• aleph@lemm.ee
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    First hand reports from people who were actually there say that there was no massacre.

    In the square itself, maybe, but all eyewitnesses agree that the PLA shot and killed many hundreds of protesters in Beijing during the protests, which had been (until that point) largely peaceful.

    So while you at the author of this article might be correct to say that there was no actual massacre in Tiananmen Square itself, there certainly was a massacre going on around it.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8057762.stm

    https://earnshaw.com/writings/memoirs/tiananmen-story

    https://apnews.com/article/4d3bc613370f4f1d97bf841d1ef5ef6c

    • WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      1 year ago

      Gold star for you! This is significantly better than the usual nonsense that's pushed. But after having claimed a massacre for so long, this still seems like damage control to me.

      Do these photos look like the aftermath of a massacre to you? Or do you think that the CPC account of the situation might be closer to reality? They claim that after the protest was broken up, some violent instigators began attacking the military in the area around the square. And yes, hundreds died, and many of them were soldiers.

      • aleph@lemm.ee
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Do these photos look like the aftermath of a massacre to you?

        Yes, they do. The term "massacre" doesn't necessarily imply that the protestors didn't fight back after the PLA started killing them.

          • aleph@lemm.ee
            ·
            1 year ago

            There was a massacre that morning. Journalists have to be precise about where it happened and who were its victims, or readers and viewers will never be able to understand what it meant.

            Again, the reporter's point is not that "there was no massacre"; it just didn't happen in the square.

            • WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yep. Even after being forced to admit that he made it up, he's still reporting about things he admits he never saw. Which I have to admit, is a pretty bold move.

              • aleph@lemm.ee
                ·
                1 year ago

                So you initially linked it as a source and now you've realized what it actually says, it's unreliable and worthless?

                Seems par for the course around here, tbh.

                • WhatWouldKarlDo@lemmygrad.ml
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I'm really confused by this one. He admitted he lied, and so did many of his colleagues. But you believe that he's still telling the truth about the massacre?

                  Look, we don't know exactly what happened there that night. But it's clear that the west lied through their teeth about the entire thing, and the lies are self perpetuating at this point. China's story seems to check out. You HAVE to see that.

                  Furthermore, why is this event of a couple hundred casualties pushed so hard by the media as proof of China's evilness, when Mai Lai or the 228 incident are barely talked about? This is 100% pure propaganda, and it's mostly, perhaps entirely untrue.

                  • aleph@lemm.ee
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    It's hard to know exactly what happened, of course, but the facts of the matter are that even the CCP themselves acknowledged the fact that hundreds died and all the Western journalists who were there confirmed that the PLA shot and killed hundreds of protestors.

                    Also, while it's true that Western journalists may have been biased, it's also certainly true that China's authoritarian and notoriously opaque government cannot be trusted to tell the truth either, especially if they were responsible for the deaths of many civilians.

                    While the extent of the massacre in Beijing may be contested, it seems incontrovertible that it did occur.

                    Furthermore, why is this event of a couple hundred casualties pushed so hard by the media as proof of China’s evilness, when Mai Lai or the 228 incident are barely talked about?

                    Asides from the fact that this is classic whataboutism, you are categorically wrong to suggest that the My Lai massacre is portrayed in Western media today as anything other than a horrific attack upon civilians.

                    It is perfectly possible to deplore both massacres, in Beijing and in Mai Lai. This is not a simple zero sum contest between China and the US where one must be the good guy and the other the bad guy.