• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

Tiananmen Square protest death toll 'was 10,000'

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
40,021
Likes
60,945
Location
Rocky Mountains
#1
Tiananmen Square protest death toll 'was 10,000'
  • 23 December 2017

Image copyright GETTY IMAGES
A burning armoured personnel carrier (APC) on 4 June 1989, near Tiananmen Square

The Chinese army crackdown on the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests killed at least 10,000 people, according to newly released UK documents.

The figure was given in a secret diplomatic cable from then British ambassador to China, Sir Alan Donald.

The original source was a friend of a member of China's State Council, the envoy says.

Previous estimates of the deaths in the pro-democracy protests ranged from several hundred to more than 1,000.

China's statement at the end of June 1989 said that 200 civilians and several dozen security personnel had died in Beijing following the suppression of "counter-revolutionary riots" on 4 June 1989.
Sir Alan's telegram is from 5 June, and he says his source was someone who "was passing on information given him by a close friend who is currently a member of the State Council".

The council is effectively China's ruling cabinet and is chaired by the premier.


Image copyright AFP
Student hunger strikers in Tiananmen Square on 14 May 1989

The cables are held at the UK National Archives in London and were declassified in October, when they were seen by the HK01 news site.

Sir Alan said the source had been reliable in the past "and was careful to separate fact from speculation and rumour".

The envoy wrote: "Students understood they were given one hour to leave square but after five minutes APCs attacked.

"Students linked arms but were mown down including soldiers. APCs then ran over bodies time and time again to make 'pie' and remains collected by bulldozer. Remains incinerated and then hosed down drains.

"Four wounded girl students begged for their lives but were bayoneted."

Sir Alan added that "some members of the State Council considered that civil war is imminent".

The political protest had lasted seven weeks before the army was sent in and it was the largest such demonstration in Communist China's history.

The killings remain highly sensitive in China.

China bans all activists' commemorations and highly regulates online discussion of the incident, including censoring criticism.

But it is marked annually by activists elsewhere in the world, particularly in Hong Kong and Taiwan.
 

Bigjon

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
2,586
Likes
2,383
#5
Gee from those really reliable Brits.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/163872-china-tiananmen-square-june4/

This week marks twenty five years since the world was told of a brutal massacre by the Chinese Peoples’ Liberation Army of “thousands” of peacefully protesting pro-democracy students in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square.

The response from the West then was to demonize the Chinese government and to impose economic and military sanctions which in many cases exist to the present day. A recent release of a diplomatic telegram from then-US Ambassador to China, James E. Lilley, to Washington sheds new light on what really happened that June 4.

According to the mainstream Western version of events, thousands of Chinese university students began their sit-in protest demanding democracy and transparency from the Communist government in April and into May 1989 in the huge Tiananmen Square, directly across from the historic Forbidden City edifice in central Beijing.

They defiantly faced off against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army. On May 20, 1989, the CCP imposed martial law and ordered truckloads of soldiers to Beijing to take back the square from protesters. The Western account has it that then, on June 3 into June 4, PLA soldiers opened fire and killed “up to 1000 student protesters.”

Sensational eyewitness account
WikiLeaks, the website that received hundreds of thousands of pages of intercepted diplomatic correspondence from the US State Department, has released a classified diplomatic cable from then-Beijing Ambassador James Lilley to Washington dated July 12, 1989 more than four weeks after the events. In his report, Lilley writes the following shocking version of events:

OF JUNE 3-4 EVENTS ON TIANANMEN SQUARE

1. CONFIDENTIAL - ENTIRE TEXT.

2. SUMMARY- DURING A RECENT MEETING, A LATIN AMERICAN DIPLOMAT AND HIS WIFE PROVIDED POLOFF AN ACCOUNT OF THEIR MOVEMENTS ON JUNE 3-4 AND THEIR EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT OF EVENTS AT TIANANMEN SQUARE. ALTHOUGH THEIR ACCOUNT GENERALLY FOLLOWS THOSE PREVIOUSLY REPORTED, THEIR UNIQUE EXPERIENCES PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INSIGHT AND CORROBORATION OF EVENTS IN THE SQUARE. THEY WERE ABLE TO ENTER AND LEAVE THE SQUARE SEVERAL TIMES AND WERE NOT HARASSED BY TROOPS. REMAINING WITH STUDENTS BY THE MONUMENT TO THE PEOPLE'S HEROES UNTIL THE FINAL WITHDRAWAL, THE DIPLOMAT SAID THERE WERE NO MASS SHOOTINGS OF STUDENTS IN THE SQUARE OR AT THE MONUMENT. END SUMMARY. (Emphasis mine - WE)

Lilley in his memo goes on to name the Latin American couple as Chilean Second Secretary Carlos Gallo and his wife. They had been dining near the square and went to observe events. As foreign diplomats, they managed to move in the crowd without difficulty. They said the PLA had evidently been ordered not to interfere with foreigners. They reported hearing shots and wounded students were brought to a Red Cross tent for care. Then the US Ambassador reported,



8. GALLO EVENTUALLY ENDED UP AT THE RED CROSS STATION, AGAIN HOPING THAT TROOPS WOULD NOT FIRE ON THE MEDICAL PERSONNEL THERE. 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… (Emphasis added - WE)

Then Gallo reports in a subsequent meeting with the US Embassy’s political officer a most remarkable development which was entirely blocked out of sensational Western media. The student leaders and the PLA reached an agreement that the protestors would be allowed to leave peacefully if they disbanded their sit-in:

10. ALTHOUGH GUNFIRE COULD BE HEARD, GALLO SAID THAT APART FROM SOME BEATING OF STUDENTS, THERE WAS NO MASS FIRING INTO THE CROWD OF STUDENTS AT THE MONUMENT. WHEN POLOFF MENTIONED SOME REPORTEDLY EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS OF MASSACRES AT THE MONUMENT WITH AUTOMATIC WEAPONS, GALLO SAID THAT THERE WAS NO SUCH SLAUGHTER. ONCE AGREEMENT WAS REACHED FOR THE STUDENTS TO WITHDRAW, LINKING HANDS TO FORM A COLUMN, THE STUDENTS LEFT THE SQUARE THROUGH THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. ESSENTIALLY EVERYONE, INCLUDING GALLO, LEFT. THE FEW THAT ATTEMPTED TO REMAIN BEHIND WERE BEATEN AND DRIVEN TO JOIN THE END OF THE DEPARTING PROCESSION. ONCE OUTSIDE THE SQUARE, THE STUDENTS HEADED WEST ON QIANMEN DAJIE WHILE GALLO HEADED EAST TO HIS CAR. (Emphasis mine - WE)

The report of a deal between student protestors and the military to end the protest peacefully and leave had been told to me by various young Chinese in personal accounts on recent visits to Beijing, but until this WikiLeaks release of the Lilley cable, it could never be confirmed. Now it seems clear that the entire story of “thousands” of dead students at Tiananmen Square, whose very name in the West is synonymous with brutal government suppression of democracy, was largely a fabrication. The protests were real, but not the horrendous stories of slaughter.

Indeed, as I have written elsewhere, there is rather strong circumstantial evidence that suggests that the CIA and US State Department played a key role in trying to goad on the student protestors at Tiananmen Square; much like the CIA did in Hungary in 1956, in order to provoke a government bloodbath of repression.

Around the same time as Tiananmen protests in April-June 1989, the Chinese government banned a Chinese NGO of US operator George Soros, the Fund for the Reform and Opening of China, after interrogating its Chinese director in August 1989 and claiming that the Soros China fund had links to the CIA. The Soros Fund according to Chinese reports had been supported by ousted Communist Party chief Zhao Ziyang.

Significantly in addition to the Soros Fund, Gene Sharp of the Cambridge Massachusetts Albert Einstein Institution, whose handbooks on “non-violence as a method of warfare” have been the “how-to” textbook for every color revolution to date, was in Beijing days before the Tiananmen events. Then-US Ambassador Lilley himself was a career CIA officer who, like then-President George H.W. Bush, had been in the secretive Yale Skull & Bones society, and who was with Bush at the CIA. The circumstantial evidence points to an attempted US destabilization of China designed to coincide with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, with Lilley the likely on-the-ground coordinator.

When the PLA failed to fill Beijing with the blood of “thousands” of student democracy martyrs, Washington could simply go with fabrication of a fantasy or virtual massacre and, because of its overwhelming control of mainstream media; most of the world could believe the Washington version.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
 
Last edited:

Buck

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
5,685
Likes
5,259
#6
is that a bottle of Coke I see in the picture of the hunger strike?
naw, just a pee bottle



and look at that military equipment
Reminds me of the 50's but, I'm sure, by now, thanks to the Clintons and the Lincoln Bedroom in the WH, I'm certain the Chins have much more superior military hardware, closer to ours
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
40,021
Likes
60,945
Location
Rocky Mountains
#7
If they were 'peacefully' protesting I suppose that track vehicle in the pic spontaneously combusted?

I wonder, if no shots were fired, how many people a tank could kill if it just went through a packed crowd of people?

Two tanks? A murder of tanks???
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,214
Likes
2,530
#8
Trump already sent warm congrats to the recently announced dick tator for life.

Trump even openly expressed his envy over the event.

Both of them drinking from the trough together. Trade wars, just like shooting wars, they're meant to suck out our blood and wealth, anything else is just the distraction they trot out.
 

Buck

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
5,685
Likes
5,259
#9
If they were 'peacefully' protesting I suppose that track vehicle in the pic spontaneously combusted?

I wonder, if no shots were fired, how many people a tank could kill if it just went through a packed crowd of people?

Two tanks? A murder of tanks???
Burned out military equipment doesn't seem to fit the narrative of a 'slaughter', now that you mention it

The only way I can think of burning out military equipment is if the military abandoned it...that doesn't fit the category of a 'slaughter' and since that tracked piece in the front still appears to be smoking, all those people milling about, it wasn't 'just' abandoned



Sumting Wong
 

Bigjon

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
2,586
Likes
2,383
#10
https://journal-neo.org/2019/06/09/ashingtons-tiananmen-lies-begin-to-fray/

Washington and its allies across the Western World have been particularly eager in observing this year’s anniversary of their version of the 1989 Tiananmen protests.

It has become an opportunity to add political pressure atop economic pressure already being exerted on Beijing by Washington in its bid to encircle and contain China’s rise.

This pressure comes mainly through the Western media.

But the monopoly the US once enjoyed over the flow of global information is coming to an end. The more attention the US tries to draw to certain events, the more objective scrutiny others apply resulting in growing, irreversible damage to some of Washington’s most valuable propaganda narratives.

Attempts to characterise the Tiananmen protests as a violent crackdown on peaceful protesters is meant to portray China, then and now, as an violent authoritarian regime and a threat to not only freedom in China, but freedom worldwide.

But as this lie is exposed, the US itself appears to be the real risk to global peace and freedom.

US State Department Cables Contradict US Secretary of State’s Version of Events

The US State Department itself would set the tone of Washington’s annual propaganda drive. In a press statement titled, “On the 30th Anniversary of Tiananmen Square,” US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo would claim:

On June 4, we honor the heroic protest movement of the Chinese people that ended on June 4, 1989, when the Chinese Communist Party leadership sent tanks into Tiananmen Square to violently repress peaceful demonstrations calling for democracy, human rights, and an end to rampant corruption. The hundreds of thousands of protesters who gathered in Beijing and in other cities around China suffered grievously in pursuit of a better future for their country. The number of dead is still unknown.
Yet according to the US State Department’s own cables, thanks to Wikileaks, what Secretary Pompeo stated is categorically untrue.

In a 2011 Telegraph article titled, “Wikileaks: no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square, cables claim,” it is admitted that:

Secret cables from the United States embassy in Beijing have shown there was no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square when China put down student pro-democracy demonstrations 22 years ago.
While the Telegraph attempts to claim Chinese troops merely killed protesters they portray as peaceful and unarmed “outside” the square, evidence within the US State Department’s own cables proves precisely the opposite.

One cable dated June 3, 1989 admits:

[Embassy officers] encountered a number of incidents in different locations in which crowds harassed military or police personnel, forced their vehicles to turn around, jeered at displays of captured military equipment, or vandalized captured military vehicles.
Further detailing the violence was an oblique admission in the New York Times in a recent article titled, “Witnessing China’s 1989 Protests, 1,000 Miles From Tiananmen Square,” in which now US Representative Andy Levin of Michigan gives his account of what he saw as a student during the protests.

The article admits (my emphasis):

Word spread quickly about what had happened. Rumor had it that protesters were being held in a particular police station, and a huge crowd massed outside it. The students weren’t there after all, but the crowd set fire to the police station.

Three fire trucks arrived, sirens blaring. The first instinct of the crowd was to move aside. But then, I could see the crowd change its mind. As in, “Wait a minute, we set this fire on purpose, so we don’t want this fire truck putting it out.” The crowd converged on a truck, chased off the firemen, flipped the truck on its side and set the truck itself on fire.
A forgotten Washington Post article from 1989 deceitfully titled, “Images Vilify Protesters,” attempts to dismiss evidence the article itself admits proves violence and atrocities were indeed carried out by protesters against soldiers who were displaying restraint.

The article admits (my emphasis):

The government’s case is bolstered by the fact that, in some areas, demonstrators did attack troops who did not respond, and these incidents were captured on videotape. On nightly television now, images are broadcast of protesters stoning troops, beating them with poles and, in some particularly dramatic photos, firebombing trucks, buses and even armored personnel carriers. In some cases, soldiers were still inside at the time. On one avenue in western Beijing, demonstrators torched an entire military convoy of more than 100 trucks and armored vehicles. Aerial pictures of the conflagration and columns of smoke have powerfully bolstered the government’s argument that the troops were victims, not executioners. Other scenes show soldiers’ corpses and demonstrators stripping automatic rifles off of unresisting soldiers.
If Chinese troops did kill “thousands” of protesters as many across the West claim, there is no evidence of it. This is why Secretary Pompeo himself admitted even this year, “the number of dead is still unknown.”

If Chinese troops fired into crowds at all, the US State Department itself, witnesses now holding political offices in the US government and prominent US newspapers all admit it was at mobs carrying out deadly violence against troops, police and rescue workers.

We don’t have to imagine what the US government itself would do if mobs attacked military personnel, burned down police stations then attacked responding rescue workers before destroying their equipment in a large US city. During the 1992 Los Angeles riots, thousands of US Army soldiers and Marines were deployed and authorised to use deadly force.

We could, however, try to imagine how absurd it would be if Beijing and media concerns it controlled tried to portray the LA riots as peaceful protests which the US “cracked down” on with disproportionate force. Only the West’s enduring monopoly over global news and information affords its the ability to portray Tiananmen Square in such absurd terms, despite evidence disclosed by the US government and media itself proving precisely the opposite.

Tiananmen Anniversary: A Time for US-Backed Political Stunts, Hypocrisy

Across Asia, the US is determined to drive a wedge between Beijing and the many nations in the region eager to build ties and do business with it. By promoting Washington’s Tiananmen narrative across the region, the US hopes to turn local opinions against Beijing.
The US has invested tens of millions of dollars a year in building up fronts posing as nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) or “student activists” to oppose regional governments doing business with China and to sour ties between regional nations and Beijing itself.
A perfect example of this is Thai “student activist” Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal.
He opposes a 2014 coup and the resulting government which ousted the US-backed client regime of billionaire fugitive Thaksin Shinawatra and his sister Yingluck Shinawatra.
The current Thai government has since cemented significant ties with Beijing through arms deals, military cooperation and the beginning of major infrastructure projects including a high-speed rail network.
Netiwit’s opposition to the government is tenuously hidden behind “democracy promotion” and “human rights.” His ties to and cooperation with US-funded NGOs along with his regular visits to Western embassies in Bangkok expose him instead as a lobbyist backed by some of the worst offenders of human rights on the planet today.
A 2017 Twitter post by pro-Western commentator Pravit Rojanaphruk showed himself posing with Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal inside the British Embassy enjoying wine together.
While not sipping on wine inside Western embassies or undermining the current Thai government, Netiwit annually protests in front of the Chinese embassy in Bangkok on the anniversary of the Tianaman protests.
An article by US government-funded media front Prachatai about this year’s anniversary protest titled, “Student group gathers in front of Chinese Embassy in memory of Tiananmen massacre,” claims:
The student group, calling themselves “Humanity Without Borders”, was led by Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal and Sirin Mungcharoen, both students at Chulalongkorn University. The group placed white flowers in front of a printout of a tank, and observed a moment’s silence in memory of the dead.
The article includes a picture with a large, professionally printed tank cut-out with a sign that reads, “a tank crushing those who think differently.”
Here, Netiwit and others not only repeat US lies regarding Tiananmen, they do so specifically to portray China, then and now, as a despotic regime that should be protested and resisted, not cooperated with, a notion that only Western embassies and the interests they represent could benefit from.
It might be relevant at this point to note that Netiwit has close ties with another US-backed “student activist,” Joshua Wong of Hong Kong, only further exposing the foreign-backed nature and motives of his activities, particularly in regards to China.
It should be noted that Netiwit was born in 1996. While he protests in front of the Chinese embassy in Bangkok annually promoting a dubious account of events that took place years before he was born, he has not been spotted protesting in front of the US or British embassies for illegal wars and atrocities both nations are carrying out today.

By reminding the world of Washington’s Tiananmen lies based on evidence the US government and media itself has documented, and exposing the truth behind cheap public stunts like those carried out by agitators like Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal, the West’s lies regarding Tiananmen will continue to fray each year.

Whole articles can be dedicated to emerging evidence that the US provoked the protests in 1989 to being with. It is admitted that the US CIA and British MI6 coordinated operations to rescue leaders from arrest after order was restored, the Financial Times would report. Many of those who led the mobs in 1989 are openly backed by the US government to engage in anti-government activities against Beijing today.

The more attention the US attempts to focus on its annual propaganda drive, the more attention to these truths it will attract.

While the events of Tiananmen lay in the past, the US still to this day seeks to provoke similar violence against not only China, but nations all around the world in a strategy now so regularly used by Washington it has a name; colour revolutions.

By exposing the truth about past colour revolutions, we may be able to blunt or even prevent future ones from taking place, along with all the death and destruction that accompany them.

Joseph Thomas is chief editor of Thailand-based geopolitical journal, The New Atlas and contributor to the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
https://journal-neo.org/2019/06/09/ashingtons-tiananmen-lies-begin-to-fray/
 

Thecrensh

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
6,165
Likes
7,958
#11
Gee from those really reliable Brits.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/163872-china-tiananmen-square-june4/

This week marks twenty five years since the world was told of a brutal massacre by the Chinese Peoples’ Liberation Army of “thousands” of peacefully protesting pro-democracy students in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square.

The response from the West then was to demonize the Chinese government and to impose economic and military sanctions which in many cases exist to the present day. A recent release of a diplomatic telegram from then-US Ambassador to China, James E. Lilley, to Washington sheds new light on what really happened that June 4.

According to the mainstream Western version of events, thousands of Chinese university students began their sit-in protest demanding democracy and transparency from the Communist government in April and into May 1989 in the huge Tiananmen Square, directly across from the historic Forbidden City edifice in central Beijing.

They defiantly faced off against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army. On May 20, 1989, the CCP imposed martial law and ordered truckloads of soldiers to Beijing to take back the square from protesters. The Western account has it that then, on June 3 into June 4, PLA soldiers opened fire and killed “up to 1000 student protesters.”

Sensational eyewitness account
WikiLeaks, the website that received hundreds of thousands of pages of intercepted diplomatic correspondence from the US State Department, has released a classified diplomatic cable from then-Beijing Ambassador James Lilley to Washington dated July 12, 1989 more than four weeks after the events. In his report, Lilley writes the following shocking version of events:

OF JUNE 3-4 EVENTS ON TIANANMEN SQUARE

1. CONFIDENTIAL - ENTIRE TEXT.

2. SUMMARY- DURING A RECENT MEETING, A LATIN AMERICAN DIPLOMAT AND HIS WIFE PROVIDED POLOFF AN ACCOUNT OF THEIR MOVEMENTS ON JUNE 3-4 AND THEIR EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT OF EVENTS AT TIANANMEN SQUARE. ALTHOUGH THEIR ACCOUNT GENERALLY FOLLOWS THOSE PREVIOUSLY REPORTED, THEIR UNIQUE EXPERIENCES PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INSIGHT AND CORROBORATION OF EVENTS IN THE SQUARE. THEY WERE ABLE TO ENTER AND LEAVE THE SQUARE SEVERAL TIMES AND WERE NOT HARASSED BY TROOPS. REMAINING WITH STUDENTS BY THE MONUMENT TO THE PEOPLE'S HEROES UNTIL THE FINAL WITHDRAWAL, THE DIPLOMAT SAID THERE WERE NO MASS SHOOTINGS OF STUDENTS IN THE SQUARE OR AT THE MONUMENT. END SUMMARY. (Emphasis mine - WE)

Lilley in his memo goes on to name the Latin American couple as Chilean Second Secretary Carlos Gallo and his wife. They had been dining near the square and went to observe events. As foreign diplomats, they managed to move in the crowd without difficulty. They said the PLA had evidently been ordered not to interfere with foreigners. They reported hearing shots and wounded students were brought to a Red Cross tent for care. Then the US Ambassador reported,



8. GALLO EVENTUALLY ENDED UP AT THE RED CROSS STATION, AGAIN HOPING THAT TROOPS WOULD NOT FIRE ON THE MEDICAL PERSONNEL THERE. 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… (Emphasis added - WE)

Then Gallo reports in a subsequent meeting with the US Embassy’s political officer a most remarkable development which was entirely blocked out of sensational Western media. The student leaders and the PLA reached an agreement that the protestors would be allowed to leave peacefully if they disbanded their sit-in:

10. ALTHOUGH GUNFIRE COULD BE HEARD, GALLO SAID THAT APART FROM SOME BEATING OF STUDENTS, THERE WAS NO MASS FIRING INTO THE CROWD OF STUDENTS AT THE MONUMENT. WHEN POLOFF MENTIONED SOME REPORTEDLY EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS OF MASSACRES AT THE MONUMENT WITH AUTOMATIC WEAPONS, GALLO SAID THAT THERE WAS NO SUCH SLAUGHTER. ONCE AGREEMENT WAS REACHED FOR THE STUDENTS TO WITHDRAW, LINKING HANDS TO FORM A COLUMN, THE STUDENTS LEFT THE SQUARE THROUGH THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. ESSENTIALLY EVERYONE, INCLUDING GALLO, LEFT. THE FEW THAT ATTEMPTED TO REMAIN BEHIND WERE BEATEN AND DRIVEN TO JOIN THE END OF THE DEPARTING PROCESSION. ONCE OUTSIDE THE SQUARE, THE STUDENTS HEADED WEST ON QIANMEN DAJIE WHILE GALLO HEADED EAST TO HIS CAR. (Emphasis mine - WE)

The report of a deal between student protestors and the military to end the protest peacefully and leave had been told to me by various young Chinese in personal accounts on recent visits to Beijing, but until this WikiLeaks release of the Lilley cable, it could never be confirmed. Now it seems clear that the entire story of “thousands” of dead students at Tiananmen Square, whose very name in the West is synonymous with brutal government suppression of democracy, was largely a fabrication. The protests were real, but not the horrendous stories of slaughter.

Indeed, as I have written elsewhere, there is rather strong circumstantial evidence that suggests that the CIA and US State Department played a key role in trying to goad on the student protestors at Tiananmen Square; much like the CIA did in Hungary in 1956, in order to provoke a government bloodbath of repression.

Around the same time as Tiananmen protests in April-June 1989, the Chinese government banned a Chinese NGO of US operator George Soros, the Fund for the Reform and Opening of China, after interrogating its Chinese director in August 1989 and claiming that the Soros China fund had links to the CIA. The Soros Fund according to Chinese reports had been supported by ousted Communist Party chief Zhao Ziyang.

Significantly in addition to the Soros Fund, Gene Sharp of the Cambridge Massachusetts Albert Einstein Institution, whose handbooks on “non-violence as a method of warfare” have been the “how-to” textbook for every color revolution to date, was in Beijing days before the Tiananmen events. Then-US Ambassador Lilley himself was a career CIA officer who, like then-President George H.W. Bush, had been in the secretive Yale Skull & Bones society, and who was with Bush at the CIA. The circumstantial evidence points to an attempted US destabilization of China designed to coincide with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, with Lilley the likely on-the-ground coordinator.

When the PLA failed to fill Beijing with the blood of “thousands” of student democracy martyrs, Washington could simply go with fabrication of a fantasy or virtual massacre and, because of its overwhelming control of mainstream media; most of the world could believe the Washington version.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

CIA involvement? Say it ain't so! (eye roll)
 

Buck

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
5,685
Likes
5,259
#12
The old-school type of narrative-building, repeat the lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth, etc, no longer works as it did 20 years ago, we have the internet today, where not only 'that' version of the story will float around for a few days, but the anti-stories will float, then we'll read more pro-stories that have different agendas, er, perspectives, ulterior-motive agendas will be introduced for apparently no reason at all, and the cat pictures will quadruple in availability, some power tool set will be on-sale and promises of more nakid pictures of some hotty will only lead to click-bait and in the end, the only ones who will care, will be those in charge, and eventually no one will listen any longer and there ya go...we'll get the security forces...all because at some point in time, We Stopped Paying...

where was i going?