Zionist sperm in the womb of Arab cinema!

I am at a loss for words to describe the film, Amira. The least we can say about this film is that it is a vile and despicable film that not only offends the honourable Palestinian prisoners, who pay the price for their heroic stances and their defence of their freedom, but is offensive to all Palestinians and the Palestinian cause itself, the most just cause in the world.

Unfortunately, all the makers of the shameful film, Amira, are Arabs. They are Jordanians, Egyptians, Emiratis and Saudis. The actors are Jordanian, the director is Egyptian and the writer is Egyptian. As for the production, it is a joint production by several companies in Egypt, including the deceitful scholar, Moez Masoud, Jordan, the UAE and in Saudi Arabia. Imagine, all of these individuals gathered to challenge the honour and dignity of the Palestinian people!

The film revolves around a fabricated scenario contaminated with malicious objectives in an attempt to create confusion and cast doubt about the most honourable and innovative Palestinian struggle, the sperm that Palestinian prisoners successfully smuggle from their cells, against the wishes of the occupation jailers, not as the film tries to prove and insists on.

Amira, the girl who this vile film is about, is a seventeen-year-old girl who was born through artificial insemination, while her father was imprisoned in the occupation prisons, as he somehow sent his sperm to his wife, as they both agreed. Amira was proud of her father who was imprisoned by the occupation, considering herself the daughter of a Palestinian fighter. She would visit him often with her mother and, during one of these visits, the heroic prisoner asked his wife to repeat the experience again, which she refused, at first, but then agreed to. He sent her his sperm and, this time, we are surprised to find that the doctors declare the husband sterile and cannot have children.

READ: Jordan bans screening of film deemed offensive to Palestinian prisoners

This prompts the husband’s family and Amira to first suspect the mother’s behaviour, and they begin the process of finding a genetic match with everyone around the wife, but to no avail. As the wife begins to feel surrounded, she confesses to cheating on her husband with a friend of his, who was in prison with him and who had delivered a letter to her in the past. She is about to pay her life as the price of her confession, but the doctor who supervised the insemination process appears and confirms that the pregnancy was the result of the smuggled sample.

Amira continues the search for her biological father until she is convinced that a guard from the Israeli prison, who smuggled the sperm, replaced it with his own. Amira’s life is turned upside down, meaning she is the daughter of both the oppressor and the victim, the murderer and murdered, the thief and the victim of theft. Her mother is Palestine, and her father is the occupation, and she has to live with her existential reality and accept it, and even defend it. This is what Amira could not handle and so she breaks down and tells her mother that they must leave Palestine, and this is the bottom line or the narrative that film-makers want to convey to the world. That they must expel the Palestinians from the land of Palestine and that the land belongs to the Jews, represented by the sperm of the Israeli soldier.

The film Amira was build on a false premise that was exposed by several Palestinian parties, including the Commission of Detainees and Ex-detainees Affairs, the Higher Committee for the Follow-up of Prisoners’ Affairs, and the Palestinian Prisoners Club regarding the issue of sperm transferred from Palestinian prisoners to their wives. It is done through a mechanism that does not leave the slightest opportunity for manipulation or questioning the identity of the sperm that is being handed over, by hand, from the prisoner to his wife and his family, in the presence of witnesses and is documented on official record and, therefore, not the slightest mistake can happen.

The film is a miserable and desperate attempt to discredit the lineage of these children, whom the Palestinians proudly call “ambassadors of freedom.” It portrays the Palestinian society as a fragile society that is  violent against itself and those around it, and one that is racist and intolerant. It is a suspicious film that distorts the image of the Palestinian struggle in its purest form, the smuggled sperm. The film oozes malice, falsification, distortion and conspiracy.

READ: Palestinian girl follows in jailed father’s footsteps

This film identifies with the jailer’s policy and aims to criticise this achievement and what it constitutes as a great victory in the history of the notorious Israeli prisons. Instead of shaming the sadistic oppressive jailer’s policy, it attacks this honourable achievement by the oppressed. Instead of siding with the persecuted in their basic human rights, it sides with the oppressor.

It is a purely Zionist film, and it is natural that it would win several international awards. The film-makers were hoping to screen it at the Oscars, had it not been for the popular anger that swept the Arab world and the pressure on social media to withdraw the film, which actually forced them to withdraw it. This shows the strength and importance of alternative media for pressure and shows the power of the word.

The Palestinian citizens have taken upon themselves the cause of the nation, which has abandoned its duty, leaving the Palestinians alone to resist the racist Israeli occupation that occupied their land, killed and expelled half of the Palestinian people, established their state and exercised all forms of oppression and tyranny against the Palestinian people. Prisoners have become the symbol of liberation from this usurper occupation, which all mankind throughout history rejects.

I will end by saying, did the film-makers find no other name but Amira, who loves Palestine and the Palestinians and dreams of Palestine returning to the heart of the nation!

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.