Nazista lunar
Member
Self-Immolation Hoax on Tiananmen Square
Background: By the end of 2000 -- a year and a half after the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) launched the suppression of Falun Gong -- the campaign had failed to garner support among many of the CCP's rank and file. Then-CCP leader Jiang Zemin had toured southern provinces earlier in 2000 hoping to shore up more support for the campaign among local leaders. Meanwhile, public support for the campaign more broadly had waned. On January 23, 2001, five individuals allegedly set themselves on fire in Tiananmen Square in Beijing. The entire scene was caught on camera from multiple angles. Beginning just hours after the event, state-controlled media was flooded with reports that the self-immolators were Falun Gong practitioners. These reports included grisly footage of the victims, portraying Falun Gong teachings as directly responsible for the tragedy.
The Problem: In the weeks following the event, a wealth of evidence uncovered (including a Washington Post article finding that two of the self-immolators never practiced Falun Gong) indicates the entire incident was staged. Yet, while people inside China had no access to this information, the Chinese state-run media continued a blitz campaign to portray the "self-immolators" as Falun Gong practitioners. People across China changed from respecting and sympathizing with Falun Gong to becoming infuriated with and attacking the practice. Hate crimes targeting Falun Gong practitioners increased and the CCP escalated its persecution with increased arrests, torture, killing, and forced organ harvesting.
Why It Matters: With 70-100 million practicing Falun Gong in China, by 1999 the traditional discipline was largely a household name and a respected one at that. The staged "self-immolation," however, changed all that, and to this day remains the single most influential factor in garnering disgust or hatred toward Falun Gong among the Chinese people. The resulting apathy or hostility toward Falun Gong in China has greatly facilitated the regime's attempt to eradicate the practice, and is a primary cause for the tens of thousands of reports of abuse and torture.
https://en.minghui.org/cc/88/
A False Fire
Detailed analysis of the footage, testimonies of witnesses, and related reports can be found from the Focus Topic of Self-Immolation Hoax on Minghui.org. Here we briefly review a few major flaws identified from the CCTV video that show the propaganda was a staged incident.
Death caused by object hitting. Liu Chunling, a woman claimed to have been burned to death in the incident, was a key figure since her daughter was also in the incident. Video analysis indicates that Liu actually died from being hit by a heavy object wielded by a man in a military coat.
Over 20 fire extinguishers and blankets arrived in minutes. The police are not known for caring about the lives of ordinary citizens, as was shown in the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989. But in this case, police officers produced more than 20 fire extinguishers and blankets – instead of tear gas and guns – moments after the incident. Worth noting is that police do not usually carry fire extinguishers or blankets.
Able to sing four days after trachea was cut open. Liu Siying, 12, was the daughter of Liu Chunling. She was reported as having extensive burns and was hospitalized. Four days after her trachea was surgically cut open, however, she was interviewed by CCTV and even sang a song. This defied medical common sense.
Liu Siying, 12, was interviewed by CCTV and sang a song four days after trachea surgery.
Atypical handling of extensive burning. Several survivors including Liu Siying were claimed to be suffering from severe burns over large areas of their bodies. When this is the case, ventilation is normally required along with strict infection controls, to facilitate recovery. But from reports by CCTV and other media, all of these victims were tightly wrapped up with many layers of gauze in Beijing’s Jishuitan Hospital. No precautions were in place, even when reporters approached them in close proximity.
Clothing was burned, but flammable substance was intact. One of the victims was claimed to be Wang Jindong. Although his clothing was heavily burned, his highly inflammable hair was fine, as was the Sprite bottle allegedly containing gasoline between his legs. Furthermore, the police officer who was holding the fire blanket was seen leisurely standing next to Wang for a while but did not put the blanket on Wang until after Wang shouted out a slogan claiming his affiliation with Falun Gong.
Wang’s hair and Sprite bottle were not burned.
Three versions of Wang. In reports from CCTV and Xinhua, there are three versions of Wang Jindong.
Three versions of Wang Jindong: Version 1 (left): published by Xinhua on January 23, 2001, several hours after the incident. Version 2 (center): image shown in CCTV’s Focus Interview program on January 30, 2001. Version 3 (right): image shown in CCTV’s Focus Interview program on April 10, 2001.
Face recognition experts identified three versions different from each other. Furthermore, as requested by the World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong (WOIPFG), the voice recognition lab at Nation Taiwan University performed analyses and concluded that the voices in version 2 and version 3 were not from the same person.
https://en.minghui.org/html/articles/2021/1/23/190059.html
https://www.falsefire.com/en/
https://en.minghui.org/cc/88/
Self-Immolation Hoax on Tiananmen Square: Opinion From a Fire Expert
This article was first published on November 2, 2014.
To incite public hatred of Falun Gong and to thereby somehow “justify” its policy of persecution in the minds of the public, the Chinese government arranged for a group of people to set themselves on fire on Tiananmen Square on January 21, 2001. The government told the public that they were Falun Gong practitioners. We refer to this as the “self-immolation hoax on Tiananmen Square”
We call it a hoax because all of the evidence suggests that it was staged by the Chinese communist regime as a propaganda stunt. And of course the Falun Gong teachings forbid suicide, as well.
The owner of a gas station in China, who is an expert in fire control, recently spoke to a Minghui correspondent and raised three questions about the incident.
1. The Fire Blanket
The Chinese Central TV station (CCTV), which broadcast the footage of the hoax every day for several months, claimed that a policeman put out the fire on one of the victims by covering him with a fire blanket. But the blanket shown in the footage does not look like a real fire blanket.
A real fire blanket is made of asbestos. In China, only facilities, such as gas stations and combustible materials storage buildings, vehicles such as fire trucks and gasoline trucks, etc., are equipped with them. Police cars do not routinely carry them on patrol.
More importantly, asbestos blankets are usually gray and weigh over 20 pounds. The average person needs two hands to carry one. However, in the CCTV footage, the policeman easily opened up a colorful blanket with one hand. It looked like an acrylic blanket that is commonly available in China.
Policeman holding what is claimed to be a “fire blanket” in CCTV footage.
2. The Fire Extinguishers
In the CCTV footage, the police carried a dozen fire extinguishers. All of them were 8-kilogram extinguishers. In China, however, this size extinguisher is only found in the facilities mentioned above. They are not carried in vehicles.
The size of the extinguisher is based on the vehicle. In China, an average-size van carries a single, one-kilogram extinguisher. A big bus might have one or two 2.5-kilogram extinguishers. Even the largest gas truck is only equipped with two 4-kilogram ones. It is highly unlikely that the police in the footage would have been carrying more than ten 8-kilogram extinguishers in their vans, unless that they'd need them that day.
3. The Fire Itself
Different combustible materials burn differently. As an expert working in this field for more than 20 years, I have seen all kinds of materials burn, especially gasoline. The CCTV claims that those people poured gasoline on themselves, but after watching the footage many times, I've concluded that it was not a gasoline fire.
Gasoline has a special property. When it catches fire, it will spread instantly. The flames shoot up at the very beginning and then quickly die down. The whole thing is very quick, so it is not easy to capture it on film unless the camera is set up and ready to go before hand.
Yet somehow the CCTV showed very clear footage of the entire event. To my mind, there are only two possibilities that could have allowed this.
First, something other than gasoline was set on fire, so that it lasted long enough for the CCTV to take the video. Or, secondly, the TV station knew about it beforehand, so they had already set up the camera, waiting for it to happen.
Either way, the CCTV lied about it.
https://en.minghui.org/html/articles/2021/1/26/190091.html
Background: By the end of 2000 -- a year and a half after the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) launched the suppression of Falun Gong -- the campaign had failed to garner support among many of the CCP's rank and file. Then-CCP leader Jiang Zemin had toured southern provinces earlier in 2000 hoping to shore up more support for the campaign among local leaders. Meanwhile, public support for the campaign more broadly had waned. On January 23, 2001, five individuals allegedly set themselves on fire in Tiananmen Square in Beijing. The entire scene was caught on camera from multiple angles. Beginning just hours after the event, state-controlled media was flooded with reports that the self-immolators were Falun Gong practitioners. These reports included grisly footage of the victims, portraying Falun Gong teachings as directly responsible for the tragedy.
The Problem: In the weeks following the event, a wealth of evidence uncovered (including a Washington Post article finding that two of the self-immolators never practiced Falun Gong) indicates the entire incident was staged. Yet, while people inside China had no access to this information, the Chinese state-run media continued a blitz campaign to portray the "self-immolators" as Falun Gong practitioners. People across China changed from respecting and sympathizing with Falun Gong to becoming infuriated with and attacking the practice. Hate crimes targeting Falun Gong practitioners increased and the CCP escalated its persecution with increased arrests, torture, killing, and forced organ harvesting.
Why It Matters: With 70-100 million practicing Falun Gong in China, by 1999 the traditional discipline was largely a household name and a respected one at that. The staged "self-immolation," however, changed all that, and to this day remains the single most influential factor in garnering disgust or hatred toward Falun Gong among the Chinese people. The resulting apathy or hostility toward Falun Gong in China has greatly facilitated the regime's attempt to eradicate the practice, and is a primary cause for the tens of thousands of reports of abuse and torture.
https://en.minghui.org/cc/88/
A False Fire
Detailed analysis of the footage, testimonies of witnesses, and related reports can be found from the Focus Topic of Self-Immolation Hoax on Minghui.org. Here we briefly review a few major flaws identified from the CCTV video that show the propaganda was a staged incident.
Death caused by object hitting. Liu Chunling, a woman claimed to have been burned to death in the incident, was a key figure since her daughter was also in the incident. Video analysis indicates that Liu actually died from being hit by a heavy object wielded by a man in a military coat.
Over 20 fire extinguishers and blankets arrived in minutes. The police are not known for caring about the lives of ordinary citizens, as was shown in the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989. But in this case, police officers produced more than 20 fire extinguishers and blankets – instead of tear gas and guns – moments after the incident. Worth noting is that police do not usually carry fire extinguishers or blankets.
Able to sing four days after trachea was cut open. Liu Siying, 12, was the daughter of Liu Chunling. She was reported as having extensive burns and was hospitalized. Four days after her trachea was surgically cut open, however, she was interviewed by CCTV and even sang a song. This defied medical common sense.
Liu Siying, 12, was interviewed by CCTV and sang a song four days after trachea surgery.
Atypical handling of extensive burning. Several survivors including Liu Siying were claimed to be suffering from severe burns over large areas of their bodies. When this is the case, ventilation is normally required along with strict infection controls, to facilitate recovery. But from reports by CCTV and other media, all of these victims were tightly wrapped up with many layers of gauze in Beijing’s Jishuitan Hospital. No precautions were in place, even when reporters approached them in close proximity.
Clothing was burned, but flammable substance was intact. One of the victims was claimed to be Wang Jindong. Although his clothing was heavily burned, his highly inflammable hair was fine, as was the Sprite bottle allegedly containing gasoline between his legs. Furthermore, the police officer who was holding the fire blanket was seen leisurely standing next to Wang for a while but did not put the blanket on Wang until after Wang shouted out a slogan claiming his affiliation with Falun Gong.
Wang’s hair and Sprite bottle were not burned.
Three versions of Wang. In reports from CCTV and Xinhua, there are three versions of Wang Jindong.
Three versions of Wang Jindong: Version 1 (left): published by Xinhua on January 23, 2001, several hours after the incident. Version 2 (center): image shown in CCTV’s Focus Interview program on January 30, 2001. Version 3 (right): image shown in CCTV’s Focus Interview program on April 10, 2001.
Face recognition experts identified three versions different from each other. Furthermore, as requested by the World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong (WOIPFG), the voice recognition lab at Nation Taiwan University performed analyses and concluded that the voices in version 2 and version 3 were not from the same person.
https://en.minghui.org/html/articles/2021/1/23/190059.html
https://www.falsefire.com/en/
https://en.minghui.org/cc/88/
Self-Immolation Hoax on Tiananmen Square: Opinion From a Fire Expert
This article was first published on November 2, 2014.
To incite public hatred of Falun Gong and to thereby somehow “justify” its policy of persecution in the minds of the public, the Chinese government arranged for a group of people to set themselves on fire on Tiananmen Square on January 21, 2001. The government told the public that they were Falun Gong practitioners. We refer to this as the “self-immolation hoax on Tiananmen Square”
We call it a hoax because all of the evidence suggests that it was staged by the Chinese communist regime as a propaganda stunt. And of course the Falun Gong teachings forbid suicide, as well.
The owner of a gas station in China, who is an expert in fire control, recently spoke to a Minghui correspondent and raised three questions about the incident.
1. The Fire Blanket
The Chinese Central TV station (CCTV), which broadcast the footage of the hoax every day for several months, claimed that a policeman put out the fire on one of the victims by covering him with a fire blanket. But the blanket shown in the footage does not look like a real fire blanket.
A real fire blanket is made of asbestos. In China, only facilities, such as gas stations and combustible materials storage buildings, vehicles such as fire trucks and gasoline trucks, etc., are equipped with them. Police cars do not routinely carry them on patrol.
More importantly, asbestos blankets are usually gray and weigh over 20 pounds. The average person needs two hands to carry one. However, in the CCTV footage, the policeman easily opened up a colorful blanket with one hand. It looked like an acrylic blanket that is commonly available in China.
Policeman holding what is claimed to be a “fire blanket” in CCTV footage.
2. The Fire Extinguishers
In the CCTV footage, the police carried a dozen fire extinguishers. All of them were 8-kilogram extinguishers. In China, however, this size extinguisher is only found in the facilities mentioned above. They are not carried in vehicles.
The size of the extinguisher is based on the vehicle. In China, an average-size van carries a single, one-kilogram extinguisher. A big bus might have one or two 2.5-kilogram extinguishers. Even the largest gas truck is only equipped with two 4-kilogram ones. It is highly unlikely that the police in the footage would have been carrying more than ten 8-kilogram extinguishers in their vans, unless that they'd need them that day.
3. The Fire Itself
Different combustible materials burn differently. As an expert working in this field for more than 20 years, I have seen all kinds of materials burn, especially gasoline. The CCTV claims that those people poured gasoline on themselves, but after watching the footage many times, I've concluded that it was not a gasoline fire.
Gasoline has a special property. When it catches fire, it will spread instantly. The flames shoot up at the very beginning and then quickly die down. The whole thing is very quick, so it is not easy to capture it on film unless the camera is set up and ready to go before hand.
Yet somehow the CCTV showed very clear footage of the entire event. To my mind, there are only two possibilities that could have allowed this.
First, something other than gasoline was set on fire, so that it lasted long enough for the CCTV to take the video. Or, secondly, the TV station knew about it beforehand, so they had already set up the camera, waiting for it to happen.
Either way, the CCTV lied about it.
https://en.minghui.org/html/articles/2021/1/26/190091.html
