Jews have historically been scapegoated. They have a reputation, in general, for being shrewd in business. That is the stereotype. If it is true, then there is much to learn from Jewish businessmen. As far as the conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis and their supporters goes, when people experience serious trauma it can affect the way they behave and how they relate to others. The Holocaust was an exceptionally traumatic experience for the Jewish people, it introduced slave labor and genocide on a global scale in an almost mechanized fashion. The global economy was in the dumps, people envied and coveted what some wealthy Jewish people had, they imagined that if they expropriated and eliminated the Jewish people, then their own lot in life would improve. It is worth remembering that the most famous among Jewish scapegoats was Jesus Christ. Scapegoating, prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination prevent people from seeing the truth even when it is right in front of their eyes. Unfortunately, for the present, scapegoating can and does occur everywhere. Some people are experts at creating scapegoats, they hide their own shortcomings behind the scapegoat and they generally welcome group participation.

I think the idea is that if Gadaffi has a nation he can go to in exile, then it offers him a way out of the crisis.  As far as Zimbabwe's development goes, when I was in Harare, a young American told me that Zimbabwe was a very poor country. I asked her if she had seen the city, she said that she had but that there was little development out in the rural zones.  That is pretty much true of any nation.  Had Mugabe invested the majority of the nation's wealth in developing the countryside, the same woman would have commented that Harare's buildings were all left over from white rule. That is how some people think. I am telling you, I road with a young man from America from Mozambique to Zimbabwe over hundreds of miles of brand new black top highway.  There was one section of road of about 50 feet that was still being constructed. It was where the two ends of the blacktop highway met up. And I already knew what this guy was going to tell me.  At that very point he groaned, "Oh, this road is just so awful!!!" That is how some people think.  If John Smith puts a cup on top of the table, someone thinks, "Oh, great, he has a free hand, let me go over there and shake it, and I'll make a new acquaintence."   The same guy sees a black man put his cup down on the same table and he thinks to himself, "He put that filthy cup down on top of that table! No respect! Someone ought to put him in his place, "  It is unfortunate but it is true and I think it contibutes to mental illness in minority members in the USA and in Europe, etc. because there is a steady drumbeat of negativity that is pounded into many peoples heads and it causes chronic stress

Whoever said that everyone wants to rule the world is correct. The Americans, the British and the Germans all wanted to be the one who would run the world. France wanted to rule the world as well. The Jews, similarly, lean towards the idea of how wonderful everything would be if they were the ones running the world. The Russians wanted to dominate the globe. The Cubans wanted to influence people the world over. It's an inherent human tendency. Some people have greater needs than others with that regards. As far as Hitler goes, he said that if Germany were to fail in her effort to subdue the world, then he had made a mistake, and that Germany's enemies should wipe out the Germans and the Aryan race, as this would reflect the fact that they were not the superior race and he had made a fatal mistake. He said such an outcome would seem just to him. He may have been many things but I guess he wasn't a hypocrite.

SOme people believe that what European nations have done all around the world, colonizing north and south America, colonizing New Zealand, Australia, the Carribbean, Hawaii, parts of Asia, is the very thing that Jews do to Europeans and Americans, they arrive in a foreign land and colonize it in order to dominate the economic and political life of the society. If there is any truth to this, then Europeans and Americans might recognize their own selves in this behavior, the quality would not be uniquely Jewish.

It's also worth noting that people all around the world were willing to rally to Hitler's call. The Nazi's found allies all around the world. That is what is conveniently forgotten in history. For whatever reason, people like to see a strong, charasmatic leader. Latin America was enthralled by Hitler. Many in Eastern European like wise fell under his spell. Local Nazi parties sprung up from Nazi sympathizers. At the time, I imagine people said that it was a result of what the Jews had done to Christ. When it all turned around and many Jews came to find themselves in positions of authority, power and wealth again, those same people who claimed that what was happening to the Jews during WWII, then turned around and said, admiringly, that the Jews are G_D's chosen people. This is why they say that praise and blame are one and the same and no one should pay much attention to either.

Hitler also made a personal fortune from his book, "Mein Kampf". He also received a ton of monetary contributions from the corporations he was fronting for. Hitler got the German economy, and thus the German corporations, back on their feet. If he had quit while he was ahead and not tried to rule the world, he wouldn't have such a piss poor reputation. Having seen all the drunk German's in the beer halls, he should have been a little more humble and kept his goals a little more modest, full employment, a volkswagon in every garage, a chicken in every pot,

I think Hitler was at first maybe a sensitive person, he thought of himself as an artist, but every single member of his household, his family of origin, died and he was left alone in the world when he was a still a young man. Eventually, he found himself in a miserable trench early one morning during the war and he could see poisonous gas coming in, and it effected him, and affected him, because he could see that the people who were fighting him were literally trying to exterminate him like a rat in the gutter. Everyone in his family was dead, and here comes the gas for him. I am sure many would say, "If only they had succeeded!" Hitler was nationalist and a racist, he believed in white supremacy and he believed in dominating those who he deemed his racial inferiors, he was an expansionist and an imperialist and thought nothing of occupying and exploiting people at the force of arms. But the same is true of Winston Churchill. Adolph Hitler did to Europeans what Europeans were doing to others all around the globe. This is why Hitler is demonized. History has been full of men like Hitler, they often write history. That isn't to absolve Hitler of his crimes, but to acknowledge that many in Europe, in England and Belgium, behaved as mad men as well.

Gadaffi, Khadaffi & Quadafi, Inc., have been holding back the black tide from flooding the Mediterrean region?  But the Italians and French are flying jets over Libya because they want that black tide of light sweet crude. Berlesconi certainly likes them light, sweet and crude. Why he ever called that young woman Mubarak's niece is beyond me. I bet he got an angry call from Mubarak!

No money, no honey.
Some romances are sustained on nothing but finances; when the cash runs out so does the young lady.
I have seen grown men cry bitterly that they have spent every dime on a woman and when their wallet was dry they had nothing to do but shed tears over the loss of their lady love who had found another treasure trove.
Men just aren't in to romance. What a women often means by romance is wasted cash, disposable cash, displays of cash, wanting to know that her man will sacrifice his money for her love
A man general can't stand this. I mean, he's generally not going to feel very loving and romantic when he is shelling out money on a meal that she should be making for him in his kitchen in order to win his love by the loving creations she has put together with her own hands and knowledge of food preparation. If the thought of that makes your woman's eyes bug out then she is not the woman for me and I will let her find someone else. She can love their money.

If you want her to know you love her and you want to make love to her then you might want to give her a shoulder massage, neck massage, head massage, and then start working your way down her back, and to her legs, you get the point,

Take her to a karioki club and sing her a song about love and babies.

That was a beautiful conclusion to the story. It was beautiful that it makes me feel sad, ashamed and enlightened.

I never said the guy wasn't deceitful as well. It isn't about a gender thing. He had no business with his uncle or brother's girl in the first place. And if she wants to be with the uncle, or brother, the nephew, or brother, and other guys to boot, you can call that natural, you can say it's to be expected in a woman her age, you can say whatever, but I'll tell you what, I wouldn't want to be with someone like that. Marry her and look a fool as she continues to do what you knew she always did do and all the while you look the fool. Why? Cause ya' married it when ya' could have just borrowed it and used it, like everyone else. You paid for something others get for free. That's too high a price to pay.

What is a mumu post? I have to ask if the rest of you also feel that many serious boundaries have been crossed by the poster and by the relatives involved, as well as by the young woman herself. I don't know about you, but I would want to know if the woman I am with is fooling around with other guys so that I can make a decision as to whether I want to stay with her deceitful soul or not. It sounds like there is no respect for boundaries and no respect for the people involved, either.

There are too many women out there who will swear that *so and so* is there baby's daddy and that they are 100% certain of the fact but in reality it could be any one of a half dozen different dudes! The woman will just try to hook the man who has the most resources or the one she likes best, which isn't a kind thing to do to a man you like. If the man is fool enough to marry such a woman, then he will be fool enough to stay with her when the baby is born looking Chinese.
If your brother / uncle takes this woman onto a TV show that deals with such scandals, they may be willing to provide free dna testing, in which case the young woman is likely to feel humiliated and your uncle / brother vindicated. If it comes back a near perfect match, then you might want to step up to the plate and get a dna test yourself, just to make sure that your brother / uncle isn't raising your child. On the other hand, if that were to occur, then you could probably tap dat ass for nuttin', and it'd always be near at hand, especially around the holidays. How dare that man screw some girl who is near to your age! Man do you sound jealous.

The poster might want to ask herself how she would feel if her husband were to start accepting gifts from an ex-girlfriend. If she answers the question HONESTLY she will probably decide that she wouldn't like that one bit. If she cares about her husband and is not simply selfish, greedy and disloyal, she would at least ask her husband what he thinks about the matter before accepting anything from anyone. She shouldn't be asking strangers, but her husband. When a woman accepts things from a man who is not her husband, it is like a gambler placing side bets. Women are notorious for being disloyal and if she accepts gifts from ex-suitors she will give her husband reason to doubt her. And all hell may follow until the end of her days.

a married woman should not have a close relationship with her ex-boyfriend,  If he hit it once he might be tempted to hit it again, her too!

The poster behind the original question sounds like a poseur. There is a lot of inconsistency behind what he says, the brother / uncle thing first, then the pregnant / she has his kid / no visitation business comes right behind it. In order for the pregnancy to resolve itself in a birth this quickly I have to suppose that his *brother* / *uncle* are the names of his two pet gerbils. In which case, I can understand the confusion. Seriously, when I read a post like that I get the feeling I am dealing with someone who is not particularly honest. Did his relative know that he was sleeping with the same woman, HIS woman? Did he warn his relative that the woman was sleeping with other men, and therefore putting him at risk for sexually transmitted disease? In either case, if he did not warn, alert and inform, then he is guilty of lying by omission. It also seems that he has not explained to his relative that there were other men in the LovePeddler's life, who may have knocked her up. If the relative and mother were made aware of that fact, they could inform the worthless twats parents and then, maybe, they would get on the LovePeddler's case and leave his brother and mother alone. But in order for him to do that, he would have to explain what he had been up to and he doesn't want to do that because he's not that honest, cause they would want to know why she told him so much about her personal business and they would catch on to the rat. Yes, I say "rat", because he may be the father of the child!!!

The way to show a girl you love her is to hold her tight and fk her right, twice at night and once in the morning. It works like catnip.