Why Is The Holocaust the Only Genocide for media?

I do not doubt for a minute that Nazi Germany under Hitler, Himmler and Goebels commited the murder of, depending on whom you use as your reference, 1.5 million to 6.5 million people in the seven Nazi death camps. Of this numer the largest proportion was Jews. There also were Catholics, gypsies, homosexuals and undesireables of any description also murdered.
The question I have is why does the media, especially the Movie industry and the History channel on television, keep showing features of the Nazi genocide, but you never see documentaries about the genocides commited by people like Joseph Stalin, Mao, PolPot or the Japanese.

To illustrate the enormity of the genocides that are ignored I have include some statistics gathered from the internet.
Rummel, 1990: 61,911,000 democides in the USSR 1917-87, of which 51,755,000 occurred during the Stalin years.But first a deffinition of Democide: "Democide is a term coined by political scientist R. J. Rummel for "the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder". Rummel created the term as an extended concept to include forms of government murder that are not covered by the legal definition of genocide, and it has found currency among other scholars".
In Russia under Stalin and Lenin the following murders are calculated.
1923-29: 2,200,000 (plus 1M non-democidal famine deaths)
1929-39: 15,785,000 (plus 2M non-democidal famine)
1939-45: 18,157,000
1946-54: 15,613,000 (plus 333,000 non-democidal famine)
TOTAL: 51,755,000 democides and 3,333,000 non-demo. famine
William Cockerham, Health and Social Change in Russia and Eastern Europe: 50M+
Robert J.Rummel, Professor Emeritus of Political Science and author of "Lethal Politics" has this to say about Stalin's genocide: "I calculate that the Communist regime, 1917-1987, murdered about 62,000,000 people, around 55,000,000 of them citizens. As for Stalin, I calculate that Stalin murdered about 43,000,000 citizens and foreigners. Therefore, the usual estimate of 20 million killed in Soviet democide is far off for the Soviet Union per se, and even less than half of the total Stalin alone murdered."

Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr:Has estimated that between 51 and 60 million Russians were murdered.
A consensus of scholars seems to be forming around a death toll of 20 million. This would adequately account for all documented killings without straining credence, as all numbers are estimates.
In "The Great Terror" (1969), Robert Conquest suggested that the overall death toll was 20 million at minimum -- and very likely 50% higher, or 30 million.

Rummel blames the Japanese for 5,964,000 democides
POWs: 539,000 (400,000 Chinese)
Forced Labor: 1,010,000 (142,000 Chinese)
Massacres: 3,608,000 (2,850,000 Chinese)
Bombing/CB warfare: 558,000 (all Chinese)
Imposed Famine: 250,000 (none in China)
Rummel also estimates that General/Prime Minister Tojo Hideki was responsible for a lifetime total of 3,990,000 democides.

People's Republic of China, Mao Zedong's regime (1949-1975): murdered 40, 000 000 Agence France Press (25 Sept. 1999) citing at length from Courtois, Stephane, Le Livre Noir du Communism:
Rural purges, 1946-49: 2-5M deaths
Urban purges, 1950-57: 1M
Great Leap Forward: 20-43M
Cultural Revolution: 2-7M
Labor Camps: 20M
Tibet: 0.6-1.2M
TOTAL: 44.5 to 72M source: Twentieth Century Atlas and the
Guinness Book of World Records:
Although nowadays they don't come right out and declare Mao to be the "Top Dog" in the Mass Killings category, earlier editions (such as 1978) did, and they cited sources which are similar, but not identical, to the Glaser & Possony sources:
On 7 Apr. 1969 the Soviet government radio reported that 26,300,000 people were killed in China, 1949-65.
In April 1971 the cabinet of the government of Taiwan reported 39,940,000 deaths for the years 1949-69.
The Walker Report lists: between 32,2500,000 and 61,700,000 killed.

With these kind of numbers there can only be one reason why Hollwood and their ilk prefer to pound away at the Germans. They are all subliminaly if not actually pro-Communist, and all the numbers in the world would not change their position that Fascism is the great threat not "misapplied" Communism!

Can We Afford Another Crooked President?

In today's New York Times the following scandal has been revealed.

"Late on Sept. 6, 2005, a private MD-87 jet plane carrying the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra touched down in Almaty, Kazakhstan. Several hundred miles to the west a fortune awaited: highly coveted deposits of uranium that could fuel nuclear reactors around the world. And Mr. Giustra was in hot pursuit of an exclusive deal to tap them. Kazakhstan has 1/5 th of the Worlds Uranium deposits and it is mined by Kazatomprom.

Unlike more established competitors, Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic, with a horrible human rights record. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton. It is also worth mention that he also is a board member of "international Crisis Group" that has George Soros and Wesley Clark as members.

Within two days, corporate records show that Mr. Giustra also came up a winner when his company signed preliminary agreements giving it the right to buy into three uranium projects controlled by Kazakhstan’s state-owned uranium agency, Kazatomprom. Mr.Giustra's Canadian Mining Company UrAsia produces about 1,8-million pounds of uranium a year and plans to accelerate the development of two other uranium mines in Kazakhstan. It didn't hurt his cause that the night they arrived they had dinner at the palatial home of the President of Kazakhstan!

Just months after the Kazakh pact was finalized, Mr. Clinton’s charitable foundation received its own windfall: a $31.3 million donation from Mr. Giustra that had remained a secret until he acknowledged it last month. The gift, combined with Mr. Giustra’s more recent and public pledge to give the William J. Clinton Foundation an additional $100 million, secured Mr. Giustra a place in Mr. Clinton’s inner circle, an exclusive club of wealthy entrepreneurs in which friendship with the former president has its privileges".

This is just one more financial deal that the Clinton's are or were involved in that smell to high heaven of corruption and quasi-legal kick backs.

If Senator Clinton is running on her experience in the White House when husband Bill was President. She also must be culpable for the shady deals they have been involved in. She can hide behind the abused wife mantle when the Lewinski issue is discussed, but the "shady" financial deals and renting out the Lincoln bedroom are fair game for criticism.

First there was White Water where Hillary Clinton's relationship with her employer, the Rose Law, firm suddenly became the legal representative for James McDougal's Savings and Loan Company Madison Guaranty.When it declared bankruptcy it cost the U.S. taxpayers over 68 million dollars.

The secretive campaign money, allegedly given in a Chinese restaurant in Los Angeles, from the Chinese Communists, involving convicted felon Charlie Trie, during Clinton's second Presidential campaign.

And then Janet Reno, Attorney General, had to investigate claims that Clinton allowed "soft money", raised to promote the Democratic Party and its positions on issues of policy, to be diverted into the effort to elect Clinton and Vice- President Gore. If that happened, and the President knew it, a crime was committed.

There was the claim that he and Gore authorised White House staff to use telephones in the White House to solicit campaign funds. A clear violation of the law!

Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich, a big contributor to Clinton Campaigns, just before he left office is very suspect. U.S. pardon attorney Roger Adams says "when the White House sent over Rich's name for pardon consideration — only a few hours before the President was due to leave office — there was never any mention of Rich being a fugitive". There is also suspicion that donations made to Clinton campaigns and to the Clinton presidential library by Rich's ex-wife, Denise, could be a quid pro quo for the pardon. Source: Time Magazine

Add to this the Peter Paul lawsuit against the Clintons that claims malfeasance was involved in fund raising for a Clinton Gala ,using White House personnel ( Kelly Crawford)to solicit contributors to the event being arranged by Paul. The Federal Elections Committee eventually fined the Senatorial Campaign Committee $35,00 and Indicted Senator Clinton's financial campaign director. John Armor, an Election Law Expert, was quoted as saying Hillary Clinton was "involved in the largest election law fraud in U.S. history. Source: Doug Ross Journal

Do we really want this pair in the White House again?

Time To Wake Up to the Real Threat

From the pages of the Afganistan section of the Middle East Times comes an article by ARNAUD DE BORCHGRAVE.

"One wing of the Taliban movement wants to give its top priority to demoralizing and evicting the United States and its NATO allies from Afghanistan. The other, led by Baitullah Mehsud, the man who allegedly ordered the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, wants to focus on the Talibanization of Pakistan. Mullah Muhammad Omar, the one-eyed Taliban leader whose movement was deposed and who has been in hiding since the U.S.-led invasion a month after Sept. 11, 2001, resurfaced – long enough to fire Mehsud.
Mehsud, a Pakistani Talib warlord, let be known that while he remained loyal to Mullah Omar, he also remained "the amir of Tehrik-Taliban Pakistan," and it wasn't much longer before both sides denied his expulsion. Commander Mehsud makes no bones about jihad, and says it is in fact the duty of every Muslim to wage jihad against "the infidel forces of America and Britain".
He certainly echoed Omar when he told an al-Jazeera television reporter: " We now fear America will use a nuclear bomb against the Muslims … so we fear the American bomb, but not the Pakistani bomb. At least it's in the hands of Muslims. We pray to Allah the Muslims will take over all the nuclear bombs from infidels, whose hands are soiled with the blood of the innocent."
As for al-Qaida, added Mehsud, "I have the utmost love and respect for Osama bin Laden and al-Zawahiri, because of their enmity toward the Jews and the Christians … the Islamic zeal that runs in their veins is very rare … we will serve them, even if they ask us to sacrifice our heads for their sakes."

He concludes his interview with these warning words: "Lest anyone still doubt their global strategy, Mehsud spelled it out: "We will wage jihad in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, Bosnia and Iraq as well. There are no borders in Islam. We fight the Jews and Christians in Afghanistan out of ideological motives."
NATO allies are already tiring of the Afghan campaign. Canada now says it will only extend its mission there if Germany, France, Spain or Italy agree their soldiers should also be involved in harm's way missions. NATO's future is now clearly at stake in the Pakistan-Afghan mess".

The reason I am posting this small piece of informantion is because it will never appear in the Main Stream Media or cross the lips of any of the candidates for President. This despite the fact that today's foreign papers are filled with reports that Afghanistan is on the verge of a destabilization of it's fragile government. This from Guardian Unlimited:

"If Afghanistan fails, the possible strategic consequences will worsen regional instability, do great harm to the fight against Jihadist and religious extremism, and put in grave jeopardy Nato's future as a credible, cohesive and relevant military alliance."

None the less, the National cognizance of the war against radical Islam has taken a back seat to the secularist talk about extending the Welfare State in the United States. It is the economy that appears to have blotted out of the minds of Americans, the threat that radical Islam poses to Middle East stability and to our present way of life. Since we send over $400 billion dollars each year to Middle Eastern Countries for the purchase of oil, that runs our economy.

I believe, the United States people are in the frame of mind that asks what can my Government do for me, insted of asking themselves what can I do for myself and my Country?

We seem to have taken the slippery slope toward secularized Socialism of the entire Country as is indicated by the three front runners remaining in the race for the Presidency.

John McCain is anything but a Conservative. He has voted with Feinglod and Ted Kennedy more times than he has voted to support Our President. The only position that he has, that is in line with Conservative opinion, is his stance on Iraq and Afganistan.
Hillary and Obama are outspoken advocates of bigger government and more "hand outs". They also would begin withdrawal of the troops in Iraq, there by making Iraq a staging location for al Qaeda and Taliban Terrorists. A situation that will allow them to aid in the fabrication of small nuclear weapons to use against American Cities and Israel.

A famous Biblical scholar wrote "what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world, but loses his soul". I postulate that the United States of America has lost it's soul, It has become a Greek like tragedy and is headed for a catastrophic occurence, because of our political correctness, libertine hedonism, greed, and the disregard for the unborn and the elderly.

In too many of our "newer" generation minds there is no room for "tumults " of war, and those people whom they believe are not part of the "great work force" it takes to support a welfare state.

It All Depends on What "Literal" Means

Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty while prosecuting the war with radical Jihadistan.

If Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton get to be President, they will need all our prayers. It is physically impossible to remove all the troops at the same time. Because of this logistic problem, the last to be extracted from Iraq will be vulnerable to attack and Massacre, by Al Qaeda whom once the withdrawal is announced, will lie in wait and prepare to kill the troops as they depart..

While we are praying we should consider the dire consequences for Israel if Senator Obama is elected President.

The "Israel Insider" is reporting today on a speech given Monday by Barrack Obama in which he said the following: "Palestinian refugees do not have a "literal" right of return to Israel. He did not clarify whether that implied they had a moral, metaphorical, legal or other non-literal right to return to Israel.

More controversially, Obama said he supported the division of Israel into at least two parts by a Palestinian state. This completely stunning comment came as Obama was attempting to articulate his position on key Mideast issues presently in dispute.... "The right of return [to Israel] is something that is not an option in a literal sense," Obama said, but then went on to say that "The Palestinians have a legitimate concern that a state have a contiguous coherent mass that would allow the state to function effectively."

Roget;s thesaurus defines literal with any one of the following
Synonyms:
accurate, actual, apparent, authentic, bona fide, critical, faithful, genuine, natural, not figurative, ordinary, real, scrupulous, simple, strict, true, undeviating, unerring, unexaggerated, unvarnished, usual, veracious, verbal, verbatim, veritable, written. I have put some of the words in italics to Illustrate the duplicitous nature of his speech.

To make an analogy that is closer to home. Let us consider the ramifications of applying his solution to the problem native Mexicans living in southern California and Nevada have with Our Country, that they believe was wrongly taken from their ancestors.

Would We stand still while Congress and the President gave back a part of Southern California from the Mexican border to the Southern end of Los Angeles. Would We stand for the return of the portion of California and Arizona that included the land from Mexacali, Mexico North to Las Vegas, then East to the Arizona/ New Mexico border, then South to Aqua Prieta on the Mexican border.

This would effectively cut the Southwestern United States off from the rest of United States. Not unlike what it would do to Israel if Obama's plan were implemented. People traveling or transporting goods from Colorado Springs, Co. to San Diego,Ca. would have to pass through a foreign Country!

A land corridor between Gaza and the West Bank, as he has suggested, would effectively cut Israel in half, making it a non-contiguous Country. It would divided Israel into northern and southern portions by the Palestinian land-mass Obama envisions. The Democratic Presidential candidate didn't explain why it was legitimate for the Palestinians to have a coherent and contiguous territory at Israel's expense. It also would give them a position that surrounds Israel from which they could destroy them with Russian and Chinese made rockets.

Barack Obama does have a record to run on, despite many critics of him who say he has done nothing of note in his two years in the Senate. It is a record that should be of concern to those who support America's only real ally in the Middle East, Israel.

The following quote is one made my Reverend Jeramia Wright

Pastor of the Trinity United Church of Christ. This Church and

it's Pastor follow a particularly Afro-centric view of Christianity, emphasizing a Black Work Ethic, commitment to a Black Value System, and an allegiance to all Black Leadership that follows the Black Value System. A brief review of its philosophy shows that this is not your everyday Christian parish, in fact it follows a very racialist belief system that is espoused by Louis Farrakhan. This could account for Obama and his campaign's managers dropping of the name "Trinity" when discussing his church membership.

Pastor Wright had this to say about the Isarel/Palestinian problem:

"The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for almost 40 years now. It took a divestment campaign to wake the business community up concerning the South Africa issue. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community up and to wake Americans up concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism".

This racist belief system stands in stark contrast to Obama's rhetoric regarding the need and desirability of racial and religious inclusiveness. The church's principles seem to belie Obama's platitudes about the need for all people - of whatever race or religion - to come together as one.

Until Obama refutes his Pastor's position, We can assume he like his other benefactor, George Soros and his Democracy Alliance (whose members are called “partners,”who pay an initial $25,000 fee and $30,000 in yearly dues,and must pledge to give at least $200,000 annually to groups that Democracy Alliance endorses), are pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel!

Why would any one vote for this duplicitous smooth talking man to the Presidency?

Time to Take Iran's Nuclear Threat Seriously

- Iran Focus has learnt that the photograph of Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, holding the arm of a blindfolded American hostage on the premises of the United States embassy in Tehran was taken by an Associated Press photographer in November 1979. Prior to the first round of the presidential elections on June 17, Iran Focus was the first news service to reveal Ahmadinejad’s role in the seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran. This man has been, and still is a terrorist who is in the process of developing a nuclear bomb. A bomb that he denies on one occasion to be building, and on another threatens to use against Israel and U.S. military bases if attacked by Israel.

It is time to take this mad man, megalomaniac seriously!

Yet, we are in the middle of a Presidential campaign, and not one candidate on the Democrat side and too few on the Republican side have even mentioned how they would deal with this real threat if elected.

Anthony Cordesman may be the most influential man in Washington that most people have never heard of. A former director of intelligence assessment for the secretary of defense and director of policy and planning in the Department of Energy, he is now the top strategic "guru" at the Center for Strategic & International Studies. He believes it is a real possibility that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon.

In the real world outside of politics, this matters mainly because an Iranian nuclear capability would transform the power balance in the Middle East, and leave the region and the rest of us living under the constant prospect of a nuclear exchange between Iran and Israel.

Cordesman theorizes that the biggest bomb that Iran is expected to have is 100 kilotons, which can inflict third-degree burns on exposed flesh at 8 miles; Israel's 1-megaton bombs can inflict third-degree burns at 24 miles. Moreover, the radiation fallout from an airburst of such a 1-megaton bomb can kill unsheltered people at up to 80 miles within 18 hours as the radiation plume drifts.
Cordesman assumes that Iran, with less than 30 nuclear warheads in the period after 2010, would aim for the main population centers of Tel Aviv and Haifa, while Israel would have more than 200 warheads and far better delivery systems, including cruise missiles launched from its 3 Dolphin-class submarines.

Cordesman also notes that Israel, if attacked or threatened with an attack, would have various options, in addition to a strike on Iran. A limited nuclear strike on the region mainly inhabited by the Alawite minority in Syria, from which come the ruling Assad dynasty.

A full-scale Israeli attack on Syria would kill up to 18 million people within 21 days; Syrian recovery would not be possible. A Syrian attack with all its reputed chemical and biological warfare assets could kill up to 800,000 Israelis, but Israeli society would be able to recover.

So in a clear, and chillingly style, Cordesman spells out that he believes the real stakes in the crisis that is building over Iran's nuclear ambitions would certainly include the end of Persian civilization, quite probably the end of Egyptian civilization, and the end of the Oil Age. This would also mean the end of globalization and the extraordinary accomplishments in world trade, growth and prosperity that are hauling hundreds of millions of out of poverty.

Cordesman also lists the oil wells, refineries and ports along the Gulf that could also be targets in the event of a mass nuclear response by an Israel convinced that it was being dealt a potentially mortal blow. If it was contained within the region, such a nuclear exchange might not be Armageddon for the human race; it would certainly be Armageddon for the global economy.

Source: Middle East Times

The Wrong Pesron To Get Endorsement From

In Mafia lore the soldier never wanted to get a kiss on the lips by the "godfather'. If he did he knew immediately that he was marked for death!

The analogy is a little far fetched when you speak of politics, but I believe the announcement of the endorsement of Obama by Senator Ted Kennedy may turn out to be a negative in the long run. Not because of the animus Senator Kennedy has developed in his alcohol sodden 52 year tenure in the Senate. The endorsement and comparison of Obama and John Kennedy will only result in people delving into Obama's and John Kennedy's history to compare the two, and what they find will be a stark contrast in persons.

When we compare Barrack Hussein Obama to Ted's brother John Fitzgerald Kennedy we will see a great difference. Not a similarity.

Kennedy was a Catholic, Obama belongs to a Church whose pastor is an supporter of Louis Farrakhan. John Kennedy was a war hero who had his PT boat shot out from under him by the Japanese, for which he received the Purple Heart and the Navy and Marine Corps. Medal. He was an advocate of defending the South Vietnamese against the Communist North Vietnamese. He could be described as a Hawk in the way he stared down the Soviet Union during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Obama is described at best as a dove. He believes we can talk directly to the maniac that runs Iran, and that the Iraq war was wrong from the beginning.My question is at what point would he be willing to use the military?

President Kennedy proceeded to cut the high income tax rates
immediately after he was sworn in as President. Obama is for repealing the Bush tax cuts, and is advocating expanded welfare programs like universal health care. All of which will result in more tax dollars coming out of the pockets of working Americans and heading for the big welfare State rulers in Washington.

Unlike the two years service in National office of Obama. Kennedy served three terms in the Congress of the United States before being elected to the Senate. He was an experienced young political operative by the time he was nominated for President.

As Senator Lloyd Bensten said in 1988, during the vice-Presidential debates with Dan Quayle: "Senator you are no Jack Kennedy!". I repeat:Senator Obama, you are no John F. Kennedy!