Saturday, August 16, 2014


From the pages of alcanaanite (Unfinished business)

He still has not posted my last response on his site.  So he has opted to leave it as his answer best fits his narrow world view.

Robert De Niro on Palestinian-Israeli conflict

Is the state of Israel an apartheid state?  Robert De Niro acknowledges that fact:
“My name is Robert De Niro and I acknowledge that apartheid exists.”  De Niro is talking about the state of Israel.  He adds:  “If you were bitten by a mad dog, who will you blame? the dog or its owner?  Definitely the owner, so, all the blame is on the USA government’s shoulder for adopting and supporting a state like Israel.”
It may take time, but the truth will eventually prevail.  De Niro’s humanity is making him speak out and others will follow.  Israel’s apartheid practices against the Palestinians are being recorded by history.  One day, sooner or later, all of humanity will stand up for Israel and force it to end apartheid practices against Palestinians.
Monzer Zimmo
Ottawa, Canada
Hope is the stuff from which life is made!

About Alcanaanite

Monzer Zimmo, a Palestinian-Canadian living and working in Ottawa, Canada. Monzer is an advocate of resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict through the peaceful creation of a bi-national-democratic state on all the territory of historic Palestine, where Christians, Jews, Muslims, and others live together as equal citizens; be and feel safe, secure, and at home.
This entry was posted in Apartheid StateBi-national-Democratic StateExclusive StateIsraeli Self-Destruction. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Robert De Niro on Palestinian-Israeli conflict

  1. mohamed ossama says:
    This is not true, on the contrary he is supporting Israel.
    • Alcanaanite says:
      Mr. De Niro was reported to have said: “All the blame is on the USA government’s shoulders for adopting and supporting a state like Israel.” That statement stands, it has not been denied, and its meaning is clear. Therefore, the post continues!
  2. And therefore he’s a world leading expert on land rights, geopolitics and an international lawyer? He’s just an actor with an opinion. The word “FACT” is in itself a misnomer and an accusation without basis. Like forgetting to say Alleged before a conviction of a criminals crime. Facts are just that, the pieces of what are there for all to see. Not the Judgement. Call it as it is not what you think. Otherwise it’s just an opinion. And from De Niro…. it is JUST that.
    • Alcanaanite says:
      De Niro’s opinion that the state of Israel is an apartheid state is one that happens to be shared by President Jimmy Carter, the late Nelson Mandela, and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, just to name three prominent experts on the FACTS of apartheid and the structure of the state of Israel.
      The matter is not complicated. The facts can be clearly discovered in the answers to three simple questions:
      First: Do all citizens of the state of Israel enjoy the same rights and privileges regardless of their religion or ethnicity? The answer is: No; under Israeli law, Jewish citizens enjoy more rights and privileges than non-Jewish citizens do.
      Second: Can non-Jews, whether citizens of the state of Israel or not, live in Jewish-only settlements built in the occupied Palestinian West Bank? The answer is: No; under Israeli law, only Jews (whether citizens or otherwise) can live in those Jewish-only settlements.
      Third: Do non-citizens of the state of Israel – whether they are Jews or non-Jews – have the same rights and obligations and are subject to same laws, especially the Law of Return? The answer is: No; under Israeli law, Jews who are not citizens of the state of Israel are treated far more favourably than non-Jews, and under the Law of Return only Jewish non-citizens can automatically become citizens of the state of Israel upon request.
      When citizens of a state, people living under the control of such state, and non-citizens of such state are treated differently based on their religious affiliation or ethnicity, such state is practicing an apartheid system of government that separates and discriminates among individuals based on their religion or ethnicity. That is precisely what the state of Israel does, and that is apartheid. Accordingly, De Niro’s opinion is confirmed in FACT.
  3. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Jimmy Carter from his book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid
    “It’s not Israel. The book has nothing to do with what’s going on inside Israel which is a wonderful democracy, you know, where everyone has guaranteed equal rights and where, under the law, Arabs and Jews who are Israelis have the same privileges about Israel. That’s been most of the controversy because people assume it’s about Israel. It’s not.
    “I’ve never alleged that the framework of apartheid existed within Israel at all, and that what does exist in the West Bank is based on trying to take Palestinian land and not on racism. So it was a very clear distinction.”
    This is clear and not open for debate.
    Both Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela (who’m till his comment I held in great regard and respect) Spoke with seeming lack of information and purely one sided passion. The kind of Dialogue you hear from someone who see’s a picture and told a story and then responds with passion. Like a knee jerk reaction before seeing the whole picture. But men like these once spoken cannot resign from without loss of credibility.
    As to your definition of Apartheid. I’m sorry but your definition is not international law definition. You can set those guidelines to fit your platform but it will never make it true.
    “The crime of Apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity “committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one RACIAL group over any other RACIAL group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.”
    So if you want to call Palestinians a race then you will need to change the international definition of RACE. Pretty simple. You can’t make up your own rules to define international law, This is a faith basis or it’s a national basis but race? Not even close.

    Am I too soon to say; GAME, SET and MATCH Monzer!
Yours In Clay & Water

No comments:

Post a Comment