The police version of that video shows they said 'gassed' not killed and that's what I'm hearing as well. You'd be better off linking to the video of the LAPD ramming people with their car.
Does that sound like normal grammar in this part of the US? It does not to me. They might have said "or we will drive over you", "or we will ram you". "You will be dead"? That just sounds silly. Why focus on this instance when there are other, much more obvious and clear instances of police abuse?
I don't read this comment as "what about the US?" I understand whataboutism to be bad because it turns things into a competition and diminishes the problems under discussion.
I read that comment as "there are scary parallels here today." To me, it makes Tienanmen square more real and less other.
> Contrary to popular belief, the bulk of the violence took place in the neighborhoods all around Tiananmen Square, rather than in the Square itself.
As explained by journalists who were in Beijing that day, the Chinese government’s official account that there was no massacre in Tiananmen Square may actually be technically true, but of course dodges the main point.
Richard Roth: “For years now (certainly by the time of the 10th anniversary of Tiananmen) scholars — and many journalists — have been describing it as a weekend massacre, a massacre in Beijing, the ‘Beijing massacre’ or the ‘crackdown’ in Tiananmen, but not a ‘Tiananmen Square massacre.’ … the Chinese government has always claimed, perhaps with a bit of sophistry: that there was no ‘massacre in Tiananmen Square.’ But there's no question many people were killed by the army that night around Tiananmen Square, and on the way to it.” [1]
James Miles: “There was no Tiananmen Square massacre, but there was a Beijing massacre.” [2]
> “Tiananmen Square Massacre is a taboo subject, most Chinese under the age of 25 have never even heard about it. Websites that mention the "June 4 Incident" are blocked in China.”?
Anyone with access to BBC iPlayer would be hard pressed to find a better source than Tiananmen: The People V the Party.
For me, it revealed the story of an organised revolutionary mass that was on the very brink of bringing Democracy to China, they just didn't get enough of the army on side before time ran out.
12 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 35.4 ms ] threadHere is the badge cam video and audio: https://twitter.com/jlwedel/status/1268355402384596992?s=21
I read that comment as "there are scary parallels here today." To me, it makes Tienanmen square more real and less other.
As explained by journalists who were in Beijing that day, the Chinese government’s official account that there was no massacre in Tiananmen Square may actually be technically true, but of course dodges the main point.
Richard Roth: “For years now (certainly by the time of the 10th anniversary of Tiananmen) scholars — and many journalists — have been describing it as a weekend massacre, a massacre in Beijing, the ‘Beijing massacre’ or the ‘crackdown’ in Tiananmen, but not a ‘Tiananmen Square massacre.’ … the Chinese government has always claimed, perhaps with a bit of sophistry: that there was no ‘massacre in Tiananmen Square.’ But there's no question many people were killed by the army that night around Tiananmen Square, and on the way to it.” [1]
James Miles: “There was no Tiananmen Square massacre, but there was a Beijing massacre.” [2]
[1]: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/there-was-no-tiananmen-square-m...
[2]: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8057762.stm
> “Tiananmen Square Massacre is a taboo subject, most Chinese under the age of 25 have never even heard about it. Websites that mention the "June 4 Incident" are blocked in China.”?
Is it really that burried?
For me, it revealed the story of an organised revolutionary mass that was on the very brink of bringing Democracy to China, they just didn't get enough of the army on side before time ran out.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0008z7h/storyville-ti...