rockypath

I used to believe in the news reports from western media about 6.4. without any doubt. However, as I became more mature and received information about 6.4. from other sources. It really makes me to have a 2nd thought of what really happened during that time and on Tiananmen square.

Can we really 100% trust western medias? Probably not. If you had studied in communication or work in the field of news reporting (especially TV and newspaper), you should have a better understanding of what I try to say.

Look at how CNN & BBC reports incidents in Tibet before the opening of 2008 Olympic.

http://www.openv.com/play/PhoenixTV1prog_20080327_6514121.html

rockypath

yes.. but at that time, there are also HK newspaper & media doing live broadcast.


anyway, there are always something you believe or you don't believe,  it is up to individual judgement.
rainbow-davie 發表於 2009-6-1 10:13

I think you just bring up a very important point which we might not be aware of when we are emotionally overwhelm  – “Can we take it as a fact based on what we believe?” The danger is that we might not realize that is only what we believe in and it might not be the whole true story.

I wish one day I can know the truth of what exactly happened but not just based on my personal judgement of what to believe in based on news reporting from media.

rockypath

別說我偏幫中共﹐現在奉上電子書link 一條﹐ 請慢慢看~
http://beijingspring.com/big5bjs/bjs/ls/index.htm
soli 發表於 2009-6-1 16:11

I will certainly find some time to read it.

I read a book about Tiananmen written by a western reporter & journalist (he was in Beijing during 6.4) in 1995 or 1996. The title seems to be called “Tiananmen Square” (cannot recall the exact name). Honestly speaking, I don’t remember 90% of what was written in the book and it was a bit too complicated for me to comprehend that time, but I remember it did trigger my thought of what exactly happened in Tiananmen Square. I remember it didn’t say thousands of students were killed and it did mention solders were killed by the mob and tanks were put on fire by the riot.

It also mentions that some students did try to control the riot and tell people not to be 煽動. But they failed and totally lost the control of the riot.

I think I can find the book and read it again since I borrowed it from the library.

rockypath

31# 老友四號

One thought to be shared (triggered by 老友四號). Maybe there is a possibility that 6.4. did turn into an action or movement to overthrown鄧小平 and his administration. It was possible that another 政治勢力within CPP saw the student movement as an opportunity to replace 鄧小平 and they jumped on it.

If it is the case, 鄧小平 and his administration would certainly treated 6.4. as a movement to overthrown the government. Therefore, they will not 平反六四, and they will not release the confidential information about 6.4 which many people in HK has been asking for. Why will they let the people know about its internal power struggle and 平反its counter 政治勢力?

It was not a student movement any more at the end and students was only a group of innocent 羔羊被人利用, especially when they were unfortunately led by liars like 烏爾凱西and柴玲.

rockypath

中共現今嘅領導人本身同六四並無直接關係，佢地點解要為前朝嘅政權負上呢個帶有極大損害性嘅道德包袱呢？六四一日唔平反，人民一直都會響呢個議題上沖擊中共政府。

正如趙紫陽所講，早啲平反好過遲啲先平反；社會安 ...
Lik 發表於 2009-6-3 09:51

In your opinion, how should the Chinese government 平反 6.4. if it was an action to overthrow the government (directed by another counter 政治勢力) and the student movement was just a tool.

What if we try a though which is even bolder – the student movement was actually planned, directed and provoked by the政治勢力 which wanted to overthrow 鄧小平and his administration.

P.S. – please don’t blame me, It is all triggered by 老友四號. Maybe 6.4. is not as simple as we thought.

rockypath

In court, conviction is based on the evidences. No one would deny the army did open fire and people were killed. However, can we believe there is a planned and deliberate massacre when there is no concrete evidence. If you have it, please show it to all of us when and at where there were thousands of people (students) were killed. What is the motive and purpose for massacre?

rockypath

104# mcjohnjohn

Forget it MJJ,  they are just desperate, how many supporters they got here?
3 1/2,  I believe 1 of them use 2 accounts.
Even young ladies LYK have spoken loud and clear, we have you ...
somewhereintime 發表於 2009-6-5 09:03

Don’t try to 煽動 others. We just try to have an object discussion of what actually happened in 6.4. If we rule out other possibilities and we can only discuss one possibility, otherwise we will be called “共狗”, so what that will be different from the CPP you have been bombarding?

rockypath

無問題wor, 你可以做共狗，你又可以叫我做民主自由的走狗
問題是我可以大聲自認係民主狗，你夠忠心好應該好proud自己係共狗la
ricrick 發表於 2009-6-5 12:41

I think you just box yourself in the comfort zone which you feel comfortable with.