This paper argues that Israeli director's Etyan Fox's film The Bubble (2006) is more a colonial fantasy, which articulates power and mastery over the colonial Other, than an anti-occupation film. By focusing on the absences, silences, and displacements of the film regarding the representation of queer Palestinians, my reading traces the transformation of Ashraf from Noam's lover (the gay Arab as the "good Arab," in the Israeli imaginary) into the demon lover (the sexy suicide bomber) who kills himself and his lover in an act of primal revenge. In the process of exposing the self-delusion of its twenty-something anti-occupation protagonists, the film constructs a bigger delusion about Palestinian queerness that is blind to the pernicious ways sexuality is deployed by the Israeli military occupation to consolidate its stranglehold on the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza. This paper discusses the practice of sexual blackmail of Palestinian gays that the Israeli shabak engages in and its role in creating and consolidating the perception in the Palestinian community that equates gayness with collaboration. I argue that while homophobia in Palestinian society certainly facilitates the perception of gays as threats to national security, Israeli recruiting practices, which always prey on the most vulnerable groups in Palestinian society, give much credence to these fears. Ashraf's visibility in The Bubble goes hand in hand with the invisibility in the film of Palestinian men from the West Bank and Gaza who survive on the streets of Tel Aviv as sex workers. These "sweet boys," not only foreground the exploitative nature of the queer encounters between Israeli and Palestinian men, they also expose the myth of Israeli hospitality to gay Palestinians on which The Bubble is premised. But the presence of those queer Palestinians has to be suppressed along with any Palestinian queer activists who are Israeli citizens. The Bubble's representation of violence is how Ashraf's queer demonization is finally completed. In the film, Israeli violence is incidental and pragmatic, while Palestinian violence is premeditated and primal. The film, then, undermines its anti-occupation stance by its failure to represent Israeli violence against Palestinians in terms other than those of the hegemonic national discourse and by its insistence on the fantasy that the violence that punctures the idealistic bubble still comes, with the queer Palestinian, from elsewhere.