Well even according to the PRC sources at least 200-300 people died. The New York Times wrote about 400-800 victims, the Chinese Red Cross claims about 2000-3000 victims.

The western press is well within the extreme estimations on both sides. But thats not my point anyway, even if it was 200 dead people, its a clear enough difference to the protests in Germany on 1st May where exactly 0 people died. Clear enough to say that setting it a same like you did with what happened at the Tiananmen Square is ridiculous.

Putting the demonstrators at the Tiananmen square with the burning down rioters in Tibet onto one level is also rather interesting. The last time I looked at it, hunger strike was not an act of violence. The demonstrations and its demands found even high ranked supporters within the state, but those who wanted to send the army in to "clear up" rather than those who wanted to commit the demanded reforms won in the end, and thats what they did then.

So you come here to see "lies and distortions"?

No gun shots, no tanks.....again bad correlation by Chaochao. See, I can't talk about ANYTHING without bringing up "but that country did this!!!to much lesser extents". It's not relevant what the US did. The CCP sends in the army on students and peaceful protests no matter what the US did. The CCP shot thousands of students no matter what. China attempts to minimize it and censor it as much as it can no matter what Germany did. God, have the dignity to at least stop these charades; they're only proving your arguments weaker and weaker and I am now convinced that Chinese apologists have nothing else to say.
And yes, although people in China know about the event, they know VERY little.

__________________

How the hell did you arrive at this half ass conclusion? I call for an alternative to violence, to prevent violent, and now I somehow justify violence? Whose post were you reading?
Do you know that the CCP has an enormous bias and that further proliferating its propaganda is ridiculous? There's no reason to say that the Dalai Lama would be the leader of Tibet and there's no reason to think that Tibet would separate completely if it were given what the people want -- liberalism.

I don't think so, Canada is a member of the G8, has closer relations to most countries and has achieved more on the international scene than HuJingTao or its predecessor. On top of that, Stephen Harper has no real power, since Canada is one of em....."democracy". It's funny when we received the Dalai Lama in my university, China issued notice not to receive him, no one paid attention to it.

Because we were already committed to the most volatile region in Afghanistan (and still are). Plus the fact that the war in Iraq was so far fetched, and that Bush is such a bad leader and yet still got the support of some countries shows a lot. Plus there has been a lot more accepted policies from the Bush Administration than that war. That war is 1 event/8 years of presidency.

__________________

A few thousands according to the Red Cross. I'll take their words before this "uncle" that didn't even see the whole of it (being arrested and all).

__________________

2600 to be precise.

How Many Really Died? - TIME

__________________

PS: Note the figures are from the Chinese Red Cross

__________________

sorry but it did sound like that. you ever criticized those violence? where?

my Tibetan friend told me he loves China. you know better what they want than him huh? actually it is him that told me this site.

then i should have said, China is alot more influential than Canada. here we dont talk about Canada unless when it comes to how difficult to take back Chinese corrupt officials from Canada. Canada has achieved more than China? let us do a simple contrast:

20 yrs ago, tens of thousands of college students were protesting against the government at Tian An Men Square and many more supported them.

today, its still college students, alot of who are living abroad, that are with their government, proteting against foreign media distortion and foreign govenment-affiliated organiations brazen tricks. and 1 billion people support them. ( i have tons of pics of them). you see the progress?

these words does not make any sense to me.

China Agricultural University, Beiijing, 2008.4.29


Fudan University, Shanghai


Beijing Institute of Technology



this is very interesting:

ä¸*å�Žç½‘论å�›-è¿›æ�¥çœ‹çœ‹ï¼Œè—�民家里挂的是什么“佛†�ï¼�

I said if there are elections, there won't be need for violence. If people can talk to solve their problems rather than throw fists, then they will talk -- considering it's far more efficient.
How you think I was advocating violence in that statement is way beyond me.

Oh, your friend from Tibet must be the all encompassing, all knowing, all infallible, lord and savior of Tibetans. I never stated I knew more than anyone, simply that no one knows anything about the general consensus in Tibet (not even your or your friend) and that is why there should be elections. Is loving China the anti-Christ of elections? If you love China, you must hate democracy? None sense. I like China and I like democracy.
I'm an ethnic French Canadian in every aspect, grew up and born in Quebec, I had no idea if the majority of people wanted to separate until after the referendum. How could I?

Again, no elections -- all bullshit. You don't have a picture of one billion people advocating the exact same thing. Have elections, then run your mouth about what other people want, until then, you only speak for yourself and your immediate peers.
That's the very reason we don't take the CCP seriously anywhere outside China.

Short form: Bush's influence > Hu jingtao.

__________________

Yes, a few selected pictures of three dorms, that must encompass the opinions of everyone over every matter of governance. If that's your indicator of public opinion, I can do the same thing about everything else:
Oh noes! most of the people in the western world are neo-nazis!!!!!!

__________________