Graffiti serve many purposes and encompass myriad qualities: they have been considered art, communication, an expression of alienation, a site of resistance, and thinking ‘out loud’. During the first Palestinian intifada against the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinians and Palestinian land in the Gaza strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, the Palestinians used graffiti as “an intervention in a relationship of power.” Faced with heavily censored media, and newspapers controlled by an older and more conservative and cautious elite, the writings on the walls quickly came to be used as a reliable form of communication. One of the major tasks of the graffitists in those days was to inform and mobilize the public at large. Palestinian graffiti challenged Israel’s claims to surveillance, demonstrating the Jewish state’s inability to control and observe every space, and were part of the Palestinians’ acts of civil disobedience. They were an act of resistance. Over a decade later, the conditions of occupation and the subsequent reliance on graffiti have hardly changed. It was in this environment that British artist Banksy, the guerrilla graffiti artist famous for reclaiming public spaces for “public imagination and enlightenment where they have become propagandistic barriers to thought and awareness,” traveled to the Occupied Territories in the fall of 2005 to paint nine graffiti on various parts of the separation Wall. All nine graffiti are images of escape that serve to highlight the imprisonment of the Palestinians caused by the separation Wall. The graffiti represent a form of expression grounded in the complex of Palestinian-Israeli power relations. They are the Palestinians’ “presence” imprinted on Israel’s Wall. This paper addresses the use of political graffiti as an alternative form of communication (media) and how the Palestinians have used this form of cultural production as a tool of resistance since the beginning of the first intifada in the early 1990s. It also provides a textual analysis of Banksy’s graffiti on the Wall, with a discussion of the levels of meaning (denotative, connotative) on which they function, and the myths they serve to both contest and reinforce.