User talk:49.195.103.117

March 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 00:55, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

you clearly are not familiar with her work. I have read declass cables and all media reports in 89 at university and was SHOCKED..i am like L.K. Cheah, Toronto - and kate reports were one of the ones most contradicted by the declass cables. I will go to the library and retrieve sources as they aren't going anywhere but permanently documented. Cables can be read on wikileaks however. Many articles loosely support the impression that Chinese troops and tanks fired indiscriminately into the crowds of students, massacring thousands of them on June 4, 1989 as they "refused" to clear the square. Many editors still promote that popular myth by saying Kate was at the square and witnessed the atrocity of the "democracy" students being cleared with plenty of bloodshed. Except they already obedie tly left the sqaure without need for violence but people like chai ling, student leader Wu’er Kaixi, etc made up verbal stories that were OBVIOUSLY false and too many journalists in the BBC said they saw the shooting in the square. But later evidence proved them as liars. https://www.unz.com/article/tiananmen-square-1989-revisited/ ..i can tell that you are unwilling to acknowledge that SHE wasn't at the sqaure and her narrative that she saw mass shooting there yet her crew in the square, somehow never gave visual evidence of active mass firing. I already gave sources from us embassy cables and people who were at the square, that showed she cannot possibly be telling the truth and wiki editors can not mislead people anymore by NOW HIDING the lies that she claims to be the only jourmalist crew out in the square, and saw people mass fired in that location. Like chai ling, student leader Wu’er Kaixi, or the inaccurate BBC massacre report, filed from that out-of-sight Beijing Hotel. Kate was already exposed as a liar by the info in Wikileaks that showed the students on the square were not made to leave with violence, but They ALL left without any violence needed. However western articles do not often talk about the dishonesy of chai ling, student leader Wu’er Kaixi or kate but the evidence is already public knowledge on what happened in the square that night. I'm not going to argue with you as i got my own life to attend for now, but wikipedia should not promote dishonest myths otherwise this would no longer be a neutral place - i will return and show exactly what kate had said about what happened at the sqaure and show how that is now disproven as fake facts. I am an aussie that refuses to throw my integrity away to promote a false myth when evidence of declassified gov embassy cables and eyewitnesses has shown the larger story and all the Documented lie that are obviously cannot be denied anymore to PUSH atrocity propganda. Majority of westerners thanks to kate, still thinks soldiers arrived at the square and then immediately shot them all. 49.195.103.117 (talk) 05:26, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Same editor?

Appears to be doing same repeated edits as User:49.180.0.62. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 00:57, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

if you want me to confirm, it's not like I deliberately able to change ips, they change automatically itself but all the edits from australia done on talk and article, today and yesterday are OBVIOUSLY from me. Don't try to spin it and make a false claim that I socked. I HAVE ZERO REASONS OR NEED to deliberately change ip addresses and never claimed EVER to be different people49.195.103.117 (talk) 04:58, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

---