“NO OTHER LAND FILM.”
In regards to the recently released and Oscars award winning film “No Other Land”, that was produced by both a Palestine and an Israeli, controversies arising create a two sided atmosphere yet still not attaining an equilibrium.
Most Palestine people to whom the context and setting of the film was made from believe that this is a stage-managed electro-art tool that’s meant to falsify the struggles of Palestine and cultivate a global intermarriage propaganda for the antagonists.
On the other hand, the film points out the real experience of Palestine following the attacks and genocide from Israeli.
We held interviews with the following and they had these opinions;
1. Jordanian Popular Democratic Party – Palestine.
“Based on the presence of two of the crew working on the film, it became clear that they did not actually renounce their “Israeli” citizenship and did not consider the occupation a colonial settlement entity, and that its presence is illegitimate on all Palestinian lands colonized since before 1948. They are: the “Israeli” director Yuval Abraham, and the “Israeli” cinematographer Rachel Szur; in accordance with our standards to call for banning or boycotting films and cinematic works, and based on the “Israel” Boycott Law of 1955, which was approved by the Boycott Office of the League of Arab States, call for and work on:
1. Banning every film whose director, executive producer, main actor, or any supporting actor is “Israeli”. Exempted from the ban are every film produced, directed, or acted by Palestinians of 1948, unless the director agrees to include it in the category of “Israeli” films in international festivals, or unless it is “Israeli” funded, or promotes normalization with the enemy, or undermines the legitimacy of its resistance.
2. Banning every film whose director, executive producer, main actor, or any supporting actor supports the “Israeli” occupation in a tangible material way, even if he is not “Israeli”.
3. Banning any film whose director, executive producer, main actor, or any supporting actor is an Arab who participates in “Israeli” festivals.
4. Banning any film that promotes normalization with the “Israeli” enemy.
5. Banning any film in which any Jordanian, Palestinian, or Arab who deals with any party in the enemy entity participates, even if it is a documentary without representation.
We also point out that if any of the above criteria applies to the film, our group calls on the relevant parties from the Artists Syndicate, cinemas, and others, to ban it, regardless of its content, even if it is “progressive”; there is no progress with accepting occupation, racism, settlement, and colonialism on any part of historical Palestine, and there is no progress with benefiting from the benefits of this occupation.
Our group believes that the standards of resistance to normalization and boycott had only excluded our people in the occupied Palestinian interior in 1948, who are forced to normalize, hold “Israeli” citizenship, study in the schools and universities of the occupation, work in its institutions, pay taxes, etc., unless they promote Zionism or Arab-“Israeli” normalization. In addition, they are prohibited from voluntary normalization, i.e. representing “Israel” in artistic, sports, or cultural events, etc., in international forums.
Accordingly, we call for the film to be withdrawn permanently, and for this to be accompanied by an announcement from the organizing body to withdraw it.”
2. Patricia Brodsky – Argentina.
“It’s a necessary film but’s not my vission. The occupation legitimes all kind of ressistance, included armed ressistance. This film is usefull by propaganda of palestine voice.”
3. Medellin Bolivia – Netherlands.
“Calling for a boycott in this particular film seems legitimate to me from the perspective of colonized resistance. Those of us who have been colonized understand this.A film made by Israelis, (who are the colonizers) that wins an award from a capitalist entity that supports colonialism, or does not understand colonization is pure propaganda. However, there are other good films that focus on this reality and denounce land dispossession. Why did this film win an award? Its directors are Israelis.”
4. Amin Arar – Palestine.
I was really curious about the film “No Other Land,” which received an Oscar for outstanding documentary. Folks streamed it earlier today, so I had the opportunity to watch it. I don’t and will not write a film review about it. But I will say this: the online tributes lionize what looks like a visual representation of acceptable dissent.
Yes, the film fearlessly shows the occupation of the West Bank, which is not an exposé at this point. In fact, it’s a narrative that posits a reminder if not a counterpoint to the globally denounced I$raeli genocide of Palestinians: “ordinary Isr@elis oppose this,too.”
After all, the film is made by a Palestinian and an Isr@eli-a good balance for a European Union-funded film.
In their acceptance speech,Palestinian filmmaker tenderly shares that he is a new father and hopes that his daughter would not have to go through what he and his people suffer. His Isr@eli counterpart condemned October 7 and called for the release of I$raeli hostages. The latter claim is insupportable given the horror of what continues to unravel as “Isr@el’s” conduct throughout the ceasefire and hostage release. His message took me back to a time when opportunists called upon the whole world to “condemn both sides” (I know and have not forgotten of “scholars” who did and moved on as though it was just one of those debates they lost in the process. All of you are disgusting.)
But I do embrace and will forever be grateful for and humbled by those who make the claim “No other land” possible for Palestinians and all peoples fighting for national liberation — the Palestinian Resistance (PR), and why not say it; the H*amas-led Brigada Al Aqsa.
If the PR did not achieve the goals of October 7 the day that genocidal entities, US and Isr@ael retreated, then Trump’s plan for forced displacement, ethnic cleansing and total US occupation of P@lestine would have been difficult for the Oscars to challenge.
In any case, this film is aware of the dangers of standing on the side of Palestinian freedom, from the river to the sea without ideological complicities (“no other land for both sides, occupier-occupied”). But we must stay the course, no other land, indeed, for Palestinians.”
The Anti Fascist International, Kenya Chapter focuses on realising that every resource at the disposal of humanity should ensure the well being of human beings.
