Wikileaks: no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square, cables claim

reply to post by Raist


There is no such thing as a utopia.

All we can do is work towards the common good. My mind rests on the bigger picture, there is no place for me to live just as some normal person. Not anymore.

My training, education and will to survive is on a scale of our entire species. We need to start from the bottom to reform the top down. We need to change everything that we perceive as reality because it is just an illusion. We need to expand our species through cooperation, which will require a whole new social line of thought (just like when we began to understand the heliocentric universe after a century of religious doctrine that dictated only lies).

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


I can say that it happened, I and 13 friends were in Tiananmen Square during the demonstrations, not that this gives me a better view of what was happening. Media coverage collectively will give you a better view.

We travelled into the square most days and saw how it changed over this time, from groups of thousands meditating calling for peace to the stressed anxiety before it went bad. We linked arms to keep together our small group of foreigners, but the crowd was a million and maybe more. A surge in the crowd split me a Tanya off from our friends and into the hunger strikers in the centre of the square.

It was strange there was a linked armed protection encircling those weakened and lying on the square ground. They opened their arms and we found ourselves in the comparative calm inside this protection. I could not voice words of support to these people, but we gained the attention of a leader there and could do little but smile.

I heard that the leaders were shot, and a bill was sent to the parents of these students. The bill was for the price of the bullet that was used to kill their sons and daughters. Can any confirm this?

I have often wondered whether if not democracy then perhaps the choice of two parties may give at least some choice afforded to the people of China. I am not anti communism; frankly I would like to live harmoniously in a commune. I am yet unsure as to whether the human race is ready for this. Choice would remove the threat of slavery which is how I view being born into a established system that has little avenue to hear my voice or the voice of the people.

I wish the world peace, within a respect for free will

reply to post by blueorder

blue -
Let me clarify what I mean by small government since you keyed in on that phrase, because I did not mean it in the way of simply decreasing the size of the beast, but I mean it in removing the beast altogether and reestablishing "human connection."

Small government can be the "head" of a household, or neighborhood, or city, or regional waterways, etc. The main issue where government ceases to be government and becomes false government is when the sheep no longer have a symbiotic relationship with their shepherd. In the case of a President, King, or Dictator, the positions of leadership are just plain too "high up" and far away for a small sheep like myself to be cared for by them. And the matters which necessitate complex organization? These too can be modified to maximize efficacy or nullified when causing more damage than good.

Nationalized education, military, laws, etc are human social sicknesses which breed more sickness unto social collapse. However, for the sake of unity and strength, uniting localized peoples through communication, cooperation, etc would allow for a more modular and flexible human governance system which would actually provide effective systems from the leaders to the followers. This begins with self-governance and the desire to see the weak become strong enough to do the same. It is followed by diversity united by agreements despite other disagreements and settlements where disagreements are too grievous to handle.

The primary issues withholding this from occurring are pride and chaos. The disconnection of Chaos allows for friends and strangers to treat each other harshly. The selfishness of Pride allows for friends and neighbors to treat each other harshly. When these things become disorienting and rampant amongst the leadership of a people, it is time to reorganize peacefully. These things have been disorienting in the U.S. for about 3 generations.

Peaceful reorganization is in great need, but the sheep are complacent and the false shepherds strangle out anything that jeopardizes their high positions.


Maybe that will make my words generally more or possibly less agreeable to others.
But I do ask, where can we agree to avoid the immediate harm and fear of events like the one spoken of in this thread? And, if we might agree to reorganize, how would we begin to do so effectively and peacefully with no help from the idle sheep or false shepherds?



*I'll understand if this is too far away from the point of this thread, but the momentum seems built to inject this here rather than creating an entirely new thread in which, most likely, no one would participate.

reply to post by Peter Brake


Again, I need to clarify the point of why I posted this: the article supports China's claim that there was no massacre within Tienamen Square. There is no claims that there was not massacre outside of the square, and that some of the leaders were not shot.

Tienamen Square is an important cultural symbol of communist China. If the Chinese government murdered protestors there, then it would show that the Chinese government does not even care about its own cultural pillars and would lead to a much more widespread revolutionary movement (no wonder why the west keeps pushing the wrong history on us).

The fact that the Chinese government managed to herd the protestors out of Tienamen Square without major violence was a strategic move: it delegitimized the riot by taking a large political/cultural aspect out of it. The remaining protest in surrounded areas was seen as a legitimate threat to commerce and infrastructure.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


Of course there is no utopia. You are still dreaming though, and failed to touch on the rest of my post.

It is okay though as both wikileaks and anonymous have failed to touch on any real useful and truthful information. Going after Sony over a gamer and other stupid things are far more important than the rest of the world.

Funny how even those you support are not working for the same thing you claim you are working toward. If they were working for the same goal as you I would support them. Give me something filling, satisfying, and tasteful. Stop giving me the artificial sweetener garbage.


Raist

reply to post by Raist


I gave you a short response because I was a using a handheld device while busy doing other stuff.

I do not know what you expect, but it seems like you are the one that wants something of utopian promise to fall onto your lap before you accept it. I believe that such a thing will never manifest, so I will accept what is already out there and use it to my advantage.

Propaganda is a tool used by all sides. The key thing to remember is that you will never get the real or full story. Running away from disinformation, regardless of the origin, is not the answer. Jumping into the clusterf*ck of information and making a solid stand is.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


Information does not give a utopia How could I be looking for that to fall into my lap by wanting useful information?

All I want is for these "hero" groups to do something useful besides hacking some game place over a gamer, or giving me information that is sponsored by government agencies. Really I find it ironic that people on here will eat up a story handed to them by wikileaks that is regurgitated government information. It if funny for conspiracy theorists to trust government information at the same time as proclaiming their distrust in the governments.

Wikileaks gave us nothing but the Chinese government account, they did not look up the citizens that were there at the time and ask them what happened. If this was word of mouth from the people that were there I would consider it as most likely true. However, this is government agencies account.


ATS is never dull that is for sure. at the irony of this whole thing.

Raist

"It's widely believed that the 'Tank Man' was killed during his personal struggle against the Chinese government/army in the final moments of the nation-wide riots. This is not true, as shown in this video."

Tank Man did NOT die in Tiananmen Square

reply to post by Raist


First off, did you not even read the article? It is the release of cables from western diplomats/embassies (American I think) where they state that they are not witnessing the same massacre that was reported here anyways.

Secondly, I take it that you lack online gaming experience. Not only do people from all around the world play video games online today, they also talk freely on these networks. Knocking down the playstation network made their existence known to literally tens of millions of likeminded individuals.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


So American embassy/diplomats are now not government officials? Of course I read the article, it was less than a page long and not a very good one at that. Sad to see such a historic event have such little work put into an article on it.


As for gaming I have online gamed for more than a decade now. I am slowing down on it though because of the childish nonsense that often goes with it scene. I was playing online games before your game boxes connected online and paid far less than you pay now for the same games (virtually) you can find online for free now. I have played more than my share of MMORPG as well as some shooter and strategy games. I have been in numerous guilds, clans or whatever name you wish to call them. I have even been a GM and helped in the creation of new content. Your assumptions are quite wrong, much like wikileaks being wrong.


Raist

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


I understand your concern about misreporting, yes there is a responsibility to be truthful and these organisations have been shown as mechanisms of foreign governments insidious plans, but to me this happens everyday.
And truthfully it would be hard not to be, we are a product of our own countries, the ideals, beliefs (I include atheist) permeate our thoughts and reactions. These concepts are mirrored to us continuously by our friends and neighbours. I am glad that this misuse has been given attention though it is blatant

I got out of Beijing when things turned bad the army was coming in as we were leaving (by train) got a belt of tear gas at the station. Met a friend who stayed through the killing, he spoke of the bodies hanging from the trees and the shooting. This was on the way to the US embassy so out of the square itself.

Do you think that this misuse is the greater sin then what occurred in Beijing that day? How do you feel when I say that the Chinese authority executed these people outside of the square? And the notice that the families received was a bill for the bullet?

The start of the protest was such a positive thing, We (the 13 of us) climbed onto a building roof above a million people gathering to bring about a change where legally their voices could be heard. Several thousand saw as there gathered and applauded us. We stood and returned their applause.

Such a showing to me at the time I thought in no way could change now be stopped, I celebrated this. However perhaps the majority of China is happy to continue with how it is their now, it would seem appropriate to me if they could find this out via poll or vote.

Originally posted by Raist
Your assumptions are quite wrong, much like wikileaks being wrong.

hah. Well if you really must know, I used to play online a decade ago too. My problem back then was that I was stuck on a 48kB/s connection, which was a real bitch to use

EDIT: By the way, I guess I should explain the Anonymous thing better. There's alot of groups claiming to be Anonymous, and I suspect some are really just shady government agents using it as a cover (to do things like wage cyberattacks against Iran). The Anonymous that I refer to goes far beyond hacking. They actually have a voice.

Here is what I speak of: Generation OS13: The new culture of resistance . This is professional stuff, in my opinion.

Peter Brake-
Do you think that this misuse is the greater sin then what occurred in Beijing that day? How do you feel when I say that the Chinese authority executed these people outside of the square? And the notice that the families received was a bill for the bullet?

There's what happened in China, and there is the global perception of what happened. When the West controls the media and misreports the reality of the situation and writes textbooks that are misleading, then yes, I see a major problem with this (it's called hypocricy).

There's lots of problems in China. However, China as a whole functions pretty well. The reason for this is that it is the longest lasting culture on Earth, and will probably exist until we all wage one last party and join the pink mist club.

The problems in China tend to even themselves out. Even now, China retains its socialist values while allowing creative (and obviously privileged) citizens to progress a bit further with private enterprise. This is basically China's solution to controlling its worker population while gaining ground on an international stage.

Personally, I am a fan of Chinese nationalism. They are an extremely disciplined people who can function as a strong society without brainwashing (such as in the West). However, the more I see of modern Chinese economic reforms, the more I cringe. China is the globalists' wetdream now. There is no more glory of the worker's revolution; now, the workers work under corporations without a voice. They live by the corporation. The corporations bring China prosperity, the main goal of the reigning party, so there is no plans to change course.

I honestly believe that modern China would be Mao's nightmare. It's almost as if the imperialists are back in power there, as if the Chinese leadership have become just like Western leaderships in terms of being controlled by economic growth (and greed). The only difference is that China is totalitarian, which I guess makes their oppression more transparent, yet it is there nonetheless.

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi There is no more glory of the worker's revolution;

yeah, not like in the 60s when anyone the communists determined as being counter revolutionary, like people who wore glasses or teachers, were being beaten to death with garden tools, yeah, not like those glory days

Originally posted by blueorder

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi There is no more glory of the worker's revolution;

yeah, not like in the 60s when anyone the communists determined as being counter revolutionary, like people who wore glasses or teachers, were being beaten to death with garden tools, yeah, not like those glory days

Yeah, because that's what really happened

You're biased discription still sounds better than the feudal 1900s when Chinese farmers had to use their own sewage to fertilize their crops.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

Not entirely sure this practice has stopped in China as yet. The toilets when I was there had to be seen (and smelled) to be believed. An open trench where you could all squat down together - the maggots (sorry is this getting too descriptive?) I used to put tiger balm under my nose so I could stay in there long enough to do the business.

Anyhow trucks used to arrive and carry the sewage away, I heard to be used agriculturally. Not necessarily directly to food crops, but I did see fields of hemp near by – stuff will grow in this s*@, I do know it is not a good idea in food production (those heavy metals keep circling around doing none of us any good)

reply to post by Peter Brake


ya, there are still alot of those in HK.

don't see how they can work, really. never used one.

seen results tho. not funny at all.

anyway, t-square was real and more than what the OS says.

the "diplomats"? ya which ones?

you can't get guns in china. no one was shooting from buildings.

they rolled over the students and killed about everyone around the square who watched.

still can't congregate in any numbers there. gotta keep moving.

china has serious growing pains, so many people are making money now.

mao would crap himself.

If Wikileaks is truly posting that, then, it is very stupid to challenge this topic! It's been a fact, how can you change it by words? Something is on videos, and you try to make it up by posting an article? Wikileaks is lost its credibility.
And from what I know the mothers of those who died in Tiananmen Square are still alive. This is the fact. Also, not long ago, there is Chinese Communist Party members tried to pay off what they did to those mothers. If there was no bloodshed, why do they need to do such thing?
No wonders, the Chinese Gov. has huge among of money. They can hire large number of people post comments on the web and buying news reporters to make fake news. Now, Wikileaks even supported by them…

Originally posted by 10151978
If Wikileaks is truly posting that, then, it is very stupid to challenge this topic! It's been a fact, how can you change it by words? Something is on videos, and you try to make it up by posting an article? Wikileaks is lost its credibility.
And from what I know the mothers of those who died in Tiananmen Square are still alive. This is the fact. Also, not long ago, there is Chinese Communist Party members tried to pay off what they did to those mothers. If there was no bloodshed, why do they need to do such thing?
No wonders, the Chinese Gov. has huge among of money. They can hire large number of people post comments on the web and buying news reporters to make fake news. Now, Wikileaks even supported by them…

edit on 16-6-2011 by 10151978 because: typo

Again, I need to explain

Wikileaks didn't report anything here. The article is based off of records of cables that the US embassy was relaying to Washington, which wikileaks released (along with 300,000 other cables).

The article is reporting what diplomats were stating, which was contrary to what their media was portraying to the public.