c******i
发帖数: 94 | 1 WikiLeaks confirms it Tiananmen Square ‘massacre’ was a myth。
The most recent is a WikiLeaks release of cables sent from the U.S. Embassy
in Beijing to the State Department in June 1989, a few days after the events
in China.
Second is an assertion in November 1989 by the Beijing bureau chief of the
New York Times, an assertion that has never again been referred to by that
newspaper.
And third is the account of what happened by the Chinese government itself,
which is corroborated by the first two.
Only one major Western newspaper has published the WikiLeaks cables. That
was the Telegraph of London on June 4 of this year, exactly 22 years after
the Chinese government called out the troops in Beijing.
Two cables dated July 7, 1989 — more than a month after the fighting —
related the following:
“A Chilean diplomat provides an eye-witness account of the soldiers
entering Tiananmen Square: He watched the military enter the square and did
not observe any mass firing of weapons into the crowds, although sporadic
gunfire was heard. He said that most of the troops which entered the square
were actually armed only with anti-riot gear — truncheons and wooden clubs;
they were backed up by armed soldiers.”
A following cable stated: “A Chilean diplomat provides an eye-witness
account of the soldiers entering Tiananmen Square: Although gunfire could be
heard, he said that apart from some beating of students, there was no mass
firing into the crowd of students at the monument.”
It should be remembered that Chile at that time was ruled by Gen. Augusto
Pinochet, who had come to power in a violent, anti-socialist, U.S.-supported
right-wing coup in which thousands of leftists, including President
Salvador Allende, had been killed. The “Chilean diplomat” referred to
would have been no friend of China.
Not one U.S. newspaper, television or radio outlet has reported or commented
on these cables released by WikiLeaks, nor on the Telegraph story about
them. It is as though they fell into a bottomless chasm.
Is it because the media here don’t believe the report is credible? Hardly.
They knew the truth in 1989
The New York Times knows it’s credible. Their own Beijing bureau chief at
the time, Nicholas Kristof, confirmed it in an extensive article entitled “
China Update: How the Hardliners Won,” published in the Sunday Times
magazine on Nov. 12, 1989, five months after the supposed massacre in the
square.
At the very end of this long article, which purported to give an inside view
of a debate within the Chinese Communist Party leadership, Kristof stated
categorically: “Based on my observations in the streets, neither the
official account nor many of the foreign versions are quite correct. There
is no massacre in Tiananmen Square, for example, although there is plenty of
killing elsewhere.”
Even though Kristof’s article was harshly critical of China, his statement
that there was “no massacre in Tiananmen Square” immediately drew howls of
protest from China bashers in the U.S., as reflected in the Times’ letters
column.
Had there been fighting in Beijing? Absolutely. But there was no massacre of
unarmed students in the square. That was an invention by the West, intended
to demonize the Chinese government and win public sympathy for a counter-
revolution.
The turn toward a market economy under Deng Xiaoping had alienated many
workers. There was also a counter-revolutionary element trying to take
advantage of popular grievances to completely restore capitalism.
The imperialists were hoping the struggles in Beijing would bring down the
Chinese Communist Party and destroy the planned economy — similar to what
was to happen two years later in the Soviet Union. They wanted to “open up
” China, not to truth, but to the looting of the people’s property by
imperialist banks and corporations.
After much wavering at the top, the army was called out and the uprising
crushed. China was not broken up like the Soviet Union; its economy has not
imploded nor has the standard of living declined. Quite the opposite. Wages
and social conditions have been improving at a time when workers elsewhere
are being forced backward by a severe capitalist economic crisis.
Despite deep concessions to capitalism, foreign and domestic, China
continues to have a planned economy based on a strong state-owned
infrastructure.
Email: d*******[email protected]
--------------------------------------------------------
Articles copyright 1995-2011 Workers World. Verbatim copying and
distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without
royalty provided this notice is preserved. |
J***J
发帖数: 6000 | |
f*****n
发帖数: 18176 | |
z****n
发帖数: 5870 | |
p****7
发帖数: 641 | 5 这个说的是广场上没有发生屠杀，这个是事实，为什么西方媒体一直遮遮掩掩的？ |
m*****s
发帖数: 2449 | 6 繁体的老将都不看
主流媒体是谁？
【在 f*****n 的大作中提到】
: 英文的轮子老将不看
|
n********d
发帖数: 7676 | 7 英文明明说的是天安门屠杀，怎么你就给改成64屠杀了呢？ |
J***J
发帖数: 6000 | 8 在西方这两个指的是同一个事件
【在 n********d 的大作中提到】
: 英文明明说的是天安门屠杀，怎么你就给改成64屠杀了呢？
|
n********d
发帖数: 7676 | |
p****7
发帖数: 641 | 10 不要混淆概念。64镇压和63~64天安门广场没有死人是两个不同的事情。
虽然我当年也是被镇压的一部分，但是今天我觉得这个事情是中共 49年以后做的为数
不多的正确事情之一。
今天没事数数，只是我个人的看法，欢迎补充批评！
1. 发展原子弹，氢弹和战略导弹
2. 大力，全面发展工业，尤其是重化工行业。
3. 大力全民教育
4. 改革开放
5. 64镇压 |
|
|
a******9
发帖数: 20431 | 11 能不能说说为啥正确
【在 p****7 的大作中提到】
: 不要混淆概念。64镇压和63~64天安门广场没有死人是两个不同的事情。
: 虽然我当年也是被镇压的一部分，但是今天我觉得这个事情是中共 49年以后做的为数
: 不多的正确事情之一。
: 今天没事数数，只是我个人的看法，欢迎补充批评！
: 1. 发展原子弹，氢弹和战略导弹
: 2. 大力，全面发展工业，尤其是重化工行业。
: 3. 大力全民教育
: 4. 改革开放
: 5. 64镇压
|
c***T
发帖数: 4990 | 12 他说为啥正确，
你说为啥不正确。
LOL
【在 a******9 的大作中提到】
: 能不能说说为啥正确
|
g******r
发帖数: 194 | 13 LMAO，中共没打死你毫无疑问是不正确事情之一。
【在 p****7 的大作中提到】
: 不要混淆概念。64镇压和63~64天安门广场没有死人是两个不同的事情。
: 虽然我当年也是被镇压的一部分，但是今天我觉得这个事情是中共 49年以后做的为数
: 不多的正确事情之一。
: 今天没事数数，只是我个人的看法，欢迎补充批评！
: 1. 发展原子弹，氢弹和战略导弹
: 2. 大力，全面发展工业，尤其是重化工行业。
: 3. 大力全民教育
: 4. 改革开放
: 5. 64镇压
|
c***T
发帖数: 4990 | 14 你被打死了？
你在诈尸？
【在 g******r 的大作中提到】
: LMAO，中共没打死你毫无疑问是不正确事情之一。
|
T******t
发帖数: 458 | 15 那还用说，还不是要你鳖难看。米油望死里丑化你鳖，这么多年就没消停过。
【在 p****7 的大作中提到】
: 这个说的是广场上没有发生屠杀，这个是事实，为什么西方媒体一直遮遮掩掩的？
|
T******t
发帖数: 458 | 16 这尼玛什么myth, 这特么是谎言还差不多。
Embassy
events
,
【在 c******i 的大作中提到】
: WikiLeaks confirms it Tiananmen Square ‘massacre’ was a myth。
: The most recent is a WikiLeaks release of cables sent from the U.S. Embassy
: in Beijing to the State Department in June 1989, a few days after the events
: in China.
: Second is an assertion in November 1989 by the Beijing bureau chief of the
: New York Times, an assertion that has never again been referred to by that
: newspaper.
: And third is the account of what happened by the Chinese government itself,
: which is corroborated by the first two.
: Only one major Western newspaper has published the WikiLeaks cables. That
|
p****7
发帖数: 641 | 17 成年人是不可能被别人说服的，如果真服了，要么是自己转变了，要么是被压服的。所
以我不打算和人在版上互喷，没有意义。
能做的，就是提供一些不同的看问题的思路和一些事实。信不信就是你自己的事情了。
64杀了几百人，当然是个悲剧，不过悲剧往往有好的效果。当年老邓完全可以像四人帮
镇压45运动一样把64压下去，对其个人的名誉没有任何影响。不过四人帮同年就被抓了
，所以老邓不会那么傻。
当时国内的民主化气氛很浓，从70年代末，每年都闹，89年不过是大了一点，又刚好赶
上党内分裂，于是越闹越大。如果不是64当头一棒，我保证中共早就被推翻了，我估计
没有64中共应该在2000年前就完蛋了。
共产党完蛋不可惜，但是殉葬的将是中国人和中国。当然，这个是我个人观点。 |
N*******e
发帖数: 3872 | 18 你说的还是比较靠谱的，老邓比大多数人认为的要老谋深算的多
政治家解决问题，常常是着眼于未来20年甚至更长时间的，而不仅仅是采取头疼医头的
方式，那样的话他根本不可能take over毛死后的中国政局。邓采取的镇压手法，除了
给民主热潮极速降温，也有平衡党内左右派的考虑。右派闹得欢，需要压一压，左派冷
血，需要搞个事情绑架一下。六四镇压最终成了左派在台上的最大代表李鹏的达摩克利
斯之剑。这么搞一下，左右派起码在台上和平共处了20年，直到薄熙来被搞下去。回头
看看，这20年对中国多么重要，一下子成了全球老二，跟美国有千丝万缕的利益瓜葛，
成了大而不能倒的国家。
【在 p****7 的大作中提到】
: 成年人是不可能被别人说服的，如果真服了，要么是自己转变了，要么是被压服的。所
: 以我不打算和人在版上互喷，没有意义。
: 能做的，就是提供一些不同的看问题的思路和一些事实。信不信就是你自己的事情了。
: 64杀了几百人，当然是个悲剧，不过悲剧往往有好的效果。当年老邓完全可以像四人帮
: 镇压45运动一样把64压下去，对其个人的名誉没有任何影响。不过四人帮同年就被抓了
: ，所以老邓不会那么傻。
: 当时国内的民主化气氛很浓，从70年代末，每年都闹，89年不过是大了一点，又刚好赶
: 上党内分裂，于是越闹越大。如果不是64当头一棒，我保证中共早就被推翻了，我估计
: 没有64中共应该在2000年前就完蛋了。
: 共产党完蛋不可惜，但是殉葬的将是中国人和中国。当然，这个是我个人观点。
|
f*****n
发帖数: 18176 | 19 尤赞最后一句。
倒霉的是无职无权的父老乡亲
【在 p****7 的大作中提到】
: 成年人是不可能被别人说服的，如果真服了，要么是自己转变了，要么是被压服的。所
: 以我不打算和人在版上互喷，没有意义。
: 能做的，就是提供一些不同的看问题的思路和一些事实。信不信就是你自己的事情了。
: 64杀了几百人，当然是个悲剧，不过悲剧往往有好的效果。当年老邓完全可以像四人帮
: 镇压45运动一样把64压下去，对其个人的名誉没有任何影响。不过四人帮同年就被抓了
: ，所以老邓不会那么傻。
: 当时国内的民主化气氛很浓，从70年代末，每年都闹，89年不过是大了一点，又刚好赶
: 上党内分裂，于是越闹越大。如果不是64当头一棒，我保证中共早就被推翻了，我估计
: 没有64中共应该在2000年前就完蛋了。
: 共产党完蛋不可惜，但是殉葬的将是中国人和中国。当然，这个是我个人观点。
|
p****7
发帖数: 641 | 20 这个版比较理性的东西往往很容易沉下去，甚至被删。看来老邢为了流量是不顾一切 |
