Dude, I just linked you a BBC article saying no death happened in the square. This thread started because I was questioning the actions of the CPC. I’m not attempting to push Chinese propaganda, I’m just not blindly accepting Western propaganda. I think my view aligns with most (if not all) of the official record that I’ve seen, which includes footage. While the Western depiction of events seems to rely more on hearsay and anecdotes.
Evidence of a massacre having occurred in Beijing was incontrovertible.
Chinese army tanks guard the strategic Chang’an avenue leading to Tiananmen square (6 June 1989) Manuel Ceneta/AFP
Troops fired at unarmed citizens on the strategic Chang’an Boulevard
Numerous foreign journalists saw it from widely scattered vantage points.
On the morning of 4 June, reporters in the Beijing Hotel close to the square saw troops open fire indiscriminately at unarmed citizens on Chang’an Boulevard who were too far away from the soldiers to pose any real threat.
Thirty or 40 bodies lay, apparently lifeless, on the road afterwards.
That scene outside the Beijing Hotel alone justified the use of the word massacre. But the students who had told me and other journalists of a bloodbath on the square proved mistaken.
From the article you posted. At this point I don’t care that the massacre didn’t happen inside the square. The Tiananmen Square Massacre describes a massacre near Tiananmen Square, that was started because of events that happened there. And also, because it’s especially relevant here:
The Chinese government was quick to exploit the weaknesses in our reporting.
By focusing on what happened in the square itself, it began sowing seeds of doubt about the general accuracy of Western reports among Chinese who did not witness what happened.
Yes, the western media source is still in line with the narrative of other western media sources. That article was mostly for pointing out that one big misconception of things happening in the square. Much of the other stuff, including what you showed, is still anecdotes. People saying what they can remember of what they think they saw. Many people wouldn’t be able to distinguish between a massacre and a war zone. Like I said, what makes something a massacre is more about how it’s carried out than any certain number. Here’s a pretty disturbing photo album.
The purpose of this link is to counter the narrative of the Chinese military attacking peaceful protesters. Note that the vast majority of burning vehicles are army vehicles. Note that the most gruesome images in this collection are of dead soldiers. Including the two of what appears to be a commander who’s been stripped naked, burned, and hung from a noose.
That’s photographic evidence. Evidence that contradicts the idea that it was just a peaceful protest. Yet another seed of doubt on the general accuracy of western reports.
Most of the pictures of the dead are of protesters, and they’re plenty gruesome.
That’s photographic evidence. Evidence that contradicts the idea that it was just a peaceful protest. Yet another seed of doubt on the general accuracy of western reports.
But importantly, do you know the timeline of events leading up to that one soldier being burned and hung up? Probably not, since there aren’t any timestamps for it that I’ve been able to see. When I throw the first image into google translate, it turns some of the writing on the bus into “he killed” and “return blood.”
That’s obviously not a complete or accurate translation, but do you think it might be possible that that particular soldier was killed after committing some crimes of his own? Do you know when and where the violence started, and by who? I’m guessing not, because the whole event is pretty heavily censored by the chinese government. And that censorship is a large part of what makes me think that the government was in the wrong, and that “massacre” is an accurate term for the hundreds of civilians that were killed.
Many people wouldn’t be able to distinguish between a massacre and a war zone. Like I said, what makes something a massacre is more about how it’s carried out than any certain number.
Even if we assume the chinese government was “fighting a war,” they’re sending armed soldiers and tanks into their own cities to fight against mostly unarmed “combatants”. One might say that the use of such overwhelming force in a fairly one-sided battle could be called a massacre.
This will probably be my last reply because this is really not an enjoyable topic of conversation and I don’t know how much more can be said.
For timeline on that picture, it’s clearly daytime so probably at least a couple hours after the events of that night. Agreed that we don’t truly know the motivations that placed him there, but I do think visibly displaying a body with possible signs of torture is in fact more gruesome than the (still gruesome) images of bodies having been placed to the side for later processing (is the best word I can come up with at the moment). Also the 50 ish bodies we see in these photos doesn’t go against china’s official estimate of 241.
About the conflict, I don’t think there was “the use of such overwhelming force”. I haven’t seen any reports claiming that tanks opened fire. There’s evidence of tanks running over things, but not people (though there are reports). The only report I’ve seen of a mounted gun being used was by protesters at soldiers. There isn’t any evidence of protesters being armed, though there are many reports that some had molotov cocktails. It’s also confirmed that there’s at least some involvement by the CIA with the help of the triads. As well as there’s the interview with one of the organizers (who chose not to be there because she didn’t wanted to risk her life) that includes, “What we actually are hoping for is bloodshed”.
All that being said doesn’t mean you have to 100% agree with china’s report, or especially with the Chinese government as they are now. If you care about the truth of what happened, look at the evidence. If you want to guard yourself against propaganda, it should be against all propaganda, not just foreign. Because that’s why the western narrative exists and why it’s so sensationalized. It’s an effort to demonize China and with it socialism as a whole. We should be talking less about China==bad and more about how poorly our own system is treating us.
You are starting to sound like a propaganda bot for the Chinese government.
You heard it here: the BBC is a propaganda outlet for the CCP
Dude, I just linked you a BBC article saying no death happened in the square. This thread started because I was questioning the actions of the CPC. I’m not attempting to push Chinese propaganda, I’m just not blindly accepting Western propaganda. I think my view aligns with most (if not all) of the official record that I’ve seen, which includes footage. While the Western depiction of events seems to rely more on hearsay and anecdotes.
From the article you posted. At this point I don’t care that the massacre didn’t happen inside the square. The Tiananmen Square Massacre describes a massacre near Tiananmen Square, that was started because of events that happened there. And also, because it’s especially relevant here:
Yes, the western media source is still in line with the narrative of other western media sources. That article was mostly for pointing out that one big misconception of things happening in the square. Much of the other stuff, including what you showed, is still anecdotes. People saying what they can remember of what they think they saw. Many people wouldn’t be able to distinguish between a massacre and a war zone. Like I said, what makes something a massacre is more about how it’s carried out than any certain number. Here’s a pretty disturbing photo album.
viewer discretion greatly advised
The purpose of this link is to counter the narrative of the Chinese military attacking peaceful protesters. Note that the vast majority of burning vehicles are army vehicles. Note that the most gruesome images in this collection are of dead soldiers. Including the two of what appears to be a commander who’s been stripped naked, burned, and hung from a noose.
That’s photographic evidence. Evidence that contradicts the idea that it was just a peaceful protest. Yet another seed of doubt on the general accuracy of western reports.
Most of the pictures of the dead are of protesters, and they’re plenty gruesome.
But importantly, do you know the timeline of events leading up to that one soldier being burned and hung up? Probably not, since there aren’t any timestamps for it that I’ve been able to see. When I throw the first image into google translate, it turns some of the writing on the bus into “he killed” and “return blood.”
That’s obviously not a complete or accurate translation, but do you think it might be possible that that particular soldier was killed after committing some crimes of his own? Do you know when and where the violence started, and by who? I’m guessing not, because the whole event is pretty heavily censored by the chinese government. And that censorship is a large part of what makes me think that the government was in the wrong, and that “massacre” is an accurate term for the hundreds of civilians that were killed.
Even if we assume the chinese government was “fighting a war,” they’re sending armed soldiers and tanks into their own cities to fight against mostly unarmed “combatants”. One might say that the use of such overwhelming force in a fairly one-sided battle could be called a massacre.
This will probably be my last reply because this is really not an enjoyable topic of conversation and I don’t know how much more can be said.
For timeline on that picture, it’s clearly daytime so probably at least a couple hours after the events of that night. Agreed that we don’t truly know the motivations that placed him there, but I do think visibly displaying a body with possible signs of torture is in fact more gruesome than the (still gruesome) images of bodies having been placed to the side for later processing (is the best word I can come up with at the moment). Also the 50 ish bodies we see in these photos doesn’t go against china’s official estimate of 241.
About the conflict, I don’t think there was “the use of such overwhelming force”. I haven’t seen any reports claiming that tanks opened fire. There’s evidence of tanks running over things, but not people (though there are reports). The only report I’ve seen of a mounted gun being used was by protesters at soldiers. There isn’t any evidence of protesters being armed, though there are many reports that some had molotov cocktails. It’s also confirmed that there’s at least some involvement by the CIA with the help of the triads. As well as there’s the interview with one of the organizers (who chose not to be there because she didn’t wanted to risk her life) that includes, “What we actually are hoping for is bloodshed”.
All that being said doesn’t mean you have to 100% agree with china’s report, or especially with the Chinese government as they are now. If you care about the truth of what happened, look at the evidence. If you want to guard yourself against propaganda, it should be against all propaganda, not just foreign. Because that’s why the western narrative exists and why it’s so sensationalized. It’s an effort to demonize China and with it socialism as a whole. We should be talking less about China==bad and more about how poorly our own system is treating us.