I will be the first to say Chinese Government's response was overdone and wrong. On the other hand, the situation was more complicated than what western media portraited, although it did start out as a noble anti-corruption course. At the center of the crackdown decision was Deng, a figure mostly praised by western media. Now, should I take your silence on the issue of this thread, except raising more unrelated questions, as your agreement with Lil and NewYorker?
Ok, but calling it a myth is something else. It just sound like more denial. The same kind of denial that others put into their textbooks that the denial-ers are upset about. That is what makes it hard to sympathize. But we all are guilty of this, some are just more willing to admit it.
People died on June 4th, in Beijing. They were shot by soldiers. The central government action was dead wrong, and Deng was misled and dead wrong in assessment and decision making. However, it is also wrong to use lies against wrong doing. The official western version changed over-time from original "tens of thousands" to "a thousand" and then to "a couple of hundred". Yes, there were still a couple of hundred Chinese lives. History won't forget anything. There will be people held accountable for that, I believe. That being said, efforts from many people to use that Chinese tragedy to gain benefits, were truly disgusting. Some of the so-called Student Leaders were very disappointing in lying about what truly happened. Tiananmen Massacre was a myth created by those people, and supported by so-called "fair and balance" media. I was in most of the demonstrations, and some of my friends were actually in Tiananmen Square at that very night. People died at that night, but NOT in Tiananmen Square. One of the leader, Chai Ling, claimed that she saw tanks roll over students in the square, was a plain lie. Of course her famous quote "blood is needed in each revolution, but mine is too important to lose" made her look even worse. BTW, she's an owner of a net company and happily doing business in Beijing now, of course as a US citizen. I've read, watched, and bought videos, DVDs, and books about 1989, information from those fled desents, Western media, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and PRC. So far, not a single agency showed footage or photos to point to a dead student in Tiananmen Square. It was a big lie so far. Anyone who possesses such evidence, please do provide your source, it will be very much appreciated by all the people seeking for truth, especially Chinese. Otherwise, if you just happen to like the sound bite of Tiananmen Massacre, I would suggest you to use another term, something truthful. I did my own part to derail this serious thread, by replying this. BTW, what's the purpose of your post in this thread?
what part of this concise description, as reported by Gregory Clark who was monitoring the border skirmish, you don't understand. ? NY, don't just merely parrot rhetorics; exercise due dilligence, do your own research, ===>the exact location where the fightings took place? ===>the fighitng took place in the Thag La ridge, what country is that located at? ===>Thag La ridge is in China The India troops where in China when the fighting broke out. Yet, all you can do is to parrot the rhetorics that China invaded India. you incessant rhetorics, ad nauseum, add new meaning to the word ignorant.
I consider hundreds to be a massacre. Just because it wasn't exactly in the square doesn't meant he the name given to the event is mythical. It's just a name. That's just using semantics to try to draw attention from the actual tragedy. Just one sentence in your post pertained to the actual killing. The rest was concerned about the "myth, lies, and propaganda". It is very telling. And how is replying to a post during a thread?
It's also fruitless in this particular instance; Common knowledge is taht China invaded India in 1962 and even most chinese authorities wouldn't tell you differently; they would only argue that the borders then were illegal so it technically wasn't an "invasion"; as for who sent their tanks forward and attacked- it's the PLA, not the Indians. When there's chinese tanks in Assam, Ladakh, Sikkim and other areas its very difficult. No offense to Gregory Clark, whoever the hell he is, but saying that India invaded China in 1962 is like saying Poland invaded Germany - simply not true in any meaningful sense; he's a fringe voice on this issue to say the least. Simply because the Indians and chinese had some skirmishes on the border at some point in 1962 doesn't change the fact that the PLA went on the offensive and seized a bunch of territory (aka an invasion).
To me, truth is more important than "just using semantics to try to draw attention from the actual tragedy". News reporting shouldn't be associated with agendas, even much worse with known lies. I bet lots of people who so happily talked about Tiananmen Massacre didn't even know there was NO death in Tiananmen Square. All you were saying is, it's perfectly fine to lie to draw attention from an actual tragedy. It is very telling indeed.
Do you even reallize the one who's "calling it a myth" in your quote isn't even Chinese? Do you ever get the chance to comprehend what the context is, of which he called it a "myth"? Oh, and I love your use of the word "sympathize", by which you can avoid stating your judgement of Japanese government's action.
I and C are neighbors. I started to throw garbage into C's lawn, hit C's dogs, and actually went into C's lawn, provoked C and hit C. C fought back, and I was defeated, in C's lawn. I retreated, and C followed into I's lawn, and hit I again. Then C made it clear to I, it was MY LaWN, you stay away with it, is it clear? I said yes. C went back to his own lawn, and even cleared a part of his own lawn as buffer zone. It seems to be over. Oh, no, all of a sudden. All the neighbors jumped out and shouted in one voice "C invaded I, C invaded I, because he stepped onto I's lawn!". Just hilarious.
It doesn't matter to me at all exactly where the killing took place. I do not care. What is important is that hundreds, maybe thousands were.
absent any substantiaion, i can only conclude that you're merely parroting rhetorics / generalization. whay have you not been able to offer specifics in support of your claim. all you've been able to do has been to build suppositions on suppositions. Gregory Clark is able to offer substantive details in support of his position, such as the exact location where the fighting took place. his detailed account put rhetoric regurgitators---such as NY, lil, you et al---to shame.
C did invade I. You drive your tanks 30 k into somebody's lawn, kill a bunch of people and then stop because your supply line runs out; that's called invading. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-prc_1962.htm It's funny how using the "I" word to describe incidences where the PLA crosses into regions, kills a bunch of people, and occupies them by force raises so much controversy on this board. When you take your tanks and go somewhere that you don't control and kill a bunch of people - it's an invasion. Israel invaded Lebanon last month; the US invaded Iraq 3 years ago; the PRC invaded Vietnam in 1979; the US invaded Normandy in 1944 -- sorry but that's English 101. The fact that you guys get so upset about using certain words when people call a spade a spade reminds of party apparatchtiks censoring language or of ancient imperial protocal functionaries having a debating society about the proper tea cermony invititation. I suppose it must have something to do with the concept of saving face (which has way too much to do with the war shrine business on both sides IMO but that's another story) but I guess I'll never understand it. Oh well.
Does it matter to you then: "The beating to death of a PLA soldier, who was in the first APC to enter Tiananmen Square, in full view of the other waiting PLA soldiers, appeared to have sparked the shooting that followed." (Cable, From: U.S. Embassy Beijing, To: Department of State, Wash DC, SITREP No. 33: June 4 Afternoon and … (June 4, 1989)) ?
If what exactly happened in that history event doesn't matter to you, why are you "discussing" about it at all? BTW, where was that "maybe" from? "Trustworthy" Western official version already denied your maybe, but you are still hanging onto it. It does seem you don't really care about the actual truth, just the sound bite. Speaking of sympathy, you are absolutely wrong, if you assume that Chinese are seeking that from you. Chinese do not tolerate any downplaying of Japanese war crimes, that was the thread about. You can save your sympathy.
What did I say? Sam, bragging your English in front of those to whom English is their second language is not cool.
The Chinese surprised attacked Indian forces by the way. India was not interested in a war. China pushed in an occupied territory beyond even what it claimed....and although it later withdrew, that still constitutes an invasion. The fact of the matter is that China solved is boundary dispute with India unilaterally with force. A very aggressive style of negoiation.
Here is my impression of discussions with the tag-team of Chinese posters on this BBS: It's like arguing with a bunch of barking dogs. It is an excercise in futility. By barking out the same half-truths over and over you just drown out any sort of legitimate debate. It gets really tiring and I often give up, but at the same time I have to keep coming back in case some young unspecting impressionable Rockets fans swallow your party line as gospel truth. Grrrrr... China can do no wrong. Yip. Bark. Woof.
WoW, WOW WOW. How mature and convincing you are. I am eager to learn who's barking out half-truth, and who's drowning out the the actual debate? Funny how eventually true color shows. LMAO The sad thing is, you(and the one who called Chinese lunatics earlier) prob won't be banished by most here, whereas if it's done by some Chinese posters to another group of poster here, he/she might lost his/her posting previllege.
