Nasa Venice premiere
News · Heat 1.0 / 10 · 3 shows · 26m airtime
The documentary Nasa, built on interviews with anonymous Israeli intelligence agents and soldiers, premiered at the Venice Film Festival on September 3, 2026, and later won the special jury prize. The directors, Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor, say they cannot return to Israel; Szor says protesters outside her parents' house called for them to be hanged, and Netanyahu has said he will propose legislation to revoke their citizenship and ordered the attorney general and Shin Bet chief to reveal the anonymous contributors' identities. The film's substance is contested: it describes a system called Where Is Daddy that tracked targets' family members to time strikes, says the army used an AI list of Hamas and PIJ suspects without further verification despite…
How 3 podcasts covered it
- Today, Explained, 2026-09-17 (2:19 to 7:28)
Interviews a journalist on the backlash
Interviews a Haaretz journalist about the Israeli reaction to Nasa: official calls to revoke the filmmakers' citizenship, unverified-witness criticism, and social media clips inviting revenge at Rachel Szor's parents' house.
New angle: Israeli officials called to revoke the filmmakers' citizenship, and social media clips invited revenge at Rachel Szor's parents' house. - Today, Explained, 2026-09-17 (7:28 to 12:50)
Reports the Israeli reaction to Nasa
Haaretz's Shani Littman reports the Israeli reaction: criticism from across the political spectrum, government threats to revoke the filmmakers' citizenship, and social media calls for revenge at Rachel Szor's parents' house. She notes the film is barely available in Israel and the atmosphere has turned frightening. - The Daily, 2026-10-12 (0:37 to 1:55)
Adds the Venice prize and Netanyahu's threat
Opens the episode with the Venice prize and the backlash, adding the award itself and Netanyahu's own statement that he would propose legislation to revoke the directors' citizenship.
New angle: NAZA won the special jury prize at Venice, and Netanyahu said he would propose legislation to revoke the directors' citizenship. - The Daily, 2026-10-12 (3:47 to 4:46)
Adds the directors' death threats
The directors go on the record about the fallout: Rachel Szor says the demonstrations outside her parents' house called for them to be hanged, and both say they cannot return to Israel because of death threats and incitement.
New angle: The directors say they cannot return to Israel; Szor says protesters outside her parents' house called for them to be hanged. - The Daily, 2026-10-12 (8:28 to 11:23)
Explains the Where Is Daddy system
Goes into the film's substance rather than its reception: the Where Is Daddy surveillance system that waited for targets to return home, and the argument that the IDF bombed homes because that is where targets could be found, complicating the human shields claim.
New angle: The film describes a system called Where Is Daddy that tracked targets' family members to time strikes on their homes. - The Daily, 2026-10-12 (12:20 to 14:29)
Details the AI targeting list
Abraham details a second targeting system in the film: a machine learning algorithm that scanned phones across Gaza and rated people by similarity to known Hamas and PIJ members, used without further verification despite a known error rate. He argues the real problem with AI is the scale it enables, marking tens of thousands of junior targets.
New angle: The army used an AI list of Hamas and PIJ suspects without further verification, despite a known error rate. - The Daily, 2026-10-12 (14:29 to 17:19)
Presses directors on the 500-civilian claim
Presses the directors on the film's most disputed claim: one officer's account of a strike approved with knowledge that up to 500 civilians could be killed or injured, which goes beyond the paper's own reporting of approvals above 100. The directors say multiple other sources confirmed the number and that they hold unpublished specifics on when and where the strike…
New angle: The directors say multiple other sources confirmed the 500-civilian figure and that unpublished specifics on the strike exist. - Global News Podcast, 2026-10-14 (11:50 to 12:55)
Reports Netanyahu's order to unmask the contributors
Reports a new front in the Nasa fight: Netanyahu has instructed the attorney general and the head of Shin Bet to unmask the anonymous soldiers and officials who testified. The rest is the directors' own account of the film's origins and its AI targeting claims, already on the record.
New angle: Netanyahu ordered the attorney general and Shin Bet chief to reveal the anonymous contributors' identities. - Global News Podcast, 2026-10-14 (12:55 to 13:35)
Adds the filmmakers' sourcing and corroboration claims
The filmmakers go on the record about method: 24 soldiers and officers on camera, more than 100 sources behind the investigation, and a corroboration claim that extends past The Guardian to other outlets. Adds sourcing detail the card did not carry.
New angle: The filmmakers say the investigation drew on more than 100 sources. - Global News Podcast, 2026-10-14 (13:35 to 15:33)
Breaks down the targeting systems and civilian thresholds
The filmmakers walk through the targeting systems themselves: Where Is Daddy flagging a target's return home by surveilling family phones, and the NASA collateral-damage figure that set how many civilians could be killed. Adds the authorization thresholds - up to 20 civilians for low-ranking targets, hundreds for senior members.
New angle: Strikes were pre-authorized for up to 20 civilian deaths for low-ranking targets and hundreds for senior members. - Global News Podcast, 2026-10-14 (15:33 to 17:30)
Interviews the filmmakers on Israeli military outreach
The filmmakers answer Israeli criticism directly: they say they went to the Israeli military more than ten times over three years, and that the IDF's claim it was unaware of the allegations is not true. The film also carries testimony from Netanyahu himself.
New angle: The filmmakers say they approached the Israeli military more than 10 times over three years.