"倉卒歲月，世事如棋，每局都光怪陸離...."
昨晚放工回來﹐ 已經讀到英國每日電訊報 Daily Telegraph獨家獲得了維基解密的電報，美國駐北京大使館的秘密電報表明， 22年前的中國學生的民主示威時，天安門沒有流血鎮壓。1989年6月4日，士兵沒有在天安門廣場屠殺示威者。
第一這是猶太人辦的報紙﹐ 第二文章也是猶太人寫的﹐ 第三維基解密得個講字, 它所說的那些電報連圖片也沒有﹐ 所以, 讀完就去睡覺。
早上起來﹐ 查閱我這裡的"反華一哥"紐約時報的網站﹐ 呵呵﹐ 沒有報導六四22周年了。自從我來美國第一年﹐ 年年香港的六四維園集會﹐紐約時報一定圖文並茂地報導﹐ 今年也沒有了。再去 Google News 搜索一下﹐都沒有 New York Times﹐ Washington Post, Los Angelos Times﹐ Wall Street Journal﹐ Christian Monitors﹐ Huffington Post 這些大報報導六四22周年和香港的集會了。
看來六四對西方 (特別是美國的) 利用價值已經到了被榨乾的階段。
在政治上美國經常都“投資”在錯誤的反對派身上﹐但是美國“斬倉”從不手軟﹐這是歷史發展的規律。
(1) 歷史不會忘記
(2) "平反六四"﹐今年英國每日電訊有文章
全文如下﹕
Wikileaks: no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square, cables claim
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.
Students link arms to hold back angry crowds from chasing a group of retreating soldiers Photo: AP Photo/Mark Avery
The cables, obtained by WikiLeaks and released exclusively by The Daily
Telegraph, partly confirm the Chinese government's account of the early
hours of June 4, 1989, which has always insisted that soldiers did not
massacre demonstrators inside Tiananmen Square.
Instead, the cables show that Chinese
soldiers opened fire on protesters outside the centre of Beijing, as they
fought their way towards the square from the west of the city.
Three cables were sent from the US embassy on June 3, in the hours leading up
to the suppression, as diplomats realised that the final showdown between
the protesters and soldiers was looming.
The cables described the "10,000 to 15,000 helmeted armed troops"
moving into the city, some of whom were "carrying automatic weapons".
Meanwhile, "elite airborne troops" and "tank units" were
said to be moving up from the south.
The army came up against "an elaborate system of blockades",
described in a cable from May 21, 1989, which allowed students to "control
much of central Beijing".
Diplomats observed that "there were buses turned sideways to form
roadblocks" and students had vowed the army would not be able to cross. "But
we doubt it", one cable added. Students also used teams of motorcycle
couriers to communicate with the roadblocks, sending reinforcements where
needed.
As the troops moved in, the cables stated that diplomatic staff were repeatedly warned to "stay at home" unless involved in front-line reporting. "The situation in the centre of the city is very confused," said a cable from June 3. "Political officers at the Beijing Hotel reported that troops are pushing a large crowd east on Chang'an avenue. Although these troops appear not to be firing on the crowd, they report firing behind the troops coming from the square".
Inside the square itself, a Chilean diplomat was on hand to give his US counterparts an eyewitness account of the final hours of the pro-democracy movement.
"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 cable from July 1989 said.
The diplomat, who was positioned next to a Red Cross station inside Tiananmen Square, said a line of troops surrounded him and "panicked" medical staff into fleeing. However, he said that there was "no mass firing into the crowd of students at the monument".
According to internal Communist party files, released in 2001, 2,000 soldiers from the 38th army, together with 42 armoured vehicles, began slowly sweeping across the square from north to south at 4.30am on June 4. At the time, around 3,000 students were sitting around the Monument to the People's Heroes on the southern edge of the giant square, near Chairman Mao's mausoleum.
Leaders of the protest, including Liu Xiaobo, the winner of last year's Nobel Peace prize, urged the students to depart the square, and the Chilean diplomat relayed that "once agreement was reached for the students to withdraw, linking hands to form a column, the students left the square through the south east corner." The testimony contradicts the reports of several journalists who were in Beijing at the time, who described soldiers "charging" into unarmed civilians and suggests the death toll on the night may be far lower than the thousands previously thought.
In 2009, James Miles, who was the BBC correspondent in Beijing at the time, admitted that he had "conveyed the wrong impression" and that "there was no massacre on Tiananmen Square. Protesters who were still in the square when the army reached it were allowed to leave after negotiations with martial law troops [ ...] There was no Tiananmen Square massacre, but there was a Beijing massacre".
Instead, the fiercest fighting took place at Muxidi, around three miles west of the square, where thousands of people had gathered spontaneously on the night of June 3 to halt the advance of the army.
According to the Tiananmen Papers, a collection of internal Communist party files, soldiers started using live ammunition at around 10.30pm, after trying and failing to disperse the crowd with tear gas and rubber bullets. Incredulous, the crowd tried to escape but were hampered by its own roadblocks.
The cables also reveal the extent to which the student democracy protests had won popular support, and how for several weeks the protesters effectively occupied the whole of central Beijing, posing an existential challenge to the Communist party.
One cable, from May 21, 1989, reports that an anonymous caller had told the US consulate in Shenyang that Ni Zhifu, the chairman of China's labour unions, had condemned martial law in the capital and warned that unless the students were treated with more respect he would lead a general workers' strike that would cripple China.
As the troops moved in, the cables stated that diplomatic staff were repeatedly warned to "stay at home" unless involved in front-line reporting. "The situation in the centre of the city is very confused," said a cable from June 3. "Political officers at the Beijing Hotel reported that troops are pushing a large crowd east on Chang'an avenue. Although these troops appear not to be firing on the crowd, they report firing behind the troops coming from the square".
Inside the square itself, a Chilean diplomat was on hand to give his US counterparts an eyewitness account of the final hours of the pro-democracy movement.
"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 cable from July 1989 said.
The diplomat, who was positioned next to a Red Cross station inside Tiananmen Square, said a line of troops surrounded him and "panicked" medical staff into fleeing. However, he said that there was "no mass firing into the crowd of students at the monument".
According to internal Communist party files, released in 2001, 2,000 soldiers from the 38th army, together with 42 armoured vehicles, began slowly sweeping across the square from north to south at 4.30am on June 4. At the time, around 3,000 students were sitting around the Monument to the People's Heroes on the southern edge of the giant square, near Chairman Mao's mausoleum.
Leaders of the protest, including Liu Xiaobo, the winner of last year's Nobel Peace prize, urged the students to depart the square, and the Chilean diplomat relayed that "once agreement was reached for the students to withdraw, linking hands to form a column, the students left the square through the south east corner." The testimony contradicts the reports of several journalists who were in Beijing at the time, who described soldiers "charging" into unarmed civilians and suggests the death toll on the night may be far lower than the thousands previously thought.
In 2009, James Miles, who was the BBC correspondent in Beijing at the time, admitted that he had "conveyed the wrong impression" and that "there was no massacre on Tiananmen Square. Protesters who were still in the square when the army reached it were allowed to leave after negotiations with martial law troops [ ...] There was no Tiananmen Square massacre, but there was a Beijing massacre".
Instead, the fiercest fighting took place at Muxidi, around three miles west of the square, where thousands of people had gathered spontaneously on the night of June 3 to halt the advance of the army.
According to the Tiananmen Papers, a collection of internal Communist party files, soldiers started using live ammunition at around 10.30pm, after trying and failing to disperse the crowd with tear gas and rubber bullets. Incredulous, the crowd tried to escape but were hampered by its own roadblocks.
The cables also reveal the extent to which the student democracy protests had won popular support, and how for several weeks the protesters effectively occupied the whole of central Beijing, posing an existential challenge to the Communist party.
One cable, from May 21, 1989, reports that an anonymous caller had told the US consulate in Shenyang that Ni Zhifu, the chairman of China's labour unions, had condemned martial law in the capital and warned that unless the students were treated with more respect he would lead a general workers' strike that would cripple China.
No comments:
New comments are not allowed.