In Memory of TianAnMen Square 4.6.1989
-
Share with those who didn't know:
On 15 April 1989, Mr Hu Yaobiang died in a hospital of Beijing. who's Hu Yaobiang? He was secretary genery of China Communist party, and was considered as one of the most influential reformist in Chinese history. He was the one set his voice to support students' movement in 1986. He died and people cried for him.
On 20 April 1989, leader of students, Mr Wang Dan with his 3 comrades, in 34 bicycles came to People's Square and offered the Government a petiton in order to be given permisson to create a Union like Union of Cooperation in Poland.
On 22 April 1989, a group of students gathered in front of the or People's Square (maybe wrong) to ask for his delegation had the permission to talk to Mr Premier Li Peng. The request had been turned down. Later, students raised the banners which said "Out here Li Peng", "Down with Li Peng".
On 25 April 1989, in his image ceremony of Hu Yaobiang held in Tianmen, some students shouted the slogan in order to seek for Democracy. they were arrested later. On 26 April 1989, on Chinese Communist's daily newspaper, there was an article which said that actions of students were violent and traitor. (I dont remember for sure) That made students angry.
At the night of 26/4/1989, and dawn of 27/4/1989, thousands of students gathered in Educatinal Training university to prepare for their marching to protest against the article.
The marching was so much successful. Some professors raised banners said: Knee down for too long, it's time to stand up.
It was almost a million people to join the marching.
They gathered in front of Tianmen Square, raised banners and started a "hunger strike". It was 02 May 1989.
13 May 1989, Gorbachev visited China.
17 May 1989, 3 million people joined a huge marching in front of Tianmen Square and some other places in Beijing.
19 May 1989, Li Peng offered a talk with Students' delegations. The talk was broken because neither side agreed to grant others' requests. In the afternoon, Mr Zhao Zhiyang - secretary general of CCP - arrived the Square with Mr Wen Jiabao. He asked the students to leave the Square ASAP before something bad could happend. He was crying and said: I was too late.
Before that, Mr Zhao had some interview with journalists, which he showed his supporting ideas toward the protestors. That was the last time people saw Mr Zhao as a politician.
20 May 1989, Li Peng, Deng Xiaopeng agreed to use PLA to "secure the Square", only one didn't agree, Mr Zhao Zhiyang. Martial law was announced.
21 May 1989, 38th Corps of PLA arrived in Beijing.
23 May 1989, PLA troops started to throw smoke grenades, gas grenades and clubs in order to re-occupy the Square. but they wer stopped by the protestors. Some soldiers joined the protestors. In front of the Tianmen Square, picture of mao was inked. A Security Committee for students was established and Chai Ling, a female student, became Commander in chief.
30 May 1989, Godness of Democracy Statue was established in front of the Square, challenged the China Government. In the same day, Wang Dan announced Delacration of Democracy.
1 June 1989, Chinese government asked the foreign journalists to leave China immediately. ?!
2 June 1989, PLA's T54s arrived the Square, they weare blocked by protestors.
4 June 1989, 300,000 PLA troops with 500 tanks assualted the protestors, killed 2,500 students. They re-occupied the Square completely 2 days later. 5,000 PLA troops were wounded or killed.
11 June 1989, Wang Dan and some others arrested.
Wu'er Kaixi and Chai Ling were forced to seek asylum in Taiwan and USA. Wang Dan was later released in 1993 when Beijing tried to be the host of Olympic 2002, later, when Beihjing failed, he was re-arrested?! In 199X, when Clinton visited China, he pulled on the pressure to free Wang Dan and gave him permisson to flee to US. Feng Congde - husband of Chai Ling - was imprisoned too. No info more. -
Tomorrow 4th of June 2005.
R.I.P PRC -
Wang Dan is now a Professor at Harvard, specialising in East Asian studies, if I remember correctly.
-
Wang Dan.. really finished.
All but memories. -
how come no one made a post abt Adolf Hitler?
his history is interesting......
then add in datelines and pics...
BTW is neo-Nazi National Democratic Party in Germany is Nazis?
there should be one in Singapore -
For this extraordinary moment, just several hours away from the time I posted this thread.
-
Anyone know why there's such a heavy protest or strike from the students?
-
-
Because the leaders refused to listen to their voices.Originally posted by babymac13:Anyone know why there's such a heavy protest or strike from the students?
-
The student wanted to end the CCP's 1 party show
The student wnated to end massive corruption within the CCP controlled government.
to answer them, Deng shopping ordered "open fire" to them at 3-4 am , 4 june, 1989 -
May 4, 1970 american soldiers opened fire at students demonstrating against vietnam war in the famous "kent state shooting".Originally posted by 38�Ž:The student wanted to end the CCP's 1 party show
The student wnated to end massive corruption within the CCP controlled government.
to answer them, Deng shopping ordered "open fire" to them at 3-4 am , 4 june, 1989
Oct 14, 1973 thailand soldiers opened fire at demonstrators protesting against military rule, killing over 70 ppl.
June 4, 1989 china soldiers opened fire at demonstrators demanding end of CCP.
The difference is what is next?
Protests in america definitely played a significant part, if not solely responsible for the withdrawan of american troops from vietnam.
Thai king intervened and finally forced the leaders into exile.
Blood spilled in those shooting cases did not go into waste because those involved were committed and they carried on the protests, in other ways.
In china, between 1904 and 1911 sun yet sen were in much greater danger and much more blood were spilled, even after they successfully toppled the Qing government. This happened because sun and his ppl were committed and believed that it was worthed dying for democracy for themselves and for the chinese ppl.
Tiananmen incident is over, what is next? wan dan is now a professor in america, comfortable life! Wu Er Kai Xi in Taiwan, also living a comfortable life, understand that cai ling, also living a comfortable life in america. anymore fight to bring down the autocratic CCP? more freedom for the chinese ppl?? I am afraid the blood spilled in 1989 was simply washed down the drain.
They should have learned from many of us, scold PAP, condemn one party rule, shout for democracy, blar blar blar... in aircon room behind the computer, on the internet forum. Succeed or not never mind but at least no blood would be spilled -
That's not true. Wang was pursuing a doctor's degree in Harvard, he is definitely NOT a professor in Harvard. Political dissidents make lousy academics, I doubt any serious university would offer him tenure. I am not even sure if he actually got his doctor's degree. His only steady job i am aware of is his columnist commentary job on Radio Free Asia. You can find his commentaries on RAdio Free Asia's website.
wan dan is now a professor in america, comfortable life!
I doubt you could call it "living a comfortable life" if he's sued by bank for failing to pay his 630,000 NT credit card debt.
Wu Er Kai Xi in Taiwan, also living a comfortable life
It's in today's "Liberty Times", a hardcore independence paper:
The article is in chinese.
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2005/new/jun/today/today-so1.htm
....
apparently he also owes money to other banks, but this bank wants to act first hoping to recoup some loss before other banks follow suit.
Not sure about that either. Cai apparently disvowed politics and went into business. She established some education internet site during the dotcom crazy, right before the crash. last time I heard, she tried to expand her site
understand that cai ling, also living a comfortable life in america.
into China and she wanted to get a visa from chinese government. She needs to get in good terms with the CCP if she wants to do any business in China.
The matter of fact is, those "freedom fighters" are only useful when then are in China and in jail. they offer anti-china force great amunition to demonise china.
But once they are on the outside, their usefullness is pretty much over. They actually have to work in order to make a living, but most of them don't have much skill. Politics doens't pay that good either, they have to write or publish what congress or taiwan want to hear if they want to get a grant from congress (like Wang Dan) or appearance fee from taiwan (like Cao Changqing). -
Thanks for the correction and update on those who involved in the tiananmen incident.Originally posted by YaoRockets: -
Long live the CCP, Down with the counter-revolutionaries!!!!
-
more news on this Wu Er Kai Xi:
appaprently one June 4th the anniversay date, he was photographed entertaining himself with with a lady friend in a trendy bar. when asked by reporters, he declined to comment.
he says he wants to settle the credit card debt lawsuit with the bank.
the original article is in chinese:
http://www.ettoday.com/2005/06/07/320-1800381.htm -
Yes agree. PRC political dissidents are usually heroes only when they're in China. Once they get out of the country they fade into oblivion.Originally posted by YaoRockets:Not sure about that either. Cai apparently disvowed politics and went into business. She established some education internet site during the dotcom crazy, right before the crash. last time I heard, she tried to expand her site
into China and she wanted to get a visa from chinese government. She needs to get in good terms with the CCP if she wants to do any business in China.
The matter of fact is, those "freedom fighters" are only useful when then are in China and in jail. they offer anti-china force great amunition to demonise china.
But once they are on the outside, their usefullness is pretty much over. They actually have to work in order to make a living, but most of them don't have much skill. Politics doens't pay that good either, they have to write or publish what congress or taiwan want to hear if they want to get a grant from congress (like Wang Dan) or appearance fee from taiwan (like Cao Changqing). -
"heroes"? Whose heroes? Chinese pple's heroes? Asian pple's heroes? Or anti-china, pro-western forces' heros? Wonder if they have blood on their hands, those of students/soldiers who died...Originally posted by lotus999:Yes agree. PRC political dissidents are usually heroes only when they're in China. Once they get out of the country they fade into oblivion.
-
Gregory Clark is an Australian ex-diplomat; the following should offer interesting reading.
The Tiananmen Square massacre myth
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By GREGORY CLARK Japan Times 2004.09.15 “VˆÀ–å�L�ê‹sŽE‚Ì�_˜b
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ƒWƒƒƒpƒ“ƒ^ƒCƒ€ƒY2004.09.15
 China's recent ceremonies to mark the 100th anniversary of the birth of former leader Deng Xiaoping have given the Tiananmen massacre myth yet another lease of life. Most media commentators, the BBC especially, have rehashed the standard condemnation of Deng as a hardliner who instigated a massacre of harmless demonstrating students in Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989.
Why someone who had suffered cruelly at the hands of Cultural Revolution hardliners and who did so much to push China on the path of liberalization should himself become a hardliner is not explained. Even less does anyone seem to have felt any need to check out just what actually happened in Tiananmen in 1989. Eyewitness accounts that say there was no massacre have been conveniently ignored. Blatantly anti-Beijing propaganda accounts have been unquestioningly accepted. Fortunately we now have a source whose sober impartiality cannot possibly be doubted, namely the de-classified reports from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing at the time (see Google under Tiananmen, Document 31 especially).
They confirm that there was no massacre in the square, that almost all the students who had been demonstrating there for two weeks had left the square quietly in the early hours of June 4, and that the real incident was panicky fighting triggered by crowds attacking troops, initially unarmed, as they headed for the square on June 3.
In the process a still indefinite number of troops, students and civilians were killed and many military vehicles were torched. Call it a mini civil war if you like, with troops eventually getting the upper hand over unarmed insurgents. But that is not a deliberate massacre of innocent students.
Curiously, the photo that most media use to illustrate the alleged student massacre shows a row of blazing army vehicles, some with crews trapped inside, in a long avenue that clearly is not part of Tiananmen Square. Indeed, the U.S. Embassy material speaks of troops only finally entering the square after some students attacked and killed a soldier in a vehicle at the entrance.
True, the Communist Party leadership under Deng later rounded up and imposed severe jail terms on student leaders involved in the Tiananmen demonstrations. But the same leadership had tried in vain to offer concessions to the students when they were camped in the square, and some of the student leaders have since admitted they were foolish to reject those concessions. Troops were only sent to remove the students when things were getting out of hand and the square needed to be cleaned up in advance of a Beijing visit by Soviet leader, Mikail Gorbachev.
Leader Li Peng later admitted that the real problem had been Beijing's inexperience in crowd control. Lacking the devices and trained police squads commonly used in the West for such control, it had had to rely on inexperienced troops.
If Beijing is to be faulted, it is for creating the conditions that encouraged the June 3 fighting outside the square. Years of insane Cultural Revolution economic policies and political oppression had created a sullen and impoverished proletariat only too willing to seize any excuse for antiregime violence. The attempt to remove the students from Tiananmen gave them that excuse.
Surprisingly, the media moralists so upset over the nonexistent Tiananmen massacre have little to say about the very brutal massacres of student demonstrators in Mexico (196
and Thailand (1973). There, no effort was made to negotiate with or tolerate the students. They were rounded up immediately and killed in the hundreds. Yet both governments continued to enjoy Western approval. Meanwhile Beijing has had to suffer more than a decade of Western odium and sanctions for a non-massacre.
The New York Times, which should know better, recently ran an article by David Brooks opposing a EU move to lift some of these sanctions. He writes blandly of Beijing killing 3,000 students in the square. No sources are quoted. It is taken for granted that a massacre occurred.
This is not the first time Beijing has been condemned for something that did not happen. Perhaps the worst example was the Sino-Indian 1962 frontier war. As China desk officer in Canberra's foreign affairs bureaucracy at the time, I had to watch on impotently as the world, including Canberra, accused China of making an unprovoked attack on India when the evidence in front of me proved clearly that it was India that had first attacked China, across even the furthermost line of control demanded by India. It would be more than a decade before that evidence finally found the light of day. In the meantime, the myth of Chinese aggressiveness would be used to justify a raft of Western atrocities in Asia, the Vietnam intervention especially.
Another favorite of the anti-Beijing media has been alleged genocide in Tibet. This, when Tibetans, along with other minority peoples, have been allowed to have as many children as they wanted and Chinese have been subject to Beijing's one-child policies.
The latest sledgehammer aimed against Beijing, and a major reason for perpetuating the Tiananmen myth, is a claimed lack of Western-style political freedom. Whether Sinitic-culture nations with collective leaderships able to claim moral or revolutionary legitimacy -- Singapore is a good example -- should have to abide by Western-imposed standards of political conduct is debatable, particularly given the political circus we are seeing now in the U.S. But that aside, has anyone thought seriously of what would happen if China had our system of rival political parties competing for votes? First victim would be Beijing's one-child policy. The next victim would be the rest of the world as it tried to cope with the resource shortages and pollution created by a booming Chinese population. China is already destined to become a leading economic and political force in the world. The Western media should try harder to take it seriously. -
I have been living in China for a few years. I had numerous conversations with many of those students who had participated and are now all working, well travelled, well informed professionals. They may have different views on that event, but all agreed on one thing, i.e. the ordering of the army to suppress the students IS NECCESSARY. Let me explain why:
In the eyes of western media, the demonstrators may be peaceful but the fact is they are blocking all major roads. The granaries are emptying fast without new supplies of food. Most importantly, they are choking the national economy. Even when Zhao Ziyang personally went to ask for the protestors to disperse, they simply refuse to negotiate. They left the Chinese government with no choice but to use force. It was not really a deliberate massacre of students.
Unfortunately this whole incident has been distorted by western media. -
well, won't using CS gas, beanbag rounds and other non leathal weapons been more appropriate? i mean, the killing continued after the students disperse? i doubt that is neededOriginally posted by Blueray:I have been living in China for a few years. I had numerous conversations with many of those students who had participated and are now all working, well travelled, well informed professionals. They may have different views on that event, but all agreed on one thing, i.e. the ordering of the army to suppress the students IS NECCESSARY. Let me explain why:
In the eyes of western media, the demonstrators may be peaceful but the fact is they are blocking all major roads. The granaries are emptying fast without new supplies of food. Most importantly, they are choking the national economy. Even when Zhao Ziyang personally went to ask for the protestors to disperse, they simply refuse to negotiate. They left the Chinese government with no choice but to use force. It was not really a deliberate massacre of students.
Unfortunately this whole incident has been distorted by western media.