OutKick88%

Kuwaiti Muslim jiu-jitsu champion refuses Israeli athlete’s handshake: ‘We do not respect them at all’ 9%

By Dan Zaksheske0%

5/18/2026, 11:48:24 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Out-Group Homogeneity Bias, and In-Group Bias, with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 15.9% saturation with 93 hits. Analysis detected 968 faulty-reasoning hits from 586 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 26.2% and a BS Rank of 9% (19,313 of 21,230 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 91.00% of the article peer group.

Kuwaiti jiu-jitsu gold medalist Jassim Alhatem refused to shake Israeli bronze medalist Yoav Manor’s hand during a medal ceremony in Abu Dhabi on Friday. 
Alhatem later defended the snub in an Arabic-language video circulating on social media with English translations in which he said "Zionist entity" when referring to Israel and added that Muslim men "must have a principle." 
Manor won bronze in the men’s blue belt amateur under-77kg division at the Abu Dhabi Grand Slam Jiu-Jitsu World Tour, an Abu Dhabi Jiu Jitsu Pro (AJP) event, after winning three of his four bouts, according to the AJP's official results. 
Alhatem won all four of his matches to claim gold in the division. 
But the podium ceremony quickly turned tense. 
Alhatem refused to shake Manor’s hand and declined to participate in the traditional winners’ photo with him. 
Members of the Israeli delegation who were nearby told Ynet News that Alhatem said, "You Israelis kill children," and added that he would not have competed against Manor if the Israeli athlete had reached the final. 
Alhatem defended the moment, claiming Manor had tried to make himself look like the victim by offering a handshake on camera. 
"Even though I had spoken to him before the podium and told him, ‘I don’t want to know you, and I don’t want to greet you. 
Stay on your side, and I’ll stay on my side, so [there would be] no problem,’" Alhatem said. 
Alhatem made it clear he did not view the exchange as a normal sportsmanship moment. 
"We do not play with these types. 
We do not respect these types," Alhatem said. 
Then he took it a step further. 
"As Kuwaitis, we do not respect them at all," he said. 
So much for keeping politics out of sports. 
Alhatem said he does not buy the argument that athletes should separate international competition from world affairs. 
In fact, he suggested Muslim athletes have a responsibility to do the opposite. 
"The last thing, guys, advice from a brother: have a principle," he said. 
"You, as a Muslim man, must have a principle." 
He added, "Even if you tell me sports is separate from politics  no, no. 
There is no separation. 
If that were true, Russia wouldn’t be banned right now from participating in the Olympics." 
The IOC allows some Russian athletes to compete as neutrals under specific conditions, while Russia is not represented as Russia. 
Manor, meanwhile, kept his composure. 
The Israeli delegation said in a statement to Ynet that "despite the tension, the organizers and Emirati hosts tried to calm the situation and persuade the Kuwaiti competitor to take part in the medal ceremony, but he chose to leave the podium area. 
Manor, for his part, remained focused on the sporting achievement: a bronze medal at a prestigious international competition, after an impressive day of bouts against opponents from around the world." 
Amir Boaron, coach of Israel’s national jiu-jitsu team, also told the outlet that Manor continued trying to shake Alhatem’s hand and "behave like an athlete." 
Arik Kaplan, president and CEO of Ayelet (Israel’s federation for non-Olympic sports), praised Manor for showing "character, restraint and values." 
OutKick reached out to the UAE Jiu-Jitsu Federation, the AJP Tour and Alhatem for comment but did not receive a response by publication. 
International sports revolve around the idea that healthy competition brings people of all backgrounds together. 
In this case, though, that couldn't be further from reality. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 6.1%Fox Nation: 4.1%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.8%Fox Nation: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 2.0%Fox Nation: 3.6%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 6.0%Dan Zaksheske: 1.0%Fox Nation: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic6.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 2.2%Fox Nation: 3.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 9.9%Dan Zaksheske: 8.6%Fox Nation: 12.0%Framing Effect9.9%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 4.3%Dan Zaksheske: 1.0%Fox Nation: 0.9%Status Quo Bias4.3%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 2.6%Dan Zaksheske: 0.6%Fox Nation: 2.8%Optimism Bias2.6%This article: 1.7%Dan Zaksheske: 1.1%Fox Nation: 1.7%Pessimism Bias1.7%This article: 13.8%Dan Zaksheske: 7.8%Fox Nation: 10.9%Negativity Bias13.8%This article: 10.8%Dan Zaksheske: 2.9%Fox Nation: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias10.8%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 3.5%Fox Nation: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 3.6%Dan Zaksheske: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias3.6%This article: 12.8%Dan Zaksheske: 3.0%Fox Nation: 3.2%In-Group Bias12.8%This article: 13.5%Dan Zaksheske: 3.6%Fox Nation: 1.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias13.5%This article: 9.4%Dan Zaksheske: 3.4%Fox Nation: 2.9%Halo Effect9.4%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.7%Fox Nation: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.2%Dan Zaksheske: 0.7%Fox Nation: 1.4%Recency Bias1.2%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Dan Zaksheske: 5.7%Fox Nation: 2.5%Ad Hominem6.1%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 2.7%Fox Nation: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.7%Dan Zaksheske: 3.0%Fox Nation: 5.1%Appeal to Authority7.7%This article: 3.9%Dan Zaksheske: 2.3%Fox Nation: 1.8%False Dilemma3.9%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.7%Fox Nation: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 15.9%Dan Zaksheske: 7.7%Fox Nation: 6.1%Hasty Generalization15.9%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.8%Fox Nation: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 8.7%Dan Zaksheske: 4.3%Fox Nation: 7.8%Appeal to Emotion8.7%This article: 4.8%Dan Zaksheske: 1.8%Fox Nation: 1.3%Begging the Question4.8%This article: 2.6%Dan Zaksheske: 2.0%Fox Nation: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.6%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.9%Fox Nation: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 1.5%Fox Nation: 2.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 1.9%Dan Zaksheske: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.2%No True Scotsman1.9%This article: 7.2%Dan Zaksheske: 1.4%Fox Nation: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.2%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.9%Fox Nation: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 2.3%Fox Nation: 1.7%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 2.6%Dan Zaksheske: 1.5%Fox Nation: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection2.6%This article: 6.0%Dan Zaksheske: 18.2%Fox Nation: 6.2%Biased Writer Voice6.0%This article: 8.5%Dan Zaksheske: 2.2%Fox Nation: 1.4%Indoctrination8.5%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 5.1%Fox Nation: 3.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dan Zaksheske: 1.1%Fox Nation: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

586 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers62%attributed speech220writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageYnet News • 36 words • 0.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 21 words • 0.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 26 words • 0.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 7 words • 0.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 17 words • 0.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 13 words • 100.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 13 words • 100.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 9 words • 100.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 15 words • 0.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 4 words • 100.0% coverageJassim Alhatem • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageYnet News • 43 words • 0.0% coverageYnet News • 30 words • 0.0% coverageAmir Boaron • 25 words • 0.0% coverageArik Kaplan • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Arik Kaplan

100%flagged-word coverage
20 attributed words5.5% of attributed speech65% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Quote-first Misdirection-6.8 ptsWriter: 6.8%Arik Kaplan: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.