Bozo,

I am American, which means my tax dollars finance the Israeli military, the occupation, the settlements and the Wall. American citizens--black, white, Native, Arab, and Asian--have sent Israel over $90 billion dollars, obtained through Zionist bribes and coersion of our politicians. It is the largest transfer of money from one state treasury to another in the history of the world. This is happening TODAY, not 200 or 2000 years ago. Your presumptions on who owns what land are ridiculous when placed in historical context. They are also completely off point. As to your accusations of self-righteousness, look in the mirror.

STEPPEN.. good.. nothing like a bit of a 'you self righteous so and so' to get good discussion going.
Historical context my friend is RELATIVE. I fail to see what historical context you are referring to apart from the REAL and ACTUAL one, which is that the Jews lived in Israel until the Romans took it away and trashed the place. You yanks stole the land from the Native Americans, u cheated them, u bribed them, you deceived them just to facilitate capitalist expansion. Do u deny this ? Its appropriate to say also that a lot of those same native amercian races ALSO did the same to their 'enemies' (other tribes), so it becomes a bit nebulous at this point to say who is right and who is wrong. Perhaps its better to say the Israelis are not 'more wrong' than every race like yours and ours who have done similar things. Its just that now with a global village we can all SEE it happening before our eyes.
The Jews have a divine claim on the land, (Mr Netanyahu thinks this way though u may not see it this way, lots of Jews don't also, but they would then point to military viability rather than divine sanction)
The transfer of money as u described, is a 'fact' u can put some moral judgement on it, but I think if u were a Jew (which I'm not.. in fact I'm a wasp) u might be tempted to do the same. Is all about survival.
If u don't like how your leaders are acting in relation to Israel, u have a vote, use it. If ur vote turns out to have little effect.. get over it, we all have to live with things we dont like in democracies.
And its BOAZ not bozo, have a read of the book of Ruth in the Old testament. Its quite romantic (thats where boaz is from)

Boaz,

Claiming land lost 2000 years ago is ludicrous. How did the Jews acquire the land they now claim as their birthright? By force, of course, from the Canaanites. This is 2005, and in 2005 the governing body accepted by the majority of the world is the U.N. (the same body that recognized Israel as a state). Since their inception, however, the U.N. has declared Israel to be in violation of numerous offenses against the Palestinian Arabs, including the massive land grabs, property theft, and Jewish-only settlement building on Palestinian land since 1967. This land was accepted by both parties and the U.N. as Palestinian property prior to 1967. It includes E. Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights, all of which are now under Israeli rule. How is this invasion any different from Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait? More to the point, do I have a right to speak about these violations, and the cost of financing them by American taxpayers, without being branded an antisemite? It is becoming increasingly difficult, and articles like Mendes' don't help in the least.

steppen
the thick plottens...
the UN is nothing more than a result of a balance of power, and its structured with the security council so those who have significant power can veto things which are against their interests. But its the first point which is most important. 'balance of power'.
There is no "peace" that was not the result of war.
I have no faith in the UN because I've watched its pathetic impotence in places like Ruanda and Dafor etc. The reason it is not effective is because of the power balance laying at the foundation of its existence.
I see no problem with identifying historical crimes as explanations for present circumstances, nor do I see a problem with those who have the power, to fix them themselves. Speaking purely in human terms of course. There is no 'absoluteness' that anyone can refer to about the morality of it all unless u wish to invoke God, which of course would make me very happy, because then we could speak in a direction rather than in circles.

Are you following the line of reasoning here? You keep jumping to tangents that have little to do with the dialogue. What is in the water over there? Of course the U.N. represents a balance of power. Right now they are trying to balance out American and Israeli hegemony--with limited success. As for allowing those with the power (and the will) to fix things, were you OK with the way Germany and Japan were fixing things in the '40s? How about Stalin and Kruschev? Power has to checked and balanced.

This is getting tiresome...

Steppen, or is it limpin.....
Kruschev, Stalin ? that raises interesting issues. History is a wonderful thing, it 'teaches'. Was Pearl Harbour bombing wrong ?... umm perhaps when Roosevelt was saying "This is a day of infamy" the Japanese were saying "Take THAT" for sending Commodore Perry to FORCE us to open our country when we didn't want to. Perhaps the Japanese Emporer was saying the same speech in the Perry days as Roosevelt was saying after Pearl Harbour.
Step, u seem to be perceiving the world from a very 'you and now' perspective. Rather than looking at the big picture. Power without checks is madness, agreed. But the point I'm trying to make is that you cannot canonize 'your' version of history or justice, unless u u refer to THE ALMIGHTY i.e. point to some source of law which is greater than pure military or economic power. Apart from that, its alllll relative and based purely on the biggest gun.
I'm hopefully causing you to examine your own presuppositions about life here