China related news...

Ob2 wrote: And here are the source that i had used Google search outside the firewall to deep fact check and verify his facts of atrocity prppaganda using verbal accounts.It was solid.

www.theguardian.com/...3,-2317,00.html
~

www.globalresearch.c...assacre/5574567

*note - the above site is not a website that says "only conspiracy theory stories" are allowed here. And true stories with very well backed evidence are strictly not welcome. That's not how that site works.

It's a place where independant journalisms that corporate media wishes to brush aside, have at least one place to go. But integrity of an article will always depends on the individual author so  fact checking is essential as with all media tbh.

~


Anyways this is what a basic chinese guy like me found out about 89.

In 1998 Washington Post journalist, Jay Mathews confessed in the Columbia Journalism Review that "no one die at Tiananmen Square" and that "It is hard to find a journalist who has not contributed to the misimpression" (including himself).

...................
-

right .... these footages must've been made up all the way back then....

.....

Ob2 wrote:
-

ok....i suppose you can dig up some report claiming nanjing massacre never happened too right?

can you beleive the japanese were innocent all along? the japanese were defenders of asia from the "evil western colonizers "eh?

can you imagine people in china having been falsely accusing the poor japanese all this time?

maybe china owes japan an apology for false blame all this time....

Umm- dude did you even watch the full footage?



It shows the tanks refusing to squash him. And the protester cheekily climbed on the tank lilke a monkey. Got off and even then, the tanks refuse to sqaush him.


Secondly, did you even read the url articles. You're not making sense

www.telegraph.co.uk/...bles-claim.html

www.liberationnews.o...cre-that-wasnt/

www.outcastjournalis...nt_evidence.htm

www.globalresearch.c...assacre/5574567

It never denied martial law or the protest. But Spain’s TVE channel had a television crew in the square at the time, ~ Eugenio Bregolat points out angrily that most of the reports of an alleged massacre og unarmed students were made by journalists hunkered down in the safe haven of the Beijing Hotel, some distance from the square.

“

Then there is Graham Earnshaw, a down-to-earth Reuters correspondent who spent the night of June 3-4 at the alleged site of the massacre ~ Earnshaw confirms that most of the students had left peacefully much earlier and that the remaining few hundred were persuaded by the troops to do likewise.”

His account is confirmed by Taiwan-born Hou Dejian who had been on a hunger strike on the square to show solidarity with the students:

“Some people said 200 died in the square and others claimed that as many as 2,000 died. There were also stories of tanks running over students who were trying to leave. I have to say I did not see any of that. I was in the square until 6:30 in the morning.”

In a well-researched 1998 article in the Columbia Journalism Review titled “Reporting the Myth of Tiananmen and the Price of a Passive Press,” the former Washington Post bureau chief in Beijing, Jay Mathews, tracks down what he calls the dramatic accounts that buttressed the myth of a student massacre.

He notes a widely disseminated piece by an alleged Chinese university student writing in the Hong Kong press immediately after the incident, describing machine guns mowing down students in front of the square monument (somehow Reuter’s Earnshaw chatting quietly with the students in front of the same monument failed to notice this.

Mathews adds: “The New York Times gave this version prominent display June 12, just a week after the event, but no evidence was ever found to confirm the account or verify the existence of the alleged witness.”

And for good reason, I suspect. The mystery report was very likely the work of U.S. and British black information authorities ever keen to plant anti-Beijing stories in unsuspecting media.

Mathews adds that Times reporter Nicholas Kristof, who had been in Beijing at the time, challenged the report the next day, but his article was buried on an inside page and so “the myth lived on.” (I once tried in vain to rebut a 2004 anti-Beijing piece by New York Times opinion-page writer David Brooks, who claimed blandly that 3,000 students were massacred in the square.)

Another key source for the original massacre myth, Mathews says, was student leader Wu’er Kaixi, who claimed to have seen 200 students cut down by gunfire in the square. But, he notes, “It was later proven that he left the square several hours before the events he described.” Mathews also lists an inaccurate BBC massacre report, filed from that out-of-sight Beijing Hotel.

SOURCE

www.japantimes.co.jp...h/#.XQ4v7FOuaDY

You seem like a well-read, intelligent person capable of independent thinking with good research ability. Appreciate all the logical arguments and sources listed here so that more people can open their eyes to see things from different perspectives.

However you are clearly arguing with an imbecile who isn’t willing to read or understand your perspective, doesn’t know how to respond to each one your points but posts videos here and there and simply label you as brainwashed. It’s just a waste of time and lost of your brain cells arguing with folks like this.

zg375 wrote: You seem like a well-read, intelligent person capable of independent thinking with good research ability. Appreciate all the logical arguments and sources listed here so that more people can open their eyes to see things from different perspectives.

However you are clearly arguing with an imbecile who isn’t willing to read or understand your perspective, doesn’t know how to respond to each one your points but posts videos here and there and simply label you as brainwashed. It’s just a waste of time and lost of your brain cells arguing with folks like this.

Not really arguing tho. Just discussing even if he is unpleasant. I like to speak my mind and don't care.

But thank you. I appreciate your kind words mate

I am pure American and have read a fair amount about what the CIA has done in a few other countries, including Laos and Central and South America. I have NO DOUBT that the USA (along with their partner the UK) inflates negative stories about China. However, China is no angel itself and nor is Russia. Because super=powers are run by humans and human nature is so often corrupted/stank, it is only reasonable to think most governments are corrupt and power-hungry....esp. those 3....I'd through in IsraEl,. too (trifecta: IsraEl, USA, UK). For a couple of years, I worked for a man from Hong Kong, so when I heard news of Hong Kong, I paid a bit of attention to it. When China was going to get Hong Kong back, and for 10 years after China did, MANYYYYY men in Hong Kong were desperate to leave and trying to find wives abroad...offering $40K (rumored) to get out of Hong Kong, to get citizenship elsewhere. The fear was VERY real. I also spoke to one guy who comes and goes from China and he sure seems to be trying hard to get a wife ion the USA. He is desperate to leave.
It seems that most people get loyalty to their current government confused with loyalty to their country.....those 2 things are different. Americans get this confused a lot, too.
China has been through MANY governments in its history. It is sad to see them confuse their identity with a government which has only been around less than a century. But, the American government is making the Chinese government out to seem a worse than it really is. Part of this is also about trade and dominance....money. Both countries have many greedy SOBs at the top.

The Bottom line is, Chinese media is always going to promote China while limiting most reports of any negativity about its governance or downplaying tragedies. This has never changed. One the other hand, Western civilizations have always tried to get their piece of China and take advantage of its people. It's basic knowledge if you look into Chinese history. Western Media has always been anti-Chinese. Making things sound much worse and choosing to report only the negatives and not what they do right or their leaps forward.

You can't deny that China hides things or does shady activity. But you also can't deny Western countries haven't done the same and are constantly picking on China because they are becoming more formidable. China won't listen to USA or Britain, and nor should they have to. No country should have to. USA is always trying to stay #1. They do what they need and other countries do the same.

There's all this talk about China taking advantage of this and that, and they have such a monopoly and stronghold on manufacturing and goods etc. Well, nobody from China held guns to get those billions of dollar contracts. Guess what? Corporate greed gladly gave those contracts away. Why? Because they wanted 500% profit, not 200%.

So don't blame China for gladly accepting business because Corporations would jump at any opportunity to earn $5 for every $1 invested. This trade dependency was not the creation of China. That is just the easy scapegoat excuse for not looking at the long-term affects.

Well the good news is Taiwan has never been part of China and never will be. The communist government has never been to Taiwan, has not had any control over Taiwan at any point of the history, and has no claim to Taiwan. Different flags. Different currency. Different infrastructure, judicial systems, everything. Whatever works in China can't be used in Taiwan. Can't use rmb in Taiwan. Although wechat pay is accepted by some venues and Alipay but because there is so much Taiwanese presence in Alibaba; banking and everything else don't work in Taiwan. A list of things Taiwan has: their own currency, infrastructure, military, medical system, judicial system, legislation, government, president, etc. Taiwan holds its own elections and china has never took part in any of Taiwan's affairs. So in short china never managed Taiwan. Not the ccp government. chinese citizens need a special visa to go to Taiwan. They cannot legitimately live in Taiwan or work in Taiwan. They cannot purchase properties in Taiwan. They can't even try to immigrate. The only possible way for a Chinese person to obtain Taiwan citizenship is thru marriage.