The third and final post on the Tiananmen incident. It started as a student protest. It was a sit-in (more like a camp-in, actually) in Tiananmen Square – and which had lasted for weeks on end, finally terminating on June 04, 1989.
There is now conclusive and overwhelming documentation that the events in Beijing, China were very different from those reported in the Western press. Not only that, there is substantial evidence that the Chinese Government’s version of these events had been true all along!
University students had congregated in the Square and one news report suggested they had wanted to present petitions to the government.
Since the government did not immediately respond, the students camped in the square and waited. They brought food, water, tents, blankets, camp stoves – but no toilets. Tiananmen Square, after three weeks, was not a place for the faint of nose.
The government waited patiently enough during that period, but finally gave the students a deadline for evacuation of the Square – June 04.
Soldiers were sent there on the day prior, but these soldiers were not armed and by all documented reports (including those of the US Embassy in Beijing, thanks to Wikileaks) had only billy sticks.
And then, there were a couple of hundreds of people – most of whom were workers, but of whom an undetermined few were students – who had assembled elsewhere and they had set up barricades on some roads.
In the mix, a third group had emerged. It appeared that they were neither students nor workers.
“Agitators” or “anarchists” might be an appropriate adjective, but adjectives don’t help the identification. As far as I can tell from the reports I gleaned, nobody knew who they were.
To deal with the mass gatherings, the authorities sent in busloads of troops, accompanied by a few APCs – armoured personnel carriers, to clear the barricades and re-open the streets to traffic.
The violence erupted when this third group decided to attack the soldiers. They were apparently well-prepared, having come armed with Molotov cocktails, and torched the buses – with the soldiers still inside – as they entered Beijing. They also set alight the APCs.
You can see the photos:
There are documented reports to tell us that the thugs managed to get control of one APC, and drove it through the streets while firing the machine guns on the turret.
That was when the government sent in the tanks and opened fire on these rioters. Government reports and independent media personnel generally claim that a total of 250 to 300 people died before the violence subsided. And many of those dead were soldiers.
There was no “massacre” in any sense that this word could be sensibly used.
When police or military are attacked in this way, they will surely use force to defend themselves and cannot be faulted for that. And in any case, soldiers were being attacked by a violent mob – today, we call them “terrorists” – and were dying horrible deaths. We cannot blame the remaining soldiers for opening fire and killing those who were killing them. And yes, people died in that event.
As with the student supplies, the Coleman gas stoves, the manuals, instructions, training, strategy and tactics, the logistics and many other elements, there is little question the providers were not domestic Chinese. Evidence of US involvement is clear and glaring.
There is overwhelming documented evidence that no violence occurred in the Square, that no students were killed, and that there never was any “Tiananmen Square Massacre”.
Many foreign reporters filed live reports directly from the Square, stating clearly that, while gunfire could be heard in the distance, there was no violence in the Square either by or toward the students. All reports from the Square were that the event ended peacefully.
However, there was a large group of foreign (mostly US) journalists reporting “live from (a) Beijing hotel”, and describing the view through their windows of all the gunfire, the deaths, the piles of student bodies. Unfortunately, and as other foreign reporters pointed out later, Tiananmen Square cannot be seen from the Beijing Hotel.
Those live reports were fabricated by journalists who apparently believed something was happening, lacked the courage to go and see for themselves, and who told their editors the most likely events according to their convictions and imaginations.
CNN’s Mike Chinoy at the time even played a “tape” of sporadic gunfire which was edited and condensed to a few seconds to give the impression that it was rapid and continuous.
Many reporters and journalists, including Spain’s TV channel that had a film crew in the Square for the entire event, have all denied the veracity of the reports of gunfire, violence and student deaths in Tiananmen Square.
As far as can be determined from the available evidence, no one died on the night of June 03 in Tiananmen Square. A few people may have been killed by random shooting on streets near the square, but all verified eyewitness accounts say that the students who remained in the square when troops arrived were allowed to leave peacefully.
As already mentioned, there were fatalities – but these happened in a different place and under different circumstances.
This falsification of history, which appears deliberate since the facts have become well known, deludes a new generation and prejudices it against China. The distortion of the happenings within Tiananmen Square reduces the media’s credibility and leaves it open to charges of grossly misrepresenting significant current events for cheap political gain.
Thank You, America for Tiananmen.
It seems plausible that the student protests in China during the late 1980s may, at their origin, have been spontaneously generated, but there is no shortage of evidence – facts not in dispute – that the entire student movement was quickly hijacked by the US.
So now, you know!
No comments:
Post a Comment