24 years ago today

[Little-Acorn]

24 years ago today, on June 4, 1989, Chinese students and other citizens faced down large portions of the Chinese military at Tiananmen Square in Beijing, and other locations throughout China. The Chinese people refer to them as the "June 4 uprisings", since they took place in more than 300 cities across China, not just in Tiananmen Square.

Due to the lack of information coming out of China's tightly government-controlled media, death toll estimates nationwide range from several hundred, to thousands.

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/6/4/1370349987119/AP-tank-man-Tiananmen-Squ-008.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989

----------------------------------------------

BTW, today the Chinese government is frantically blocking internet searches for terms like "June 4", "uprising", "protest", etc.

Someone photoshopped the famous image of a well-dressed man with a briefcase facing down four Chinese tanks in the largest open public square in China, Tian An Men Square. The Photoshop artist replaced the four tanks in the picture, with four giant rubber ducks; and sent the altered photo out on Twitter as a joke.

And as a result, the Chinese government is even blocking searches for the terms "rubber duck" and "yellow duck"!

Leftist totalitarians can sure look stupid sometimes, here and abroad, when they try to enforce their agendas.

-------------------------------------

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/04/tiananmen-square-online-search-censored

Tiananmen Square online searches censored by Chinese authorities

Banned search terms include 'today', 'tomorrow' and date references in attempt to quell protest

Jonathan Kaiman in Beijing
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 4 June 2013 08.55 EDT

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/6/4/1370352387082/Yellow-rubber-duck-008.jpg
Twitter image mocking Chinese censorship of Tiananmen Square, adapted from AP's 1989 photograph (the search term 'Big Yellow Duck' is banned). Photograph: Twitter/weibo.com/weibolg

It takes a very significant date for the word "today" to be deemed too sensitive to mention. But 24 years after the Chinese government's bloody crackdown on pro-democracy protesters in Tiananmen Square, "today" is part of a long list of search terms that have been censored on Sina Weibo, the country's most popular microblog.

Other banned words include "tomorrow," "that year," "special day," and many number combinations that could refer to 4 June 1989, such as 6-4, 64, 63+1, 65-1, and 35 (shorthand for May 35th).

Chinese Communist party authorities, fearing a threat to their legitimacy, forbid open discussion of the so-called "June 4th incident" in the country's media and on its internet. Yet internet users have reacted by using ever-more oblique references to commemorate the tragedy, treating censors to an elaborate game of cat-and-mouse.

Many of their posts have been embedded in pictures, which can often elude automatic detection: a girl with her hand over her mouth; a Lego man facing down three green Lego tanks; the iconic "tank man" picture with its tanks photoshopped into four giant rubber ducks, a reference to a well-known art installation in Hong Kong's Victoria harbour.

Most of these pictures, too, have since been scrubbed clean. By Tuesday afternoon, the term "big yellow duck" had also been blocked.

[revelarts]

I'd like to ask a question of the folks here, and I'll assume the answer is YES if you don't respond :rolleyes:

Could that kind of censorship happen in the u.s. in the next 24 years?

[Little-Acorn]

I'd like to ask a question of the folks here, and I'll assume the answer is YES if you don't respond :rolleyes:

Could that kind of censorship happen in the u.s. in the next 24 years?

If the news networks do it voluntarily, and deliberately don't report certain things, is that still "censorship"?

How many networks gave more than 60 seconds of coverage to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright during the 2008 election cycle?

How many gave that much coverage to Operation Fast&Furious, and the deaths of U.S. Border patrol agents?

Technically none of that was "censorship", since the government never ordered any blockage. But the news was deliberately withheld from the majority of American voters, just the same.

[Marcus Aurelius]

24 years ago today, on June 4, 1989, Chinese students and other citizens faced down large portions of the Chinese military at Tiananmen Square in Beijing, and other locations throughout China. The Chinese people refer to them as the "June 4 uprisings", since they took place in more than 300 cities across China, not just in Tiananmen Square.

Due to the lack of information coming out of China's tightly government-controlled media, death toll estimates nationwide range from several hundred, to thousands.

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/6/4/1370349987119/AP-tank-man-Tiananmen-Squ-008.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989

----------------------------------------------

BTW, today the Chinese government is frantically blocking internet searches for terms like "June 4", "uprising", "protest", etc.

Someone photoshopped the famous image of a well-dressed man with a briefcase facing down four Chinese tanks in the largest open public square in China, Tian An Men Square. The Photoshop artist replaced the four tanks in the picture, with four giant rubber ducks; and sent the altered photo out on Twitter as a joke.

And as a result, the Chinese government is even blocking searches for the terms "rubber duck" and "yellow duck"!

Leftist totalitarians can sure look stupid sometimes, here and abroad, when they try to enforce their agendas.

-------------------------------------

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/04/tiananmen-square-online-search-censored

Tiananmen Square online searches censored by Chinese authorities

Banned search terms include 'today', 'tomorrow' and date references in attempt to quell protest

Jonathan Kaiman in Beijing
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 4 June 2013 08.55 EDT

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/6/4/1370352387082/Yellow-rubber-duck-008.jpg
Twitter image mocking Chinese censorship of Tiananmen Square, adapted from AP's 1989 photograph (the search term 'Big Yellow Duck' is banned). Photograph: Twitter/weibo.com/weibolg

It takes a very significant date for the word "today" to be deemed too sensitive to mention. But 24 years after the Chinese government's bloody crackdown on pro-democracy protesters in Tiananmen Square, "today" is part of a long list of search terms that have been censored on Sina Weibo, the country's most popular microblog.

Other banned words include "tomorrow," "that year," "special day," and many number combinations that could refer to 4 June 1989, such as 6-4, 64, 63+1, 65-1, and 35 (shorthand for May 35th).

Chinese Communist party authorities, fearing a threat to their legitimacy, forbid open discussion of the so-called "June 4th incident" in the country's media and on its internet. Yet internet users have reacted by using ever-more oblique references to commemorate the tragedy, treating censors to an elaborate game of cat-and-mouse.

Many of their posts have been embedded in pictures, which can often elude automatic detection: a girl with her hand over her mouth; a Lego man facing down three green Lego tanks; the iconic "tank man" picture with its tanks photoshopped into four giant rubber ducks, a reference to a well-known art installation in Hong Kong's Victoria harbour.

Most of these pictures, too, have since been scrubbed clean. By Tuesday afternoon, the term "big yellow duck" had also been blocked.

this appears to be untrue, or extremely poorly executed. The link below is to the Hong Kong GOOGLE site.

http://www.google.com.hk/#site=&source=hp&q=big+yellow+duck&oq=big+yellow+duck&gs_l=hp.12..0l10.1897.1897.0.3968.1.1.0.0.0.0.131. 131.0j1.1.0...0.0...1c..15.hp.ryBQAH7C1Y0&bav=on.2,or.&bvm=bv.47244034,d.dmQ&fp=4cad54179abcdbcf&biw=1280&bih=631

[Little-Acorn]

this appears to be untrue, or extremely poorly executed. The link below is to the Hong Kong GOOGLE site.


What is untrue? The uprisings did happen, people did get killed, that guy did stop the tanks in Tian An Men Square that day.

As for the government blocking searches, I didn't say it was succeeding. Only that it is trying.

Sweeping back the tide has always been, well, difficult.

[Marcus Aurelius]

What is untrue? The uprisings did happen, people did get killed, that guy did stop the tanks in Tian An Men Square that day.

As for the government blocking searches, I didn't say it was succeeding. Only that it is trying.

Sweeping back the tide has always been, well, difficult.

The article said the Chinese government was frantically blocking searches. I showed they are doing a poor job of it, by searching on the GOOGLE CHINA site for a supposedly blocked term and finding many references to said blocked term.

I then said...


this appears to be untrue, or extremely poorly executed.

...and I am correct. Either it isn't true that they are blocking anything, or they are doing a poor job of blocking. You could take my search as evidence of either case.

Just to clarify... I said nothing about YOU claiming something that was untrue (in other words, I did not call you a liar or anything). I was impugning the integrity of the material you posted.

[revelarts]

they block searches within China. not all over the net.

Google has made a deal with them to censor so it does work. They have other internal methods beside google to filter the net as well.

[Marcus Aurelius]

they block searches within China. not all over the net.

Google has made a deal with them to censor so it does work. They have other internal methods beside google to filter the net as well.

I did do the search in the CHINA GOOGLE site, but I suppose they could block results only for IP's within China... good point, actually.

Do we have any members in China that can verify???

[Robert A Whit]

If the news networks do it voluntarily, and deliberately don't report certain things, is that still "censorship"?

How many networks gave more than 60 seconds of coverage to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright during the 2008 election cycle?

How many gave that much coverage to Operation Fast&Furious, and the deaths of U.S. Border patrol agents?

Technically none of that was "censorship", since the government never ordered any blockage. But the news was deliberately withheld from the majority of American voters, just the same.

Fortunately for me, I still have RT and DWE to watch. It is surprising how the world really sees Obama vs what our media says he appears like.

[revelarts]

Just a few years I watched a news report where a reporter was interviewing Chinese grad students, in China.
the reporter showed them a picture of "tank man" and asked them what they thought and what it was about.
they looked at it , looked a bit confused , past it around then few said they didn't know what it was. 2 started to whisper to each other.
and finally said it had something to do with a riot or something years ago.

The reporter then did a search -- in china- for the image term Tenimen Square.
The only pictures that came up were postcard like images of of the area and happy smiling Chinese enjoying the grounds.
pretty freaky, but that's China, they're keeping there people safe, saving lives.

[revelarts]

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/idE6f78cu7I?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

"This is from a documentary called The Tank Man....from 2006. Some Uni students are shown pictures of "The Tank Man" in tiananmen square and are a bit lost to what it means. They do searches on Google in china and find out why."

[Marcus Aurelius]

Just a few years I watched a news report where a reporter was interviewing Chinese grad students, in China.
the reporter showed them a picture of "tank man" and asked them what they thought and what it was about.
they looked at it , looked a bit confused , past it around then few said they didn't know what it was. 2 started to whisper to each other.
and finally said it had something to do with a riot or something years ago.

The reporter then did a search -- in china- for the image term Tenimen Square.
The only pictures that came up were postcard like images of of the area and happy smiling Chinese enjoying the grounds.
pretty freaky, but that's China, they're keeping there people safe, saving lives.

I remember an interview where the guy was asking a Chinese citizen about the man in front of the tanks, and what had happened to him. The interviewee said 'The government killed him'.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Just a few years I watched a news report where a reporter was interviewing Chinese grad students, in China.
the reporter showed them a picture of "tank man" and asked them what they thought and what it was about.
they looked at it , looked a bit confused , past it around then few said they didn't know what it was. 2 started to whisper to each other.
and finally said it had something to do with a riot or something years ago.

The reporter then did a search -- in china- for the image term Tenimen Square.
The only pictures that came up were postcard like images of of the area and happy smiling Chinese enjoying the grounds.
pretty freaky, but that's China, they're keeping there people safe, saving lives.

That is the classic example of dictatorial censorship. When government has that kind of control of the information that the public gets to see any brave act that denigrates the image of the government is made as if to have never happened. Kind of like what has happened here a damn lot since the rise of Obama and his ffing regime..-Tyr

[tailfins]

I did do the search in the CHINA GOOGLE site, but I suppose they could block results only for IP's within China... good point, actually.

Do we have any members in China that can verify???


What if you find a China-based proxy server?

A QUICK search gives me this:

http://www.proxynova.com/proxy-server-list/country-cn/

http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/index.php

[Abbey Marie]

Fortunately for me, I still have RT and DWE to watch. It is surprising how the world really sees Obama vs what our media says he appears like.

Robert, what are RT and DWE?

[aboutime]

That is the classic example of dictatorial censorship. When government has that kind of control of the information that the public gets to see any brave act that denigrates the image of the government is made as if to have never happened. Kind of like what has happened here a damn lot since the rise of Obama and his ffing regime..-Tyr


Now, we all know where Obama and Company get their training! No wonder we owe China so much money. They OWN us, and control our WHITE HOUSE already!

Anyone really surprised with this?

[Marcus Aurelius]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=643732#post643732)
I did do the search in the CHINA GOOGLE site, but I suppose they could block results only for IP's within China... good point, actually.

Do we have any members in China that can verify???


What if you find a China-based proxy server?

A QUICK search gives me this:

http://www.proxynova.com/proxy-server-list/country-cn/

http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/index.php

Are you asking what if someone in China used a proxy server?

[fj1200]

Now, we all know where Obama and Company get their training! No wonder we owe China so much money. They OWN us, and control our WHITE HOUSE already!

Anyone really surprised with this?

Is that hyperbole or do you really think they own us?

[aboutime]

Is that hyperbole or do you really think they own us?


You tell us. You're the resident know-it-all. According to you, of course.

Guess someone has to drag all of that obvious patronizing crap from you eventually.

[fj1200]

You tell us. You're the resident know-it-all. According to you, of course.

Guess someone has to drag all of that obvious patronizing crap from you eventually.

How am I supposed to tell everyone what you think? If your post was hyperbole then OK but if you think they OWN us then you're wrong; and it's not hard to find either.
http://www.businessinsider.com/who-owns-us-debt-2011-7?op=1
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/mfh.txt

They barely own more than Japan. It's a shame that you think being informed is the same as "know-it-all."

[aboutime]

How am I supposed to tell everyone what you think? If your post was hyperbole then OK but if you think they OWN us then you're wrong; and it's not hard to find either.
http://www.businessinsider.com/who-owns-us-debt-2011-7?op=1
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/mfh.txt

They barely own more than Japan. It's a shame that you think being informed is the same as "know-it-all."


Convince yourself much?

[Robert A Whit]

Robert, what are RT and DWE?

Abbey, RT is Russian Times and the program I see comes from various places. Some of it from DC, some from Moscow and some from London. I expected it to be pure propaganda but if you get a chance to see it on cable TV, check it out. They do a lot of analysis.

DWE comes from Berlin and also is on Cable. They do half an hour of straight news but also have a lot of very interesting reports on many topics of interest. DWE is German and the D stands for Deutsche. I honestly am not sure what W and E stands for but it is easy to google.

[fj1200]

Convince yourself much?

That China doesn't OWN us? Yeah, truth and facts are like that.

[aboutime]

That China doesn't OWN us? Yeah, truth and facts are like that.


Some people use expressions in speech that you seem destined to always be critical of, due to your endless demands that LITERAL must always exist in order for you to accept it.
So.
Try this:

(scary) China Just Pierced the U.S. Treasury's Veil...



News that was NOT announced publicly by the United States government, that is.

In an unprecedented agreement, the U.S. Treasury has agreed to give China direct access to its auctions.

Per the deal, China is allowed to bypass Wall Street, and purchase Treasury Bills without placing any bids through primary dealers.

The deal wasn't announced publicly or in any message to primary dealers.

Never before... Not in the entire 237-year history of this great country has any foreign government been granted such intimate access to Capitol Hill.

Although there are no laws being broken, the Treasury's accommodation of China is definitely suspicious.

China already holds more than $1.2 trillion in U.S. Treasuries. Before long, China will own 50 cents on every dollar of U.S. debt.

With that in mind, ask yourself this difficult question...

Has the United States ALREADY lost its sovereignty to China?

Yes, China now owns/runs the United States (http://email.wnd.com/HS?a=ENX7CqhQ0f928SA9MKJSO8XnGHxKLvO8YvcStGb5lw8W0 bBhOG5mpqVsje_Hhe-ud1OE).

No, the United States remains an independent nation (http://email.wnd.com/HS?a=ENX7CqhQ0f928SA9MKJSO8XnGHxKLvO8Y_cStGb5lw8W0 bBhOG5mpqVsje_Hhe-ud1OF).

But...you insist in literal. Try this on.

[fj1200]

Some people use expressions in speech that you seem destined to always be critical of, due to your endless demands that LITERAL must always exist in order for you to accept it.
So.

Sometimes it's hard to tell so I asked the question. And fwiw, if I were always critical I would be posting a whole lot more.


Try this:
(scary) China Just Pierced the U.S. Treasury's Veil...

...

Has the United States ALREADY lost its sovereignty to China?

Yes, China now owns/runs the United States (http://email.wnd.com/HS?a=ENX7CqhQ0f928SA9MKJSO8XnGHxKLvO8YvcStGb5lw8W0 bBhOG5mpqVsje_Hhe-ud1OE).

No, the United States remains an independent nation (http://email.wnd.com/HS?a=ENX7CqhQ0f928SA9MKJSO8XnGHxKLvO8Y_cStGb5lw8W0 bBhOG5mpqVsje_Hhe-ud1OF).

But...you insist in literal. Try this on.

The answer is clearly no but my reaction to the news that is apparently a year or two old is, meh. Our problems are of our own making and are not because of China. They may make a convenient target of our ire but it's not their fault we've gutted our global competitiveness and can't seem to get by without borrowing huge amounts.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Sometimes it's hard to tell so I asked the question. And fwiw, if I were always critical I would be posting a whole lot more.



The answer is clearly no but my reaction to the news that is apparently a year or two old is, meh. Our problems are of our own making and are not because of China. They may make a convenient target of our ire but it's not their fault we've gutted our global competitiveness and can't seem to get by without borrowing huge amounts.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/monetarypolicy/f/Who-Owns-US-National-Debt.htm


Most of the news headlines focus on how much the U.S. owes China (http://useconomy.about.com/od/worldeconomy/p/What-Is-the-US-Debt-to-China.htm). And, in fact, China is the largest foreign owner of U.S. debt. However, the biggest single owner is ... you. Why? Because the single largest holder of national debt is the Social Security Trust Fund (http://useconomy.about.com/od/glossary/g/Soc_Sec_Trust.htm), aka your retirement money.


Debt Held by the Public - Foreign governments and investors hold 48% of the nation's public debt (http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/Public-Debt.htm). The next largest part (21%) is held by other governmental entities, like the Federal Reserve and state and local governments. Fifteen percent is held by mutual funds, private pension funds, savings bonds or individual Treasury notes. The rest (16%) is held by businesses, like banks (http://useconomy.about.com/od/glossary/g/Banking.htm), and insurance companies and a mish-mash of trusts, businesses and investors.

China is the least of our worries.