幾則有別於「主流」傾向、有關六四的感想──之三
另一角度看方政
之二見下址：
────────────────────────
【批註：以下是一位朋友對方政不同於「主流」的看法。對他仍然崇拜者或感逆耳，然而，如下文般的感思，只是不見於「主流媒體」而已，並非「不存在」──當然，在氣氛壓力下，類似的質疑即使「有」，一般人輕易都不感表達。
尤其是青少年，請帶包容開放的態度，試聽聽「另一些人」又如何說？──論事，要還原當時已處於「暴動」、存在你死我亡這張力下來考慮！
六四要談，可是，聚焦在暴動衝突最烈的那幾小時之外，必須要深入而詳細地扣問：這個結果，是如何一步一步給推出來的？】
那個這幾天出盡風頭的「天安門民主義士」方政，他被坦克車斷腿不假，但一眾義憤之人請想想，事發地點不是天安門廣場，大部份學生正從廣場西南邊平靜的撤離；而方政和他的朋友则是在廣場西北的西長安大街往西走，他受傷一事，應該是學生已被軍隊驅離廣場之後發生。
首先，學生是「天之嬌子」，中共是厚待學生的，在廣場的是學生，中共十分克制，天安門廣場的確沒有死人，但離開了廣場，誰是「和平學生」'誰不是，已無法分辨，坦克不是因為你是學生才從後衝壓，這判斷證之於廣場（在場者都很容易被識認為學生的一個地點）沒有學生傷亡此事實──這也是「紀念六四」者至今仍不願、不想向公眾說清楚的事實。方政，是在廣場以外受傷的。
第二，他誇張說坦克同時故意壓死很多人，當時是平暴，坦克不會慢條斯理只走路中央，坦克會撞倒壓倒一些人，死人是有的，但從救援他時拍的照片看，没有一片片的屍體；否則，拍照的外國記者那會放過這鏡頭？！那是暴力衝突, 軍隊武器當然有殺傷力，群眾也不是好像香港和大陸文人、記者、評論員等浪漫化想像中和美化描繪下的善男信女，愛好和平，很多軍車（甚至是裝甲車！也可反證非要用上重武器如坦克不可）被燒毀，軍人也有被殺的，我看過多張照片，有好幾個軍人被燒屍後，肚被刺破腸子挂在外，然後吊在立交橋示眾。軍人跟天安門母親的兒女同樣是青年人，母親同樣在家裡等著，而有一點不同的是，軍人多是農家子弟，很窮，念不上高校大學，比不上天安門母親的兒女高貴。殉職後母親只有微薄的撫恤金。
「正義香港人」不容別人質疑，理直氣壯的說他們「見證了」六四, 實情是他們沒有見證過的事實更多
。
------------------------
Ｔ,
There was
also a news clip that was widely shown in US and European TV during Tiananmen
incident. A man stood in front of an advancing tank. The tank commander tried
to zigzag around him and did him no harm. But this is not something Western
media want to dwell on.
This 方 政 asshole may be telling the
truth. But he was on Chang An Road with the other rioters, 刁民, who earlier
during the day had killed some PLA soldiers.
Quelling June
4, 1989 riot, as your friend pointed out here, was never directed against the students.
But killing students have the highest
propaganda value for the Western media, that's why this Tiananmen issue is
being kept alive. Perhaps China should reveal by now the events and the internal
political disputes that led to this tragedy. Regardless of
deliberate lies perpetuated in Western and Hong Kong media, absolutely and positively no killing
occurred at Tiananmen Square. Just a few days
before June 4, I saw TV clips of soldiers fraternalizing
with students at the Square.
Have the media shown any sympathy to those Chinese
soldiers, who were killed by the mob while initially carrying no weapons and whose bodies
were mutilated?
Our
authoritarian government's sensitivity must be measured against the practice of
the West, in particular the behavior of
the US, the hegemon of Western democracies.
During the Kent State massacre in Ohio on May 4, 1970,
US National Guards shot unarmed students over 100 meters away. That's how jittery US soldiers could feel in riot situations even though
their personal safety is not the issue. Chinese soldiers' behavior during this tragedy is
indeed exemplary. Numerologists may also try to make hay out of May 4, which
was also an important event of student rebellion in 1919.
The US
fabricated the casus belli in August 1964 to justify its attack on Vietnam. It
claimed that Vietnamese
torpedos attacked the US warships. Of course nothing like that ever happened.
USS Maddox was
the ship that attacked Vietnamese Navy, and USS Turner Joy's radar system wasn't even functioning when it
ostensibly reported an attack by torpedo boats. For almost 5 decades, Pentagon refused
to release this "classified" information. And what about
1882 Chinese Exclusion Act？ Has the US government
admitted to and apologized for its racism or made reparations to those Chinese
Americans after 130 years？
If the
virtuous paradigm of democracy and freedom, the upholder of Western
"universal values," could act so arrogantly and callously, what
should be the reasonable expectation for an authoritarian government still
working hard at it to bring her people up to the middle-income level among the
community of nations?
B
沒有留言:
張貼留言