A friend sent this mural from the West Village in New York; snapped it while running. It looks like some alumni of Birthright put it up–
Who would you want at your wedding? Photo by Michael Ratner
And it’s a pinkwashing appeal, stating that gays have much more freedom in Israel than they do in neighboring countries– including Gaza, which by the way is Israeli occupied territory. Sarah Schulman of course exposed this argument in her famous pinkwashing op-ed in the Times of a year ago, in which she said that Israel used an “image of modernity” — gay freedom — to cover up its denial of human rights to Palestinians. Israel advertises these freedoms in order to justify what it does. As does birthright!
I look on Schulman as a teacher; and still this gay rights argument resonates in the U.S. –as would a women’s rights mural with a similar message. I know liberal Americans who are swayed by it. Quick answers: Palestinian culture being traditional doesn’t justify apartheid and human rights violations; political freedom for Gazans is bound to generate freedom in other realms; fundamentalist Christians and Jews are hardly tolerant of gays. And it’s not like the United States is there either, by the way…
Whoops. They put it up on a wall in Little Rock. Support for Israel plummets.
My thoughts exactly. Put it up in the red states and the religious nuts will have to decide whether their messianic view of Israel out trumps their homophobia.
“including Gaza, which by the way is Israeli occupied territory”
well……… reality is that, “Gaza was captured by Israel in the Six-Day War in 1967, but in 1993, the city was transferred to the Palestinian National Authority.”
The legal test for occupation in international law is “effective control”. Israel’s position that it no longer exercises such control because it lacks a permanent ground troop presence in the area is untenable.
See “Disengaged Occupiers: The Legal Status of Gaza: “http://www.gisha.org/UserFiles/File/Report%20for%20the%20website.pdf
From the “Executive Summary”:
And from the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict (Goldstone) Report (posted by tree on another thread on this very subject):
yrn
Israel is amazing ? Isn’t it? Or is it us who are stupefied by Israel’ amazing display of verbal capacity by a multi-forked tongue?
Indonesian army left East Timor. Israel left GAZA. Hilary can plant US flag facing China on E Timor. She can do it even in the inaccessible part of South Sudan. Try it on GAZA. Even NAM leaders cant get entry pass from Israel. Last time Falk and a few Irish were told to get lost in the Sinai desert for trying to see the human cost of Israeli unilateral disengagement. Before that Flotialla murder and prior to that Operation Cast after apparent disengagement .
Spain disengaged from W Sahara and has never been seen on that part of Africa again. Indonesian did not have a validating roles on E Timor election to decide who would who came to power and neither Sudan had one on S Sudan.
@yrn, you’re claiming that:
a) Gaza is a city
b) Because it was transferred to the PNA, it’s no longer occupied?
Do you realize that the PNA’s seat is in Ramallah, which is in the occupied West Bank? How does transferring administrative duties for some territory to an organization existing under occupation by Israel and ultimately answerable to the Israeli military authorities make that territory not under occupation?
lyn117
Read some history 1993 PNA were incharge, Hamas was not incharge then
yrn October 1, 2012 at 4:37 am
Like all good little Ziobots instead of learning, it moves the argument to another irrelevant point not mentioned by lyn117.
Some questions :
1.If you were an openly gay person, where would you rather be, Tel Aviv or Gaza?
2.Phil’s caption is “brought to you by Birthright”. Yet in the text it says “looks like” something put out by an alumni of Birthright. So what is it? Does Birthright have anything to do with the mural?
3. How can Gaza be under the control of the PA or under Israeli occupation, when in reality it’s under effective Hamas rule?
jon,
1. The question of “where you would rather be” is a distraction, a PR stunt intended to boost Israel’s “brand” without saying anything of substance about the human rights that Israel does violate. See Schulman or Katherine Franke on the subject: link to mondoweiss.net
2. Both the headline and the sentence “It looks like some alumni of Birthright put it up” refer to the “signature” in the top-left corner “brought to you by alumni of birthright Israel”.
3. See my comments and link above, on the concept of “effective control”.
Shmuel,
1.I’m well aware of , and troubled by, the human rights violations here. And even on the issue of gay rights, the situation is far from perfect. We had the murder at the Bar Noar, the gay youth center, a few years ago, which to this day hasn’t been solved. Of course that couldn’t happen in Gaza, mainly because there’s no “gay youth center ” there. My question wasn’t ment as a distraction , but as a means to inject some balance into the discussion here, which rarely mentions any positive aspect of Israeli society. Avoiding the question is in itself an answer of sorts.
2. Thanks for pointing out that “signature”. I hadn’t noticed it.
3. The reality, the concrete ,on-the-ground situation , as opposed to this or that outdated report, is that Hamas effectively controls Gaza.
חג שמח
Avoiding the question is in itself an answer of sorts.
Neither Schulman nor Franke, nor other Gay rights activists – including Palestinians – “avoid the question”. The point of the ad in Soho and the entire pinkwashing campaign is to improve Israel’s image, thereby defusing legitimate and necessary criticism. “Balance” is entirely beside the point.
The reality, the concrete ,on-the-ground situation , as opposed to this or that outdated report
Israel’s status as occupier is a matter of international law, determined on the basis of specific criteria. Despite certain changes since these two reports were written, the basic elements of effective Israeli control over Gaza (“effective control” as a legal concept, not a layman’s impression), remain as they were – regardless of the role played by Hamas in governing the territory. This is clearly explained in both reports. As in previous threads on this subject, you are muddying the waters – ignoring legal distinctions and making fuzzy use of language and terminology.
Happy Sukkot to you too.
Shmuel,
So if the question is not being avoided- what’s the answer? Where would you rather be if you were an openly gay person? I’m trying to pin you down here. (Metaphorically).
The Gisha report is from 2007, the Goldstone report has been dead ever since Justice Goldstone himself repudiated it. The reality is Hamas rule.
So if the question is not being avoided- what’s the answer?
Franke:
The Gisha report is from 2007, the Goldstone report has been dead ever since Justice Goldstone himself repudiated it. The reality is Hamas rule.
More obfuscation. What has changed, specifically, to invalidate the Gisha report, and can you cite another, more recent report or legal opinion that explains why these criteria of “effective control” – although they may have applied in 2007 – no longer apply? Goldstone’s “repudiation” made no mention of Israel’s status as occupier, but referred only to questions of war crimes and intentionality. I repeat: The “reality [of] Hamas rule” does not, in and of itself, determine whether Israel is an occupying power in Gaza or not. There are specific legal criteria – presented by Gisha and the Goldstone report – which you have failed to address. ‘It looks like the occupation is over to me’ is not a valid argument.
Here is Gisha’s updated position paper on the current state of Israeli control over the Gaza Strip, entitled “Scale of Control: Israel’s Continued Responsibility in the Gaza Strip” (November 2011): link to gisha.org
From the “Executive Summary”:
And the vid: link to youtube.com
Shmuel,
Why do I get the idea that you’ve avoided that question for the third time?
Why is it so hard to say something like: “Honestly, I have to admit that if I were openly gay, I would prefer TelAviv”? (and one could add :”without diminishing my criticism of the occupation, human rights violations, etc.”)
On Gaza you seem to be saying that some outdated legal opinion is more important than reality on the ground . What are you, a lawyer? (I don’t mean to offend…)
jon, i don’t think you’re listening. shmuel explained to you right off the bat the question itself is a distraction, a pr stunt. that should clue you in he has no intention of ever catering to what he rightly characterizes as a pr distraction.
speaking of evasions i noticed you ignored: What has changed, specifically, to invalidate the Gisha report, and can you cite another, more recent report or legal opinion that explains why these criteria of “effective control” – although they may have applied in 2007 – no longer apply?
Why do I get the idea that you’ve avoided that question for the third time?
Beats me.
Why is it so hard to say something like: “Honestly, I have to admit that if I were openly gay, I would prefer TelAviv”?
Why is it so hard to understand “While it may seem natural for gays to side with Israel, after all they have such good gay rights laws … [i]n Israel/Palestine gay rights and human rights more broadly are necessarily connected to one another, and treating one domestic minority well does not excuse or diminish the immorality of the state’s other rights abridging policies”?
On Gaza you seem to be saying that some outdated legal opinion is more important than reality on the ground.
I provided a legal opinion from 2011 that considers the complete reality on the ground in terms of “scale of control”, as well as legal definitions of occupation and post-occupation responsibilities. What you describe as “reality on the ground” is in fact only part of the circumstances that must be taken into account when determining Israel’s obligations in Gaza.
What are you, a lawyer? (I don’t mean to offend…)
I am but a humble translator, but even I know that on legal matters (and the status of occupation/end of occupation is a matter of international law), one should seek … legal opinions. Where do you get your medical advice?
If you were openly gay where would you rather be.
In Israel or say Ireland.
After all, it is not as if the Religious fanatics are on board your ship of Gay freedom in Israel.
But I digress.
jon s says: “3. How can Gaza be under the control of the PA or under Israeli occupation, when in reality it’s under effective Hamas rule?”
This is about like the Germans claiming that they didn’t rule the Warsaw ghetto.
“Some questions :
1.If you were an openly gay person, where would you rather be, Tel Aviv or Gaza?”
Here’s a question for you: if you had a magic button that, if pressed, would grant Palestinian homosexuals full and equal rights and protection (including the vote) under PA and Hamas but, at the same time, would require israel to give all the Palestinians under its control, on both sides of the green line, full and equal rights and protection under the law (for all people, regardless of ethnicity and religion) and would require everyone from the Med to the Jordan the right to vote in the israeli government, would you press the button??
Very well put (he wouldn’t). And by the way, Jon S: You really do not need to be gay to find life in Gaza unbearably hard… Anyone would prefer to live in Tel Aviv.
jon s September 30, 2012 at 5:50 pm
“If you were an openly gay person, where would you rather be, Tel Aviv or Gaza?”
What difference would it make to the actual legal extent of Israeli sovereignty? That is the bottom line.
If you were an openly gay tourist with a conscience, where would you rather be, Tel Aviv or Beirut?
If you were an openly gay Israeli, where would you rather be, Tel Aviv or Jerusalem (where the only issue conservative leaders of all three major faiths there agree upon is opposition to the Pride Parade)?
If you lived in Gaza, would you be more likely to suffer from having your house bombed by an Israeli teen playing video games, to be able to get a drink of clean water or to be able to fish more than 3 miles off shore if you were openly gay?
” stating that gays have much more freedom in Israel than they do in neighboring countries”
Facts are hard things to deal with, Phil. Sorry.
Israel retains the right to block access to and from Gaza. She decides what goods go in, and what goods go out. She kills whomever she pleases there, whenever she pleases.
She continues to rule Gaza. I’d say asserting the right to put people to death at will is a good measure of sovereignty.
Colin,
Israel seeks to control access from Gaza to Israel, same as other countries control their border. If the US seeks to control its border with Mexico, does it occupy Mexico? The point is to prevent infiltration and terrorist attacks.
Look at a map. Gaza also borders Egypt, and Israel has no control over whatever goes on on that border.
By your logic, when Palestinians try to kill Israelis by rocket fire from Gaza, asserting the right to put people to death, they maintain “a good measure of sovereignty”.
To jon s: “Colin,
Israel seeks to control access from Gaza to Israel, same as other countries control their border…”
Ahem. Israel controls considerably more than merely access to Israel. Witness the Flotilla.
jon s October 1, 2012 at 4:20 am
“Israel seeks to control access from Gaza to Israel, same as other countries control their border.”
The US controls Mexico’s territorial waters, airspace, imports and exports and who can travel to different parts of Mexico? WOW!!! That’s AMAZING!!!!!!!
” Gaza also borders Egypt, and Israel has no control over whatever goes on on that border.”
The the 2005 agreement Israel signed with Egypt is worthless, putting the Israeli / Egyptian peace agreement in jeopardy? You’re filled with stuff not even the Israeli Government knows. AMAZING!
Gay rights are COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to the actual legally recognized sovereign extent of Israel. Completely irrelevant to the continued occupation of the Palestinian people, the illegal settlements, the illegally acquired territory Israel claims, Israel’s illegal annexation of East Jerusalem and numerous other war crimes Israel has committed over the last 64 years.
It’s irrelevant twaddle, perpetuated with only one thing in mind: to influence the US Senate in order to maintain the US Veto vote in the UNSC. Without which Israel would be facing the consequences of the law for once.
In a choice between the ultra-militaristic apartheid state and any of the other countries listed on the mural, informed gays of conscience would choose “none of the above”.
And I thought Birthright was supposed to be apolitical?
off topic: I don’t want to steal anyone else’s thunder, but I hope Phil or one of the other writers can do a story on this article. link to nytimes.com
>> I hope Phil or one of the other writers can do a story on this article. link to nytimes.com
Why just remember “Mom” when you can “Remember the Holocaust!”™
>> When the tattoo artist, a Russian immigrant, joked that he is “not so patriotic” to do it at a discount, Mr. Diamant quietly seethed.
>> “This is the reason he sits here, this tattoo and what this number represents,” Mr. Diamant said. “We got the country because of these people.”
Yes, Mr. Diamant, foreign nationals of the Jewish faith from around the world got a supremacist state in Palestine – and the Palestinians got f*cked over by people like you – because the Germans did nasty things to European Jews.
This mural was featured in the NY Times back in May:
link to cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com
thank you. we try and keep up!
RE: “Palestinian culture being traditional doesn’t justify apartheid and human rights violations; political freedom for Gazans is bound to generate freedom in other realms; fundamentalist Christians and Jews are hardly tolerant of gays.” ~ Weiss
A RELEVANT FILM: The Bubble (Ha Buah), 2006, UR, 117 minutes
When a young Israeli named Noam (Ohad Knoller) falls for a handsome Palestinian (Yousef “Joe” Sweid) he meets while working at a checkpoint in Tel Aviv, he recruits his roommates Yelli (Alon Friedman) and Lulu (Daniela Virtzer) to help find a way for the two to stay together. Director Eytan Fox’s poignant film offers a glimpse at life inside the tumultuous borders of Israel, where everyday people are constantly surrounded by conflict. [NOTE: There is some gay sexual content in this film (similar to that in the 2005 film Brokeback Mountain). - J.L.D]
Language: Hebrew (English subtitles)
Netflix format: DVD
• Netflix listing – link to dvd.netflix.com
• Internet Movie Database – link to imdb.com
• Ha- Buah / The Bubble (2006) – Movie Trailer [VIDEO, 02:05] – link to youtube.com
• The Bubble (Ha-Buah הבועה) – Have No Fear [VIDEO, 07:44] – link to youtube.com
• ENTIRE FILM ON YouTube: The Bubble (Ha Buah) Legendado [VIDEO, 1:53:45] – link to youtube.com
TO TRANSLATE THE PORTUGUESE SUBTITLES INTO ENGLISH: Left click on the red “CC” closed caption icon (bottom right) and then left click on “Translate Captions BETA”. In the box that appears, select “English – English” and then left click on “OK”.
P.S. FROM IMDB: Plot Summary for The Bubble (2006)
The movie follows a group of young friends in the city of Tel Aviv and is as much a love song to the city as it is an exploration of the claim that people in Tel Aviv are isolated from the rest of the country and the turmoil it’s going through. The movie looks at young people’s lives in Tel Aviv through the POVs of gays and straights, Jews and Arabs, men and women. It all begins when Noam, a young Israeli soldier, serves in the reserve forces and meets at a check point a Palestinian young man called Ashraf. Following an incident during which Noam misplaces his ID card at the check point, Ashraf shows up on the doorstep of the apartment that Noam shares with a gay man and a straight woman. How will the meeting affect all of their lives? Written by A.M.
“The Bubble” is the story of a group of young people who live in Tel-Aviv, Israel. The movie follows the group’s difficulties of living in Israel’s reality. Their routine breaks when a young Palestinian man enters their lives. Written by A.T