You can watch this video that has live footage from the event, former solider talks about others shooting students, and citizens at the event saying over a 100 bodies at the local hospital when they arrived for treatment.
What’s your idea of massacre numbers?
Thanks for the video link. That has some stuff I want to look more into. For me a “massacre” is less about numbers and more about how it was carried out. This video doesn’t actually show any massacre taking place, but I recognize that could be due to wanting to keep it TV friendly. Though showing that footage would greatly strengthen their case. One article I found very informative is https://archive.ph/24zzF which does contain some info/context that isn’t included in the video you shared.
That page is bogus, it says no fighting or people shot at tianemen square, while I just sent you a video showing fighting, shots fired, a soldier saying others were firing, and a guy saying he saw 100s of dead bodies. The government having the bodies sent for funerals.
And, my coworker was there as a student. They said it was friendly at first with students feeding bored soldiers, until the orders came to shut it down at no costs. Then it turned ugly.
It means there was no shooting or fighting in the physical square itself, but the protests extended much further than just the square itself and there was killing in other places
No one is saying death didn’t happen that night. What is being denied is a massacre in the square. I have yet to see footage of tanks running people over at all or any military violence in the square. That page is comprehensive and cites its sources. Please understand the full counter argument before attempting to rebut.
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,” if 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.
You can watch this video that has live footage from the event, former solider talks about others shooting students, and citizens at the event saying over a 100 bodies at the local hospital when they arrived for treatment. What’s your idea of massacre numbers?
https://archive.org/details/tiananmen-square-massacre
Op is probably gaslighting; writing so m7ch that ppl won’t reply or read.
Thanks for the video link. That has some stuff I want to look more into. For me a “massacre” is less about numbers and more about how it was carried out. This video doesn’t actually show any massacre taking place, but I recognize that could be due to wanting to keep it TV friendly. Though showing that footage would greatly strengthen their case. One article I found very informative is https://archive.ph/24zzF which does contain some info/context that isn’t included in the video you shared.
That page is bogus, it says no fighting or people shot at tianemen square, while I just sent you a video showing fighting, shots fired, a soldier saying others were firing, and a guy saying he saw 100s of dead bodies. The government having the bodies sent for funerals.
And, my coworker was there as a student. They said it was friendly at first with students feeding bored soldiers, until the orders came to shut it down at no costs. Then it turned ugly.
It means there was no shooting or fighting in the physical square itself, but the protests extended much further than just the square itself and there was killing in other places
That page is correct in saying that there wasn’t shooting in the square.
https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8057762.stm
No one is saying death didn’t happen that night. What is being denied is a massacre in the square. I have yet to see footage of tanks running people over at all or any military violence in the square. That page is comprehensive and cites its sources. Please understand the full counter argument before attempting to rebut.
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,” if 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.