You’re falling into the trap of the false dichotomy between Jews and Muslims. You’re falling into the trap of Jewish = Israeli, and Muslim = Palestinian.
You’re erasing non-colonist Palestinian Jews from the equation, as well as erasing non Muslim Palestinians.
They are all Palestinians. They all lived under Ottoman tyranny, and they all revolted against it. Of course there were tensions under British rule because British rule witnessed mass Zionist immigration with colonial intent. It makes sense. Might I remind you that the British were also kinda making life hell for everyone?
You make it sound as if colonial policy is somehow our fault.
Even before that, there were of course issues, not only with the Jewish population, it wasn’t perfect, but it never got to the point of violent riots as witnessed after Zionist immigration. Grievances were usually a result of the Ottoman authorities and their policies, who I don’t need to remind you, were also oppressive against pretty much everyone. Especially with the advent of Turkish nationalism.
We revolted for a reason.
Pre-immigration, the situation of Jewish Palestinians was not different from that of Christian Palestinians.
It’s similar to the story of the crusader kingdoms in Palestine. The problem wasn’t with Christians or Christianity. Jerusalem has always had a population of Christians living in it. The problem was with the invaders. After they were defeated, Palestine still has a proud Christian population, that is an integral part of its culture, heritage and very fabric.
The same will be the case for the future Jewish Palestinians.
In any case, none of this is a justification for Israeli crimes against humanity.
"jews and muslims have always had tension between them"
Israel’s alleged embrace of individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer often eclipses its grave human rights record. In a strategy dubbed “pinkwashing,” Israel has used liberal rights discourses to paint over its abuses in the Palestinian territories with a rainbow colored brush.
According to Queers Against Israeli Apartheid, “Israel is cultivating an image of itself as an oasis of gay tolerance in the Middle East … it uses the image of a ‘LGBTQ-tolerant society’ to ‘pinkwash’ its human rights abuses.” Queer theorist Jasbir Puar explains that pinkwashing “has become a commonly used tag for the cynical promotion of LGBT bodies as a representative of Israeli democracy.”
Pinkwashing also brings economic benefits. To increase its appeal to tourists, Israel has marketed itself as a ‘liberal’ and ‘progressive’ country, by scheduling, sponsoring, and hosting annual events such as Tel Aviv Pride and Jerusalem Pride. These kinds of initiatives place Israel within the larger global market of gay capitalism, a feat largely achieved by juxtaposing liberal, gay-friendly Israel with its allegedly ‘backwards, ‘savage’ Arab and Muslim neighboring countries.
Brand Israel, a corporate PR company working to cultivate a positive image of the country abroad, has launched campaigns marketing a ‘gay-positive’ Israel. Using sex to sell its message, Brand Israel runs campaigns to improve Israeli tourism. It is notorious for funding trips abroad that send openly gay soldiers to speak on university campuses,screening pro-Israel films at gay rights festivals, and even sending a blow up float to San Francisco Pride of then-Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad being sodomized by a nuclear missile.
While Israel has attempted to create a gay rights movement that appears depoliticized, the phenomenon remains heavily imbued with an Israeli nationalism premised on the exclusion of Palestinian identity. At Pride parades in Israel, for example, LGBT flags are flown alongsidenational, Israeli flags.During commemorations for the August 2009 shooting at HaAguda, an Israeli LGBTQ center, a spokesperson for the organization refused to invite Issam Makhol, a former Palestinian Israeli MK, out of fears it would politicize the tragedy.
While Makhol is not gay and no Palestinians were killed in the shooting, the refusal to invite him highlights Israeli Jewish perceptions that the incident only affected their community, even though queer Palestinians were also impacted. To explain its decision to exclude Makhol, HaAguda issued a statement saying, “We didn’t want [him] to make any connection between our memorial ceremony and the occupation. Our event was dedicated to the memory of two young people whose death was brought about due to sexual preferences, and this has nothing to do with the occupation.” 
Concerns about politicizing the event did not, however, stop organizers from inviting a slew of Israeli Jewish officials. The commemoration was attended by the likes of Minister of Culture and Sports, Tzipi Livni, Minister of Education, Gideon Sa’ar, and Tel Aviv’s mayor, Ron Huldai. The absence of Palestinian-Israeli officials and queer Palestinian activists from the event reinforced ethnonational exclusivity over queer issues in Israel.
According to Haneen Maikey, the director of Al-Qaws, a Palestinian advocacy group focusing on sexual and gender diversity, the Israeli national anthem HaTikvah was played, during the commencement. The anthem has strong nationalist Israeli themes and made it difficult for Palestinian queers to identify with the event. Israel’s Pride movement also helps to normalize the Occupation by focusing on Western narratives of queerness such as recognition, visibility, and coming out. The Israeli queer movement only allows space for a singular nationalist narrative, one that is inherently pro-Israeli and Western in tone. The movement reifies the Orientalist notion that Israeli and Western societies are inherently superior to Arab and Islamic cultures. This denies Palestinians, particularly queer Palestinians, a voice to critique the Occupation, as well as discrimination they face inside Israel.
In his book Desiring Arabs, Joseph Massad talks about ‘the Gay International.’ According to Massad, the Gay International “produces homosexuals, as well as gays and lesbians, where they do not exist, and represses same-sex desire and practices that refuse to be assimilated into its sexual epistemology.” In a similar way, Israel constructs Palestinian queer existence as knowable only via Israeli facilitation. Palestinian queerness is acceptable insofar as it fits within the Israeli LGBTQ framework, which forsakes a Palestinian identity for a politically acceptable gay Israeli identity.
Jason Ritchie, an American anthropologist, argues that queer Israelis act as gatekeepers by creating a moral checkpoint that decides whether the visibility of queer Palestinians is acceptable. Queer Palestinians are inspected, policed, and admitted into the fold of Israeli gayness as “victims” of Palestinian culture. InHow Do You Say “Come out of the closet” in Arabic: Queer Activism and the politics of Visibility in Israel-Palestine, Ritchie writes “queer Palestinians are only acceptable, and visible, only insofar, as they mute or repudiate their Palestinianness.” This is evidenced by the tokenization of queer Palestinians, in which pro-Israelis argue that Israel treats its Arab citizens, women, and LGBTQ people better than any other Arab country in the region.
The recent case of 17 year-old Mohammed Abu Khadeir, killed and burned alive by Israeli vigilantes, highlights Israel’s control of sexual narratives and Palestinian bodies. In order to deflect blame from theIsraeli settlers, a social media campaign was created to promote false narratives that Abu Khadeir was killed by his family for being gay. Autopsy reports confirmed, however, that these claims were false.
As Maya Mikdashiwrites:
If queer activists in Palestine have taught us anything, it is that not all homosexuals are allies or potential allies. A gay Israeli in military uniform is both an enemy and target of anti-occupation politics, just as a gay Zionist in the United States is an enemy of the Palestinian cause and the causeof queer Palestinians because they are rooted within that Palestinian national cause. The idea that Euro-American gays must be appealed to on the basis of their sexuality by others who share their sexuality partakes in the alienation of both sexuality from politics and of ‘queer Palestinians’ from their non-queer selves and communities.
The Israeli queer narrative not only seeks to colonize land and people, but also to promote homonationalist discourses and settler-imposed queer projects in Israel. The presentation of the colonized as ‘backwards’ and the colonizers as ‘progressive’ is purposeful; it acts to strengthen support for Israel, Zionism, and colonialism. By funding Pride parades and pursuing propaganda campaigns, Israel presents itself as the face of human rights in the region. As it promotes this queer friendly image, it hides the horrors of its actions in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. By selling itself as a progressive ‘democracy’ that allows openly-gay soldiers to serve, and as a place where queer people can live free from oppression, it actively wraps its militaristic identity in queer acceptance.
Queer solidarity, actual or contrived, does not remove the power dynamic between oppressors and oppressed. In “Eight questions Palestinian queers are tired of hearing”, Ghaith Hilal writes, “Pinkwashing strips away our voices, history and agency, telling the world that Israel knows what is best for us. By targeting pinkwashing we are reclaiming our agency, history, voices and bodies, telling the world what we want and how to support us.”
For liberation to be fully achieved, occupation and discrimination must be fought on all fronts. Zionism and colonialism must be dismantled thoroughly. Only by confronting pinkwashing and homonationalism in Israel can discussions on decolonization begin to move forward.
. Statement taken from an interview with Itsik Dror, Ha-ir, August 14, 2009 featured inIntroduction: Israelis, Palestinians, Queers: Points of Departure. Gil Z. Hochberg.. Ha-Ir is a weekly Israeli news paper.
Check out this article I wrote. Let me know what you think.
Artillery pieces used during Israel’s operation included a mix of Soltam M71 guns and U.S.-manufactured Paladin M109s (a 155-mm howitzer), each of which can fire three shells per minute. “The only possible reason for doing that is to kill a lot of people in as short a period of time as possible,” said the senior U.S. military officer. “It’s not mowing the lawn,” he added, referring to a popular IDF term for periodic military operations against Hamas in Gaza. “It’s removing the topsoil.”
Senior U.S. officers who are familiar with the battle and Israeli artillery operations, which are modeled on U.S. doctrine, assessed that, given that rate of artillery fire into Shujaiya, IDF commanders were not precisely targeting Palestinian military formations as much as laying down an indiscriminate barrage aimed at cratering the neighborhood.