My response with tons of sources, another thread, someone's other post, and you choose only to respond to this single comment not by refuting their complete rebuttal of your argument but by linking a new source with no comment as if this is something you can do, like you don't have to address the thing you just said that was proven to be complete nonsense. Do you actually believe your own points?

As with your poetry nonsense, we have to reply to the new source you cited too or you won't get it (you still probably won't). And from Amnesty International! The group that upheld the faked Iraq baby testimony used to push for the war in Iraq; the group that was advertised by the CIA; the group whose Board of Directors is filled with World Economic Forum hacks (Christopher Schlaeffer, Anjhula Mya Singh Bais, Alexandra Durbak) and a former CIA (NED) employee (Louisa Greve) Most of the article is uncited hearsay as per (their only source is two accounts, a quota which has already been met and exceeded by the sources we provided). Here’s a few provable lies in the article:.

pro-democracy protestors

this is a complete lie

with authorities banning all mention of the protest even today

complete and utter lie, we can even look at Chinese state media mentioning and addressing it

CPC News: Centennial Events of the Communist Party of China

People's Daily: Memorabilia of the Communist Party of China 1989

China.org.cn: China Rejects US Statement on 6-4 Incident

China Daily - Tiananmen Massacre a Myth

China Daily: What's Wrong With Our Liberal Studies Courses?

(all accessed through baidu)

there is no official death toll

Already proved this wrong in my other comment