"Here There Are Blueberries" Holocaust-themed drama at The Wallis in L.A. impresses Television Academy Governor, Kim Estes

Mr. Kim Estes, actors' Governor, TV Academy

While covering the Santa Monica Film Festival on March 15th, Nikki Carbonetta, the festival's Creative Director introduced me to Mr. Kim Estes. In addition to his career as an actor, Mr. Estes also serves (with Kate Linder) as a co-representative of the Television Academy's Board of Governors to the Performers (i.e., Actors) Members.

Mr. Estes related how impressed he was having just attended the play "Here There Are Blueberries," performed at the Wallis Annenberg Theater in Beverly Hills which plays until March 30th. Mr. Estes described the performance as spectacular and deeply poignant. 

"Here There Are Blueberries" stage
performance scene, May 2023

Mr. Estes says that this L.A. production addresses the Holocaust and Auschwitz through previously unseen photographs found by an individual in a trash can in Germany. These photographs depicted the lives of German officers, prompting a moral dilemma for the Holocaust Museum about whether to accept and showcase them. 

The narrative also includes a story about a woman who, after being cared for by an ex-Nazi officer, discovered more photographs of prisoners and officers, which she kept for 60 years before feeling compelled to share their history. 

Here, There Are Blueberries" is noted for its contemporary setting and the heavy, yet enlightening exploration of these historical moments, ultimately revealing the complexity of the human experience during such a harrowing time.  

Ought entertainment award ceremonies tolerate the exploiting of acceptance speeches for recipients' political causes?

Vanessa Redgrave redux: In view of the politicized acceptance speech given by directors of "No Other Land," (Oscar for Best Documentary 2025) we republish our article produced on the topic of exploiting the telecast in 2017.

Marlon Brando boycotted the 1973 Oscars to draw attention to Hollywood's depiction of American Indians and Wounded Knee. In 1978, Vanessa Redgrave danced with a PLO Kalashnikov rifle in her anti-Israel documentary, "The Palestinian." In her acceptance speech for her Oscar for "Julia," she made a political statement, calling opponents of her award "Zionist hoodlums" which drew audible disapproval from the audience. 

Meryl Streep exploited her microphone at the 2017 Golden Globe Awards telecast to condemn conservatism, Pres. Trump's vetting of immigrants from troublesome Islamist countries, and to praise multiculturalism.

Should opinion-leader actors and singers exploit the live award-shows' telecast spotlight to preach their politics to a global audience? Is Hollywood's esteemed diversity extended to political views? Would liberals tolerate it from conservatives? Does it needlessly risk alienating half of an artists' fans? Or does virtue-signaling grow an artist's popularity enough to compensate for it?

We took our camera to the red-carpet at Norby Walters' 2017 "Night of 100 Stars" $1000-per-plate, Oscar viewing-party at the Beverly Hilton to investigate the celebrities' perspectives. How has Hollywood become too political? Do Liberals discriminate professionally against those of alternate views? How much politics (if at all) is it appropriate to foist on an entertainment awards-ceremony TV audience?

We spoke to actors and singers of varying ages and genres: Jon Voight, Richard Lewis,  Ed Asner, Lou Gossett Jr., Richard Grieco, Frankie Valli, Charles Martin-Smith, Tanya Tucker, Trace Adkins, Courtney Stodden, (non-entertainer and anti-Trump operative) Gloria Allred, Wink and Sandy Martindale, Shadoe Stevens, Yakov Smirnfoff,  Tia Carrere, (HBO's Mike Tyson star) Michael Jai White and wife Gillian, Hollywood stylist Daniel DeCriscio. 

In most cases, those who endorsed political speeches were liberals and those opposed it were conservatives. Former Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich tied it all together. "(I think) it's not healthy... We want to have everybody enjoy the arts, because the arts are for everyone, regardless of race, color, creed, or political persuasion. ... I'd like to see that restored, once again, as it had been in the past." 

Antonovich agreed there has been some discrimination against non-liberals in Hollywood. "If we're going to support diversity, we need to respect different points of view- and still respect one another and work with one another. ... Respect is what's important."

How Oscar docu, 'No Other Land' is a false, Palestinian propaganda

“This is a propaganda film that serves the false Palestinian narrative, and seeks to undermine the legitimacy of the State of Israel.”

According to Kassy Akiva's "The Truth About The Oscar-Winning Anti-Israel Documentary ‘No Other Land’ published in The Daily Wire March 3rd '25 

According to Israeli NGO Regavim, the documentary No Other Land relies on a “concoction of misrepresentations and outright fabrications.”

“This is a propaganda film that serves the false Palestinian narrative, and seeks to undermine the legitimacy of the State of Israel in the international arena in order to cause boycotts and sanctions of IDF fighters,” Meir Deutsch, director-general of Regavim, said in a statement.

Throughout the film, Palestinian co-Director, Basel Adra, documents his struggle to stop the Israeli Defense Forces from demolishing what are described as “ancient villages” in an area called Masafer Yatta, which is east of the Palestinian Authority town of Yatta. In reality, Regavim points out, all of the so-called villages of Masafer Yatta did not exist when Israel declared the area an IDF training zone for live-fire exercises in the early 1980s.

According to Naomi Kahn, the director of the international division of Regavim, the Palestinian Authority encourages and supports the illegal construction as a way of taking over Area C.

“Since the announcement by the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority in 2009 that the Oslo framework was no longer binding, the Palestinian Authority has poured all of its resources into de facto annexation of Area C.”

Kahn stresses that more than 60% of Areas A and B — the territory already under Palestinian Authority control — is empty and available for construction and development.

“They are putting facts on the ground in strategic points, forming the map of a Palestinian state in the entirety of Judea and Samaria — without the bother of negotiation or compromise with Israel.”

Aerial photographs dating as far back as 1945 — some of which the Arabs submitted themselves to the Israeli Supreme Court — show no signs of a residential presence before the 1980s. Not until the 2000s does the area have signs of habitation in the images.

According to a thread of posts by Tweeter: @GazaWood1 (who exposes Palestinian, fabricated scenes and imagery created as propaganda) on X.com "The Film 'No Other Land' Sparked Significant Controversy. "

In reality, the film is based on a complete Palestinian falsehood known as “Masafer Yatta.” Let’s talk about it for a bit.
🧵🔎 

1️⃣ First of all, the film tells the story of an area in the Disputed Territories the Muslims named Masafer Yatta. 
The film attempts to convey the narrative that Palestinians have lived there for hundreds of years and that Israel suddenly decided to evict them.
In reality, this was abandoned land that nomadic Bedouins occasionally used for grazing and sometimes took shelter in the caves there. 

2️⃣ In fact, Palestinian construction in the area only began in the 1990s.
Before that, there were caves that Bedouins used as seasonal dwellings. 

3️⃣ The most important point: Until 1993, the Israeli Air Force conducted attack training in the area.
These were full-scale military exercises—of the kind that made permanent residence impossible. This fact alone proves that no permanent settlement existed there.
ynet.co.il/news/article/r…Only in 1999 did Palestinians file a petition with the court. The simple reason? Until then, the area was of no importance to them, and no one lived there permanently.
It’s also worth noting that even afterward, they never presented any ownership documents.

Summary:
Palestinians have never provided evidence that the area belonged to them. Even more striking, it was only many years after the military had been active there that they began constructing homes.

4️⃣ Attached is a screenshot of the court ruling, with an English translation:
ynet.co.il/news/article/r…

בג"ץ: אפשר לפנות מאות פלסטינים המתגוררים בשטח אש בדרום הר חברוןבתום מחלוקת ארוכת שנים, דחה בג"ץ שתי עתירות של פלסטינים החיים בשטח שנמצא בשליטת צה"ל. השופט מינץ קבע כי "ערב ההכרזה על שטח אש לא היו מגורים קבועים בגבולותיו", אך הוסיף כי העותרים יוכלו להיכנס לאזור לצ…https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/ryxs6swuq

5️⃣ The judge rebuked the petitioners for exploiting the legal battle to continue illegal construction,
even though the court had conditioned its injunctions against demolition on a halt to further illegal building.

🔴 In other words: All the demolition footage was staged.
They built in a prohibited area precisely so that the IDF would demolish their homes, allowing them to document and publicize it. 

6️⃣ A side note relevant to the previous point:
At 11:15 in the film, they explicitly discuss their strategy to prevent what they fear most:
🗣️ "I think we can stop the eviction. It will happen if we document and work on the ground."

It’s astounding how openly Palestinians reveal their well-worn tactic that Israel has been blind to for years: provoking a confrontation, standing by with cameras, and capturing the perfect moment.

This is textbook Pallywood.  Anyone familiar with Palestinian tactics— not Westerners unfamiliar with their methods— knows that this means: "Let’s stir up trouble, capture the perfect moment, edit around it, and publish."

This is the same trick they’ve used thousands of times: A soldier turns his rifle, they freeze the frame the moment it’s aimed at a civilian, and they frame it as if he is targeting an innocent bystander.

7️⃣ By the way, the Arabic word ‘Masafer’ means ‘nothing.’
Many believed the area was worthless. 

8️⃣ What bothered me personally the most was the use of children.
And it’s a shame Hollywood enables this. 
The same way they arm their children and encourage them to commit acts of terror,
The same way Hamas builds tunnels under schools,
The same way they always send their children—whom they love less than they hate us—into the line of fire, hoping they’ll get hurt so they can parade them in front of cameras,
That’s exactly how children were used in this film.
Why use children and force them to live in a conflict zone solely for political purposes? 

9️⃣ Did you know they even stole the film’s title from the Jews?
See here:

🔟 Summary: Why are Palestinians trying to seize Masafer Yatta?

The Palestinian push to take over Masafer Yatta is not coincidental and not simply a ‘survival struggle’ as international media portrays it.  This is a well-planned strategy motivated by demographic, political, and territorial considerations in the battle for control of the West Bank.

🔹 1️⃣ Creating ‘facts on the ground’ as part of the fight for Area C

📌 Masafer Yatta is in Area C—territory under full Israeli control according to the Oslo Accords.
📌 The Palestinian Authority knows it has no official authority there, so it promotes illegal construction to establish footholds and turn them into permanent settlements.
📌 The goal? International pressure leading to de facto recognition of Palestinian control over the land.

🔹 2️⃣ Establishing Palestinian territorial continuity and breaking Jewish settlement

📌 Masafer Yatta lies between southern Hebron and the Negev—a strategic area linking West Bank Palestinian communities with Bedouin populations in the Negev.
📌 Palestinian control there isolates Jewish settlements, preventing Jewish territorial continuity between the Negev and the Hebron region.

🔹 3️⃣ European Union & international support

📌 The EU directly funds illegal Palestinian construction in the area, despite it being a designated military firing zone.
📌 Palestinians receive financial and logistical aid from European left-wing NGOs looking to push an anti-Israel narrative by manufacturing a "forced eviction crisis."

🔹 4️⃣ Exploiting legal and media platforms

📌 Palestinians use courts and media to frame the issue as “forced displacement of traditional residents,” even though the area was historically used only for grazing, not for permanent settlement.
📌 Branding the conflict as a ‘human rights project’ recruits global support and hinders Israeli sovereignty enforcement.

🔴 Conclusion: This is a strategic battle, not a defense of ‘ancient villages.’

📌 The Masafer Yatta narrative as “historical villages” is not backed by facts—permanent settlement began only in the 1990s.
📌 The real goal is political: To create Palestinian territorial continuity, isolate Jewish communities, and weaken Israeli control over Area C.

📌 The use of media and courts is a calculated move to generate international pressure and solidify Palestinian presence as an irreversible reality.

❌ This isn’t about "another Israeli injustice"—it’s a deliberate strategic operation backed by European funding and a manipulated narrative.