[WhistlingPastTheGraveyard]

What a bunch of mealy-mouthed crap. He was an evil, murdering psychopath. It wasn’t that “his policies caused” those deaths, it was that *he* killed those people.

Bingo.

The whitewash isn't even subtle. How anyone can defend that garbage site is beyond me. It's existence is an affront to truth.

[Star Traveler]

You were saying ...

The whitewash isn't even subtle. How anyone can defend that garbage site is beyond me. It's existence is an affront to truth.

In Post #36, I listed the information on Wikipedia as compared to a conserative site, doing the exact same thing... i.e., presenting "encyclopedic information" on the net. That's Conservapedia.

And I don't find the "whitewash" that you're talking about. When I list the two, one right under the other, on that post, I find that Wikipedia is far more brutal and direct about Mao than Conservapedia ever is, and Conservapedia is touted (by some here) as a better conservative alternative to Wikipedia.

But, from what I can see, Conservapedia is not.

They may be for perhaps 1% of the information that I find from time to time over at Wikipedia that I don't think is true or presents that different "slant"... and so, I may reference Conservapedia for that 1% of information that I search out.., while I'll reference Wikipedia for the other 99% of the information that I'm looking for... LOL...