BS! Have I said TAM? I said 64 TAM incident!!! It's YOU say TAM to
twist!!!
On Dec 1, 10:19 am, "ltl...@
hotmail.com"
hotmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 1, 3:02 am, "abianc...@
my-deja.com"
my-deja.com>
> wrote:
>>> Also, the truth of 64 TAM incident has been sealed by PRC government
>> just like the truth of 228 incident was sealed by KMT government for
>> 40 years. You came from Taiwan, you know what I am talking about.
>> You CCP defenders want to defend CCP, fine, but you guys should tell
>> the truth, no twist, no lie, no BS, ok!
>
> If you don't agree, you need to point out what you don't agree with.
> Ranting will not advance any discussion. So far, Charles had given
> you
> straigth answers as far as I can tell.
>
> As I had pointed out, if by TAM Sqaure, one means the square itself,
> then the claim is about right. If one chooses to talk about the whole
> incident,
> of course, people had been killed. PLA had killed the protesters and
> PLA
> soldiers were killed by the protestors.
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Dec 1, 2:34 am, CharlesLiu
hotmail.com> wrote:>
>>> On Nov 30, 11:23 pm, "abianc...@
my-deja.com"
my-deja.com>
>>> wrote:>
>>>> LT Lee, you said you dont trust China Times, Taiwan newspaper on PRC
>>>> news, then how come you trusted Orville Schell, a non-Chinese on 64
>>>> TAM incident?
>
>>> Because what Orville Schell said is backed up by other TAM
>>> retrospectives?
>
>>> Like this one by Columbia Univ. School of Journalism?
>
>
>>> "as far as can be determined from the available evidence, no one died
>>> that night in Tiananmen Square."
>
>>> Also, the Frontline segment "The Tank Man" presented the Chinese
>>> government's official casualty figure of 250 dead. This figure is in-
>>> line with our NSA estimate:
>
>
>>>> You contradicted yourself. Now, tell me if the PLA
>>>> killed protesters in 64 TAM incident? Yes or No? No BS, no twist but
>>>> straight answer, please!
>
>>>> On Nov 30, 7:53 pm, "ltl...@
hotmail.com"
hotmail.com> wrote:>
>>>>> On Nov 30, 7:44 pm, "abianc...@
my-deja.com"
my-deja.com>
>>>>> wrote:>
>>>>>> Tell me, did the protests get killed by the PLA in 64 TAM incident or
>>>>>> not??? Yes or no?
>
>>>>> I had quoted Orville Schell. I see no contraditctions.
>>>>> The claim "No one dies in Tiananman Square" is believable if narrowly
>>>>> interpreted.
>>>>> Of course, people had died during the incident.
>
>>>>>> On Nov 30, 7:40 pm, "ltl...@
hotmail.com"
hotmail.com> wrote:>
>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 6:54 pm, "abianc...@
my-deja.com"
my-deja.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:>
>>>>>>>> I said former PRC Defense Minister claimed no one got killed in 64 TAM
>>>>>>>> incident and you can twist something else that amazed me. You are
>>>>>>>> incredible!!!
>
>>>>>>> No The claim was "No one die in Tiananman Square."
>>>>>>> Please note that Orville Schill wrote the paragraph I quoted as a
>>>>>>> response to the claim. He distinguished between causalty in the
>>>>>>> Square itself and causalty during the process of clearing the
>>>>>>> Square. Please read his paragraph again.
>
>>>>>>>> I dont trust anyone, US officials or PRC officials, I use my own
>>>>>>>> judgement. In this KH incident, "late apply" was just an excuse
>>>>>>>> because "early apply" also got rejected at the same time last week.
>>>>>>>> And even PRC military official, political analyst all said political
>>>>>>>> issue was the real reason and one of them even told state-run
>>>>>>>> newspaper, People's Daily's sister newspaper. You are the only one
>>>>>>>> trusted PRC spokesman Liu's statement and Liu even hinted the real
>>>>>>>> reason in press conference but you chose to ignore that.
>
>>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 4:06 pm, "ltl...@
hotmail.com"
hotmail.com> wrote:>
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 1:55 pm, "abianc...@
my-deja.com"
my-deja.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:>
>>>>>>>>>> Chinatimes reported what AsiaWeek (Hong Kong) said in its article. In
>>>>>>>>>> the article, PRC political analyst and miltary official all said
>>>>>>>>>> political issues were the reason for KH's HK visit denial, that's
>>>>>>>>>> their judgement and you are the only one still insists "Timeline" was
>>>>>>>>>> the reason.
>
>>>>>>>>> Sorry. The issue what decision had been made by the Foreign Ministry.
>>>>>>>>> We are not discussion public opinion. And as I had explained, their
>>>>>>>>> opinion
>>>>>>>>> makes sense, but making sense is not the issue. The issue what
>>>>>>>>> actually had
>>>>>>>>> happnening. Did the U.S. side applied for permission? Was the port
>>>>>>>>> visit
>>>>>>>>> approved and then cancelled? Yes. We need the timeline to answer the
>>>>>>>>> questions.
>
>>>>>>>>>> And other US batterships applied for New Year's HK visit in October
>>>>>>>>>> was also denied last week together with KH's visit denial. Tell us is
>>>>>>>>>> that "timeline" issue too???
>
>>>>>>>>>> Hey, former PRC Defense Minister said no one died in 64 TAM incident,
>>>>>>>>>> do you believe that too?
>
>>>>>>>>> It is fine that you don't trust PRC officials. I can answer your
>>>>>>>>> quesiton.. First of
>>>>>>>>> all, I don't have first hand information. And I have to rely on
>>>>>>>>> reporters and writers.
>
>>>>>>>>> I had posted the following excerpt from Orville Schell's MANDATE OF
>>>>>>>>> HEAVEN.
>>>>>>>>> You can read it from the following link if you wish. Two points:
>
>>>>>>>>> 1. Orville Schells had given a hour by hour, blow by blow desciption
>>>>>>>>> on what had
>>>>>>>>> happned in Tiananman square, i.e. the square itself. He did not
>>>>>>>>> describe any causalty.
>>>>>>>>> No shooting of students nor tank running over students.
>
>>>>>>>>> 2. Referring to the various eyewitness account on causalties, Schell
>>>>>>>>> reported,
>
>>>>>>>>> "After sifting through all available accounts, it seems safe to say
>>>>>>>>> that while
>>>>>>>>> some causalties were sustained during the withdrawal, there were
>>>>>>>>> probably not
>>>>>>>>> many. This is not to say, however, that there was no causalties
>>>>>>>>> sustained
>>>>>>>>> during the overall process of "clearing the Square..."
>
>>>>>>>>> My answer to your question:
>>>>>>>>> If the former Defence Minister meant that no one died in the Tiananman
>>>>>>>>> Square,
>>>>>>>>> (I think this is what he had said) he could be right. Of course,
>>>>>>>>> people died during
>>>>>>>>> the overall process of clearing the Square.
>
>
>>>>>>>>> Now let me ask you this.
>>>>>>>>> What make you trust U.S. officials? Because they had told the truth,
>>>>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>>>>> but the truth about Saddam Hussien was involved in 9/11? Because they
>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>> told the truth about Iraq acquiring yelloe cake from Niger? Because
>>>>>>>>> they had
>>>>>>>>> told the truth about incontrovertible evidece of WMD in Iraq?
>
>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 1:44 pm, "ltl...@
hotmail.com"
hotmail.com> wrote:>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 1:05 pm, "abianc...@
my-deja.com"
my-deja.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If you really believed "timeline" was the only reason for KH visit
>>>>>>>>>>>> denial. Then read the following:
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>> No disrespect. But I don't think Chinatimes provides the best and most
>>>>>>>>>>> accurate
>>>>>>>>>>> coverage on mainland. I will read Chinatimes for Taiwan news.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> AsiaWeek article said that PRC military official, poltical analyst etc
>>>>>>>>>>>> all said that recent Tibet and Taiwan issues (ie, Dalai Lama visit and
>>>>>>>>>>>> arm sales to Taiwan) were the reason for KH visit denial!!! And those
>>>>>>>>>>>> people also PRC rarely issued visit denial but only happened when
>>>>>>>>>>>> there's political issues.
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Are those PRC military official and political analyst making the
>>>>>>>>>>> decision on
>>>>>>>>>>> whether to premit port vist. If not, what they think is irrelevant.
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Bascially, what make sense and what acutally had happened could be
>>>>>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>>>>> different things. America behaved like China antagonist in many
>>>>>>>>>>> issues, it
>>>>>>>>>>> makes sense for China to treat America as one. No port visit is then
>>>>>>>>>>> logical.
>>>>>>>>>>> But is it what had happened?
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, we need the American timeline. Without it, all the talks on last
>>>>>>>>>>> minute
>>>>>>>>>>> cancellation, reversal, retaliation and etc are premature.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, former PRC Defense Minister said no one died in 64 TAM incient,
>>>>>>>>>>>> you also believe that, right?
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 12:48 pm, "ltl...@
hotmail.com"
hotmail.com> wrote:>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 30, 12:09 pm, demoris...@
aol.com wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 29, 9:54 am, demoris...@
aol.com wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 29, 7:08 am, "abianc...@
my-deja.com"
my-deja.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> China says relations with US 'harmed,' cancelled Kitty Hawk visit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deliberate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 hour ago
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BEIJING - China's last-minute cancellation of a U.S. Navy visit to
>
> ...
>
> read more >>- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
