Re: AMERICA'S YELLOW PRESS

Toby wrote:

> "Duke Lama" <duke@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:4868A86E.AEB72401@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> > Jim Walsh wrote:
> >
> >
> >> brutally
> >> repressed, and the riot was a reaction to that brutality.
> >>
> >
> > You are right when speaking about 4 June 1989. But in the Tibet case
we
> > failed to see
> > from any media that there had been a preceding peaceful demonstration.
> >
>
> This was indeed re****ted after the fact, and eyewitnesses were quoted as
> saying that there were peaceful protests that were immediately brutally
> repressed, but Chinese apologists simply dismiss such re****ts as biased
and
> false. Unfortunately the fact that holders of J-1 journalist visas in
China
> are not allowed into
> Tibet makes field re****ting difficult, which is obviously the reason for
> keeping accredited journalists out of the region in the first place.

As you have said, all we learnt about the "peaceful demonstration" (if
there had
been any) were RE****TED AFTER THE FACT. If that  had been the case, we
should
have the news or even trace of news circulating via various unoffical
channels,
such as internet, long before surfacing to the public, just like the
"riot" at
Guizhou couples of days ago. Remebering that nowaday it is almost
impossible to
block information flow as compared to 1989.