Self-immolation incident in Tian'anmen Square

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The self-immolation incident in Tian'anmen Square (also known as Tiananmen Square) ( Traditional Chinese abbreviation 天安門 自焚 事件, Hanyu Pinyin Tian'anmén Zìfén Shìjiàn) occurred on the eve of the Chinese New Year , January 23, 2001, in central Beijing . The incident is controversial: Chinese government sources claim that five followers of Falun Gong (also known as Falun Dafa ), a spiritual practice persecuted in mainland China, burned themselves in Tian'anmen Square . Falun Gong sources questioned the accuracy of these accounts and pointed out that Falun Gong's teaching expressly forbids violence and suicide. In addition, several Western journalists and scholars found that there was inconsistency in the government's reports, suggesting that the government orchestrated the self-immolations to discredit Falun Gong.

According to the Chinese state media, a group of seven people from Henan Province traveled to Beijing and five of them set themselves on fire in Tiananmen Square. One of them, Liu Chunling, died under unexplained circumstances right on Tiananmen Square; 12-year-old Liu Siying reportedly died in hospital several weeks later; three survived. The incident was reported in international media. A week later, the state television broadcaster China Central Television (CCTV) broadcast video footage of the incident across the People's Republic of China. In the Chinese press, the event was used as evidence of how "dangerous" Falun Gong is and used to legitimize the government campaign against the group, ie the persecution of Falun Gong .

However, the official account of the events was soon scrutinized. Two weeks after the self-immolation incident, the Washington Post published an investigation into the identity of the two "suicide victims" who had died. It turned out that "no one had ever seen them practice Falun Gong." Additional evidence from journalists and international observers indicated that the Chinese authorities had prior knowledge of the "self-immolation".

Human Rights Watch wrote that the incident was "one of the toughest stories for reporters in Beijing to report" because of the lack of independent information. The "self-immolation victims" were only available to reporters from China's state press. International media and even family members of the victims were denied contact with them. A wide variety of opinions and interpretations of what might have happened then emerged. These included that the incident may have been set up by the government to slander Falun Gong; it may have been an authentic protest; who immersed themselves may have been "new or untrained" Falun Gong practitioners; and other views.

The state propaganda media campaign that followed the event destroyed the public sympathy for Falun Gong that had continued until then. The Time noted that many Chinese had previously had the feeling that Falun Gong is not a real threat, and that the crackdown of the state against their supporters had gone too far. However, after the self-immolation, the media campaign against Falun Gong gained significant ground. Posters, brochures, and videos were produced detailing the alleged harmful effects of the Falun Gong practice, and anti-Falun Gong classes were even held regularly in schools. CNN compared the Chinese government's propaganda initiative to past political movements such as the Korean War and the Cultural Revolution . Later, when public opinion turned against Falun Gong, the Chinese authorities began approving the "systematic use of force" to eradicate Falun Gong. In the year after the incident, the detention, torture, and death of detained Falun Gong practitioners increased significantly.

background

Main article: History of Falun Gong

Falun Gong practitioners demonstrated peacefully in front of the Zhongnanhai Government Building in April 1999 to call for an end to the official harassment of practitioners. Soon after, a nationwide persecution began.

Falun Gong, also known as Falun Dafa, is a form of spiritual qigong practice that includes exercises and meditation , as well as a philosophy from the Buddhist and Taoist traditions. It was introduced in the spring of 1992 by Li Hongzhi in northeast China. It had tens of millions of followers by the late 1990s. Falun Gong enjoyed official recognition and support in the early years of its development. In the mid-1990s, however, the Chinese authorities tried to curb the growth of qigong practices and therefore imposed stricter requirements on the various qigong schools in the country. In 1996, Falun Gong quit the state qigong society, which resulted in increased criticism and surveillance by the country's security apparatus and propaganda department.

On April 22nd, 1999, several dozen Falun Gong practitioners in Tianjin City were beaten and arrested while they were holding a peaceful sit-down strike. Practitioners were told that the arrest warrant was from the Ministry of Public Security and that those arrested could only be released with the approval of the Beijing authorities.

As a result, on April 25, 1999, about 10,000 Falun Gong practitioners gathered peacefully near the Zhongnanhai government site in Beijing to demand the release of Tianjin practitioners and an end to the escalation of harassment against them. It was an effort by Falun Gong practitioners to seek redress from the political leaders by going up to them and "but very quietly and politely making it clear that they were not being treated so shabbily." This was the first mass demonstration at the Zhongnanhai site in the history of the People's Republic of China and the largest protest in Beijing since 1989. Several representatives of Falun Gong spoke to then Prime Minister Zhu Rongji , who assured them that the government was not against Falun Gong. and promised them that the Tianjin practitioners would be released. After that, the crowd broke up peacefully, apparently believing that their demonstration was a success.

However, that evening, the then head of the Communist Party, Jiang Zemin, issued the decision to eradicate Falun Gong. At Jiang's direction, on June 7th, 1999, a special "Falun Gong Central Leadership Group" was established within the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party to carry out the persecution and direct the implementation of the persecution. The resulting organization was called the 610 Office (since established on June 10th). The main functions of the 610 Office include coordinating anti-Falun Gong propaganda, monitoring and collecting information, and punishing and "transforming" Falun Gong practitioners. The office has reportedly been involved in extrajudicial convictions, as well as forced relocation, torture, and sometimes the killing of Falun Gong practitioners.

So the 610 Office took on the role of coordinating media coverage of Falun Gong in the state-controlled press. It also influenced other party and state institutions such as courts and security agencies. On July 19th, the Communist Party Central Committee issued a document prohibiting the practice of Falun Gong. Hundreds of practitioners were arrested by the security forces the following day.

The persecution that followed was marked by a "massive propaganda campaign" intended to legitimize the persecution by portraying Falun Gong as superstitious, dangerous and inconsistent with official ideology. Tens of thousands of Falun Gong practitioners have been detained, and in late 1999 the first reports of torture used in detention surfaced. According to Ian Johnson , extensive orders have been issued to the authorities to eradicate Falun Gong and force practitioners to reform. It was not checked which procedures and measures were used. This led to the widespread use of torture, sometimes fatal.

Tian'anmen Square was one of the main meeting places where Falun Gong practitioners gathered to protest the persecution. They usually held up banners in defense of their practice or held a sit-in to meditate peacefully. Ian Johnson estimated in the Wall Street Journal that over 30,000 practitioners had been arrested as of April 25, 2000; most of them on their way to Tiananmen Square as they tried to demonstrate for Falun Gong in Beijing. On January 1, 2001, seven hundred Falun Gong practitioners were arrested during a demonstration in Tian'anmen Square.

Chinese authorities fought to raise public opinion against Falun Gong in the early years of the persecution. On the contrary, the campaign received criticism from across the spectrum of Chinese society. Some commentators even put comparisons Cultural Revolution and the persecution of Jews in the Nazi era on. According to Human Rights Watch, "the frustration of leaders with the failure of their efforts to quickly and thoroughly dissolve Falun Gong was also evident in their media campaign." The state press admitted in late 2000 that Falun Gong continued to protest in defiance of the illegal prohibition, proclaiming that "the masses must be made to understand the length, complexity and cruelty of our battle against Falun Gong." . In January 2001, the Chinese authorities launched a new wave of propaganda to discredit Falun Gong, calling on state media organizations to slander the group.

The event

On January 23, 2001, the day before the Chinese New Year, five people poured gasoline on their clothes in Tiananmen Square and then set them on fire.

A CNN film crew who were on a routine check-up in Tian'anmen Square over a possible Falun Gong protest observed a man sit on the pavement northeast of the People's Heroes Monument in the center of the square is located. He poured gasoline on himself and set himself on fire. The police quickly rushed to him and put out the flames. Shortly afterwards, another four people set themselves on fire in the square. One of the four, a man, was arrested and driven away in a police car.

CNN reported that five people, including two men, set themselves on fire after pouring gasoline on themselves. No child had been seen among the self-immolators. The CNN cameraman tried to film the event, but was immediately arrested by military police and his equipment was confiscated. The police put out the flames that had burned the other four people's clothing. A police car came to take the badly burned man. Two ambulances did not arrive until 25 minutes later to take the other four away. The square was completely closed and security checkpoints were extremely strict the next day, the most important traditional Chinese holiday. The police monitored the public who came to Tian'anmen Square for the New Year celebrations, provided fire extinguishers, and prevented Falun Gong practitioners from displaying banners.

The state-run Xinhua News Agency named seven people believed to have been involved in the incident: Wang Jindong, Liu Chunling and their daughter Liu Siying, Hao Huijun and their daughter Chen Guo, who set themselves on fire, and Liu Baorong and Liu Yunfang. Liu Chunling reportedly died on the spot. A few months later, state media reported the death of her daughter Liu Siying, who, according to state news, was hospitalized with severe burns after the incident. It was reported that the other three were "badly disfigured." However, Beijing refused to see and interview the survivors to Western journalists to see for themselves. Only China's central television network CCTV and the official New China news agency were allowed to speak to their relatives and colleagues.

Chinese media reports

Xinhua released details of the incident to foreign media two hours after the self-immolation incident. In response to other media reports of the incident, Xinhua issued a more complete press release seven days later on January 30th. Then on January 31 , the state version of the events was presented to the Chinese public in a 30-minute special edition of the Current Affairs Forum program . The state-owned China Central Television (CCTV) broadcast footage of five people on fire. The scenes are said to have been recorded by surveillance cameras nearby.

The Chinese authorities said the seven people, all believed to be from Kaifeng City, Henan Province, came to Tian'anmen Square with the intention of burning themselves. The state-run Xinhua News Agency claimed that the self-immolators were "avid practitioners" of Falun Gong who started the practice between 1994 and 1997 and had fantasized about "how nice it would be to go to heaven" the previous week. Six of them are reported to have taken the train on January 16 and met with Chen Guo after arriving in Beijing. The seven are said to have agreed to smuggle gasoline in plastic bottles onto the square on the designated day and to pour gasoline and light themselves at various points on the square at 2:30 p.m. Each of them is said to have had two lighters with them in case one should not work. According to the government-run China Association for Cult Studies website , Wang Jindong later stated that the group had arrived in two taxis south of the People's Great Hall in Tian'anmen Square they went to the places where they wanted to set themselves on fire. Wang said that the police came up to him when he opened the plastic bottle, so he quickly caught fire without taking the lotus position. A press release from the Chinese government said that the police prevented Liu Yunfang from burning himself. Liu is said to have justified her failed attempt at self-immolation with the fact that she should not have reached the "required spiritual level".

Yangcheng Evening News and Southern Daily reported that the police had evidence that some foreign journalists had prior knowledge of the incident, and suggested that such reporters could be charged with "inciting and aiding and abetting suicide." State media claimed surveillance videos showed six or seven reporters from CNN, Associated Press (AP) and Agence France-Presse (AFP) who arrived just ten minutes before the self-immolations. However, this allegation of prior knowledge of the incident was denied by all three agencies. The AP and AFP testified that they had no reporters at all at the time, and CNN news chief Eason Jordan stated that the CNN crew was there for a routine check for a possible protest by Falun Gong, as it was had come to such a protest a year ago.

Feedback from Falun Gong

Immediately after the self-immolation, the Falun Dafa Information Center declared that the self-immolators could not have been Falun Gong practitioners. It was emphasized that Falun Gong's teaching does not condone any form of violence and that suicide is considered a great sin. The Falun Dafa Information Center also called on the Chinese government to allow foreign media and human rights organizations to investigate the incident and clarify the facts.

Falun Gong sources overseas questioned the Chinese government's official reports on the event. Obvious contradictions in official government narratives led to the assumption that the self-immolation may have been staged by the government to justify the persecution of Falun Gong by portraying the practitioners as irrational and suicidal. Under this assumption, the self-immolators may have been paid actors, presumably assured that the flames will be put out before they can do any real damage.

Analysis of the overall events

In addition to Falun Gong sources such as the World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong (WOIPFG) and the Falun Dafa Information Center, other observers attended the overall events. Based on the review of the CCTV footage, New Tang Dynasty Television produced the documentary False Fire , which was awarded the Certificate of Honorable Mention at the 51st Columbus International Film & Video Festival. False Fire analyzed the inconsistencies in the coverage of the official Chinese media and pointed to several inconsistencies in the version of the Chinese government's history. Among other things, the CCTV footage shows that the self-immolators wore fireproof clothing and masks, and the question is raised as to why the self-immolators' hair did not burn and the plastic bottles filled with gasoline did not ignite. Falun Gong sources also noted that the self-immolators' behavior, the slogans they shouted, and their meditation posture were inconsistent with the teachings of Falun Gong. Other media outlets investigating the overall incident included the Washington Post, CNN and Media Channel. In addition to the media, human rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Freedom House, The Jamestown Foundation, Amnesty International and the Laogai Foundation, as well as other observers, looked into the events to find out what really happened.

The inconsistencies in the reporting of the state-controlled media in China uncovered by the investigators are presented below as a summarizing analysis:

logistics

Fire Prevention Equipment : The Beijing Evening News reported February 16 that three to four police officers put out the fires on each self-immolator. The police are said to have had a total of 25 fire protection equipment. This raised the question of where the fire protection equipment was before the self-immolation. The Guardian's John Gittings wrote that the police used small fire extinguishers such as those on public vehicles; many of them are regularly on the pitch. But when the incident was broadcast by CCTV, it can be seen that only two police vehicles were at the scene of the incident. Since Tiananmen Square police officers do not normally carry firefighting equipment with them and the closest building to the scene was ten minutes away, observers assumed that the 25 firefighting kits were in the two police cars. Since these had been parked directly at the scene of the incident, the fire extinguishers could be accessed immediately, otherwise the police would not have been able to put out the fire within a minute. Because of this, it was assumed that the police must have known about this incident in advance.

Film cameras and recordings : A surveillance camera that recorded the entire square could not only pan back and forth, but also zoom in and out in order to precisely follow the event. Since surveillance cameras are usually fixed in Tiananmen Square, it was believed that this camera was installed in advance of the event so that the cameraman could follow the whole incident. Philip Pan was suspicious of the way the cameras were positioned and the fact that the close-ups that were shown on Chinese television could be captured without police interference. "In some [scenes] the camera can be clearly seen behind the police barricades and positioned directly over the apparent group," said Pan in the Washington Post. In addition, the footage from the panning surveillance camera showed a man with a camera bag on his back who was filming the scene with a small handheld camera instead of using a large one used for television coverage without being stopped by police officers. Since the recordings of Wang Jindong and Liu Chunlin took place almost simultaneously, the question arose whether several cameramen were on site. John Gittings said that it is common practice in many countries for police cameramen to be present when a disturbance of public order is expected. However, the Chinese media claimed that the close-ups in their video footage were not from police officers, but from confiscated CNN tapes recorded by CNN journalists. CNN's news chief Eason Jordan denied the claim because the CNN cameraman was arrested immediately after the incident began and was unable to record.

State TV team and police response time : The Age reported that the "availability of fire extinguishers and official TV crews and the lack of verification of the victims" raises the question of whether authorities had prior knowledge of the self-immolations. The police had extinguished all fires with numerous fire extinguishers within 90 seconds. Age quoted a European journalist: “I have never seen Tiananmen police officers patrol with fire extinguishers. Why were they all here today? The location of the incident was at least 20 minutes from the nearest building (the Great Hall of the People). ”Although the police were able to put out the fires in less than a minute, close-ups were taken of the victims and the cameramen - unlike the crew of CNN - not prevented.

Ambulance response time : According to Chinese media reports, three ambulances from the Beijing Emergency Medical Center arrived at the site of the self-immolation incident less than seven minutes after the incident began and immediately took the injured to the best care center for burn victims, Jishuitan Hospital. However, CNN reported that police left the victims on the ground even when one of them waved his hands to the police and asked for help. It wasn't until 25 minutes after the incident that two ambulances arrived to take the victims away. However, regardless of whether the victims were taken away at around 2:48 p.m. or 3:10 p.m., Jishuitan Hospital is only 10 km from Tian'anmen Square. Nevertheless, all burn victims were not brought in until after 5 p.m., almost 2½ hours later. This raised the question of what had happened to the allegedly seriously injured victims during those two hours.

Those involved in the self-immolation incident

The Chinese media reported that a man, three women and a child were set on fire. However, CNN reporters, who were only 15 meters from the self-immolators, said that there were three women and two men but no children among the self-immolators. After Wang Jindong set himself on fire, the CNN cameraman was arrested by the police, but saw four other people set themselves on fire, including a man. The man has not yet been identified.

Wang Jindong

Wang Jindong is said to have been one of the main organizers. According to CCTV, Wang Jindong set himself on fire at 2:41 pm on January 23, 2001. He was immediately surrounded by police officers with fire extinguishers and the fire was put out in less than a minute. In the footage, CCTV shows a police officer behind Wang Jindong, who is holding a fire blanket behind his back and waiting. Only when Wang calls does he throw the blanket over him. Since the fire at Wang was extinguished in less than a minute and a cameraman was able to film immediately from the best camera position, it was assumed that this scene was prepared. This assumption was supported because Wang could shout loudly and clearly, although the airways are first attacked in a fire due to the smoke and the hot air. Still, Wang was able to shout out loud and clear, "This universal Dafa is something that everyone needs to achieve." However, his statement was not from Falun Gong's teachings, since only predestined ones can obtain the Fa. However, Wang's words were the basis for Xinhua's claim that the self-immolators were Falun Gong practitioners. Another indication that Wang might not have been a Falun Gong practitioner is his sitting posture, because Wang does not sit in the single or double lotus position, although according to Xinhua he has been practicing since 1996. According to observers, Wang assumed the seated posture of Chinese soldiers. However, in a television interview with CCTV, Wang later claimed that he had been sitting in a simple lotus position for lack of time, which the video recording disproves. The CCTV footage also refutes Wang's statement that he stood up and called out standing after the police put out the fire. Xinhua released another statement contradicting the footage on January 30, 2001. It reported that Wang shouted the above sentence within the burning flames and dark smoke, but footage showing Wang in flames has never been released that the fire was put out by police officers.

Further indications for the assumption of a fabricated scene:

  • Wrong hand position: Wang shows the wrong hand position, overlapping the thumbs instead of forming a seal like in Falun Gong.
  • Fire protection clothing : Wang appears to be wearing multiple layers, possibly fire protection clothing. His face was also covered with a mask up to the hairline. Human hair is known to burn quickly and the media reported that Wang was severely burned, but the footage shows that his hair was not damaged. However, on February 16, 2001, the Beijing Evening News reported that police officers "took Wang Jindong, whose hair was completely burned, to the police car." Wang is said to have remained cross-legged even during the fire. But it is known that burn victims report immense pain, so that it is not possible to sit still. This reinforced the belief that Wang might have been wearing fire-resistant clothing.
  • Drunk gasoline: Government officials alleged that Wang drank gasoline from the plastic bottle and spilled the rest on his clothes before setting himself on fire. However, 1/10 ounce of gasoline per pound of body weight is fatal. However, Wang remained seated during and after the fire with no evidence of poisoning.
  • Undamaged plastic bottle with gasoline: The footage shows the plastic bottle between Wang's legs, which remained untouched by the flames, although it is said to have been full of gasoline, which raised the question of how this could be possible. Wang later told CCTV that he hung the plastic bottle with the gasoline around his neck and then hid it under his armpit with tape. Then he would have put on a wool sweater to hide the bottle. When the police came up to him, he cut the bottle through his sweater with a knife so that gasoline leaked out, which he quickly ignited. However, the CCTV footage shows an intact plastic bottle between Wang's legs after police put out the fire.
    In early 2002, Li Yuqiang, program manager of the Focal Point program on CCTV, which did several anti-Falun Gong programs, went to a brainwashing center in Shijiazhuang , capital of Hebei Province , to question Falun Gong practitioners. When asked about the plastic bottle between Wang's legs, she frankly admitted that the police had only put the Sprite bottle between Wang Jindong's legs after the fire had been extinguished and the scene was set. Li confirmed that the scene was arranged to convince the audience that Falun Gong practitioners set themselves on fire. She also made it clear that she would not have shot the scene if it had been clear that the recording would cast doubt.
  • Directional microphone directly on Wang's face: In the image-by-image analysis, a directional microphone can be seen on the left edge of the image, which is aimed directly at Wang's face. The camera position changes quickly so that the microphone can no longer be seen. This observation confirmed that a recording device was placed near Wang Jinding to get a clear and distinct recording of Wang's calls. Observers believe that several people were filming Wang at the same time, and that the cameras may have been placed before the self-immolation incident. Since Wang's entire scene lasted less than 1 minute, otherwise it would not have been possible to get a clear and distinct sound recording.
  • Time of Transportation to Hospital : After the filming, Wang Jindong was immediately taken away in a police car, while all other self-immolators had to wait 25 minutes for an ambulance. However, although Jishuitan Hospital is only 10 km from Tian'anmen Square and an emergency police car would take less than 20 minutes to the hospital, Wang Jindong was not admitted until 5:00 p.m. This led to the question of where the police car was going and what happened to Wang Jindong during those two hours.
  • Multiple identities? : While covering the event, CCTV showed a picture of Wang before he allegedly self-immolated. This image is very different from the person filmed after the self-immolation. On the one hand, the hairline is completely different in both, on the other hand, the ears. One picture shows a person with long, well-fitting ears, while the self-immersed person has protruding and small ears. WOIPFG drew attention to three appearances of Wang Jindong on state television. The question arose as to whether the man who allegedly set himself on fire in the square was the same person who appeared on CCTV in the three subsequent interviews. A language analysis conducted by the Language Processing Laboratory at Taiwan National University found that the Tiananmen self-immolator differed from Wang Jindong in the Focus interview . The language processing laboratory also found that “the 'Wang Jindong' shown in the first Focus interview was not the same person as the 'Wang Jindong' shown in the second and third interviews”. The hairline and facial proportions of both men also differed. These observations solidified the assumption that the self-immolators were commissioned actors.
  • When did Wang Jindong become a Falun Gong practitioner? : Five reports by the Chinese media published between April 8, 2002 and April 7, 2003 contradicted each other on when Wang Jindong allegedly became a Falun Gong practitioner. On April 8, 2002, the Zhongxin News Agency reported that Wang and Xue Hongjun became Falun Gong practitioners between 1999 and 2000. However, Xinhua.net Geneva published on April 24, 2002 that Wang's family started practicing Falun Gong in 1997. On May 19, 2002, in Zengzhou , Xinhua contradicted this statement and said that although Wang introduced his daughter to Falun Gong, his wife did not begin practicing Falun Gong until two years later. Guangming Daily reported that Wang's entire family started practicing in 1996. And finally, on April 7, 2003, Xinhua reported that Xue Hongjun took Wang to Falun Gong, which was between 1999 and 2000.

Liu Chunlin

Xinhua claimed that Liu Chunling, the only person who died on the spot, died from her burns. However, analysis of the CCTV video revealed that Liu died from a severe blow to the head. The picture-to-picture analysis shows that while Liu is fighting in the fire, something is knocking him down. The object, a stick or iron, hits her head and flies upwards. Before the object hits, an arm can be seen moving quickly towards Liu's head. At the same time, a stout man in a military coat can be seen standing exactly where the item came from. The force with which Liu's head was hit caused her to collapse immediately. The analysis raised the question of whether Liu really set herself on fire and why she was knocked down instead of saving her life.

While the state news agency Xinhua reported to Liu Chunling's adoptive mother that Liu was obsessed with Falun Gong, adored Li Hongzhi, and taught Falun Gong to her daughter, Phillip Pan of the Washington Post found that most of the residents of Kaifeng were themselves felt ashamed by those officially reported (of the self-immolation incident), but none of Liu's neighbors had ever seen her practice Falun Gong. On the contrary, her neighbors said that there were problems between Liu and her mother, and they observed that Liu repeatedly beat both her mother and daughter. This contradicts Falun Gong's requirements for practitioners to be kind and lenient. Pan also learned that Liu "worked in a nightclub and received money from men to keep them company." According to David Ownby, a historian at the University of Montreal and an expert on Falun Gong, Pan's portrayal of Liu Chunlin is in stark contrast to the typical profile of a Falun Gong practitioner.

According to the government report "Documenting Self-Immolation," dated January 30, 2001, Liu allegedly started practicing Falun Gong before March 1999, before the persecution began. However, when Philip Pan found out that none of her neighbors had ever seen her practice in public (as was the practice until the persecution began), it attracted a great deal of international attention. To cover up these inconsistencies, Xinhua changed history and reported on the Xinhua news program in February 2001 that Liu only started practicing at home after the persecution began, so that her neighbors would not hear. All of these disagreements raised doubts as to whether Liu Chunlin was really a Falun Gong practitioner.

Liu Siying

Liu Siying was Liu Chunlin's 12-year-old daughter. According to government reports, her mother forced her to set herself on fire. However, a CNN producer who was on the scene at the beginning of the event and only about 15 meters from the self-immolators reported that there were no children among the self-immolators. The CCTV television program shows that the girl was interviewed by a reporter in an ambulance. The ambulance was only allowed to leave after the sound recording and a close-up of her face. The close-up of her face clearly showed that the girl was wearing a mask with black and yellow patterns. Since Liu was badly burned, according to media reports, the question arose as to why the child was not immediately taken to the hospital and whether the recordings were for later use.

No interview by independent journalists : Several observers testified that foreign journalists were not allowed to interview self-immolation victims who were recovering in hospitals. According to David Ownby, the victims' relatives were not allowed to speak to them either. The authorities even threatened her grandmother so severely that she panicked no matter which reporter tried to question her. Philip Pan wrote that “Beijing refused requests to interview Liu Siying and the three other survivors, who were all in the hospital ... An official from Kaifeng said only the state-run China Central Television (CCTV) and the official news agency reported news China were allowed to speak to their relatives or their colleagues. A man guarding the door to Liu's home referred questions to the government ”. Since foreign reporters were not allowed to talk to the self-immolators, including Liu Siying, inconsistencies could only be pointed out based on the Chinese reporting, which cast doubt on the authenticity of the reporting.

Talking and singing despite the tracheostomy : Chinese media reported that the girl had suffered severe burns and therefore had a tracheostomy . A tracheostomy involves inserting a tube into the windpipe below the vocal cords to allow the patient to breathe. Since the patient no longer breathes through the mouth, no air can get to the vocal cords, preventing them from talking. It takes many days for the tube to fit in adults, even longer in children. If the patient then wants to speak, he has to close the tube, but his voice remains unclear and interrupted. However, even though Liu Siying had undergone a tracheostomy just four days before the interview, according to government sources, she was able to speak to CCTV reporters and explain that her own mother had told her to set herself on fire to "the heavenly." golden kingdom ”. A doctor at Jishuitan Hospital said, “It was impossible for Liu's voice to be that loud and clear. It seems that CCTV has done something here. ”According to a pediatrician, China expert Danny Schechter also doubted that the child could have been able to speak to the Chinese media so quickly after a tracheostomy, let alone sing. However, CCTV showed a completely different picture in the interview with Liu. Just four days after the operation, Liu was able to speak clearly and loudly with the reporter and even sing.

Liu's treatment in the hospital : Liu's treatment in the hospital raised further questions. According to medical standards, patients with extensive burns are placed in an isolated room, since the burned areas must be exposed to the air. The isolation prevents infection and makes it easier for staff to clean wounds and administer medication. Doctors and nurses must wear face masks and sterile clothing. However, the CCTV footage shows a different picture. Liu is lying in an open room and her burned body is wrapped in thick bandages. Furthermore, neither the nurse nor the reporter wear face masks and sterile clothing. Observers wondered why a patient with such severe burns is treated so unusually.

Liu Siying's Death : Two months after the alleged self-immolation in Tiananmen Square, the hospital released a report that Liu Siying died suddenly on March 17th. In CCTV coverage, Liu appears on the mend. Medical staff who treated Liu at Jishuitan Hospital also testified that "Liu Siying died suddenly when her burns were more or less healed, her health was basically restored, and she was about to be discharged from the hospital. The cause of her death is very suspicious ”. On March 16, the EKG and other tests showed normal values. However, on March 17th, between 11:00 am and 12:00 pm, Liu became critically ill and died shortly thereafter. Hospital staff reported that between eight and nine o'clock in the morning, Liu was visited by the head of the hospital and the head of the Medical Administration Division in Beijing, who talked to her for a long time. "At that time, Liu was still very lively and active." The autopsy report was not given to Liu's doctors. The hospital only made a statement that her death was likely related to a heart muscle problem.

Based on the CNN producer's statement that no children had been among the self-immolators, and CCTV reporting to the contrary, observers asked themselves several questions: Is this 12-year-old girl who will be back in just four days after a tracheotomy and major burn operation could sing, really died? How could this have happened when she was already in strikingly remarkable shape? Why was she under such close surveillance that even her family was not allowed to visit her? Falun Gong sources argued that the government may have killed her to keep her silent.

Liu Baorong

Liu Baorong was not mentioned in the first Xinhua report, and there is no footage showing her. However, just a week after the incident, Liu appeared on CCTV, spoke against Falun Gong, and said that she had prepared to burn herself, but changed her mind at the last minute. Liu said that she drank half a bottle of gasoline that day and wanted to pour the rest on her clothes. This statement raised doubts, because even 1/10 ounce of gasoline per pound of body weight is fatal, and Liu drank half a bottle of gasoline, which was enough for her body weight to kill her. Still, Liu appeared on CCTV with no signs of at least severe symptoms of intoxication. Since Liu Baorong also had inconsistencies in two appearances on state television, WOIPFG also had Liu Baorong perform a speech analysis at the language processing laboratory of the National University of Taiwan. Here, too, it turned out that the Liu Baorong on the first appearance on the CCTV broadcast was not the same person as the Liu Baorong on the second appearance. CNN reported that when the self-immolators were convicted in August 2001, the court found Liu Baorong also guilty of murder, but did not punish her for admitting her crime and disclosing the others involved.

Xue Hongjun

Xue Hongjun is believed to have been one of the main organizers. Xue has been identified by the Chinese media as a supporter of the self-immolators, who allegedly provided them with shelter and helped prepare the incident. According to Zhongxin News on April 8, 2002, Xue stated that he started practicing Falun Gong a little over a year before the event, between 1999 and 2000. However, in 2003, Wang Jindong testified that he learned from Xue Hongjun in October 1996 is said to have been introduced to Falun Gong. Clearwisdom reported that Xue comes from Kaifeng and is said to have worked there first as a surgeon at the hospital and then in his own practice. Xue was later detained in a detention center in Beijing. Cellmates saw him as a heavy smoker who liked to boast. He especially pointed out what a great practitioner he was. However, his cigarette consumption and self-centered behavior were contrary to Falun Gong principles, so doubts arose that Xue was ever a follower of the teachings.

Liu Xiuqin

Liu Xiuqin was initially not mentioned in the reports and only appeared later in Wang Jindong's stories. When the verdict was announced in August 2001, Liu Xiuqin was sentenced for assistance. She is said to have made accommodation available to the actors and helped to get hold of the plastic bottles.

Liu Yunfang

Liu Yunfang was not mentioned initially and only appeared later in Wang Jindong's account of the incident, but never in person. According to Wang, it was said to have been in the square but not set on fire. Later, when the verdict was announced, Liu was identified as the mastermind who was believed to have printed leaflets to encourage Falun Gong practitioners to commit suicide. Foreign reporters could not interview Liu.

Hao Huijun and daughter Chen Guo

Nothing was reported at the beginning either about Hao Huijun and her daughter Chen Guo, who allegedly set themselves on fire in Tian'anmen Square. Both first appeared in Wang Jindong's stories. When the verdict was announced in August 2001, neither was mentioned either. It was not until April 2002 that the Chinese government arranged for foreign media to question the alleged survivors in the presence of state officials. Hao Huijun and daughter Chen Guo are said to have been among them.

The coverage of China

Urgent press releases for foreign media : Just two hours after the self-immolation incident, Xinhua broadcast the event, but initially only in English. It was broadcast in such an unusually short time that it surprised the foreign correspondents working in Beijing. According to Schechter, this was so unusual because sensitive topics are almost never reported in time in the Chinese press. The usual minutes are first approved by several party officials before publication. When asked by Philip Pan, Xinhua declined to comment, and the spokesman for the Ministry of Public Security did not answer any questions. Ian Johnson also watched the state media reporting "the deaths of the victims with unusual zeal," "suggesting that either the deaths had happened earlier than reported or the generally cautious media gaining approval from the top." Had level to hastily issue electronic reports and a television broadcast ”. In addition, during the previous 18 months of the persecution, China's state media had not released any photos or videos to foreign press media, adding to the surprise of journalists. It was also questioned why the state-controlled media reported the incident immediately but took a week to release the footage.

Li Yuqiang : During its research, WOIPFG found that Li Yuqiang admitted in 2002 that he had taken posed photographs of the self-immolation. Li Yuqiang was the chief reporter for Focal Point on CCTV at the time , which made several anti-Falun Gong programs by interviewing Falun Gong practitioners and then falsifying the interviews to discredit Falun Gong. In 2001, for example, Li Yuqiang visited Falun Gong practitioner Zhao Ming in Tuanhe Forced Labor Camp. Zhao Ming described the gathering as if Li Yuqiang was very supportive of Falun Gong, so he told her about his positive physical and mental experiences from practicing. Through the efforts of the Irish government and private initiatives, Zhao got out of the labor camp and was able to travel to Ireland. There he found that his interview with Li Yuqiang had been completely changed: “They were the same pictures, but changed the context of my words and placed them on top of my original words. It was the exact opposite of what I said and a direct attack on Falun Gong. [...] and they hid that they had tortured me. "

In early 2002, Li Yuqiang went to a brainwashing center in Shijiazhuang to interview Falun Gong practitioner Wang Bo. When asked about the plastic bottle between Wang Jindong's legs, she frankly admitted that the police did not put the Sprite bottle between Wang Jindong's legs until the fire was extinguished and the scene was set. Li confessed that the scene was arranged to convince viewers that Falun Gong practitioners set themselves on fire. She even admitted that she would not have shot the scene if it had been clear beforehand that the shot would cast doubt.

When other CCTV personnel from Focal Point was questioned , they said that Li Yuqiang was solely responsible for Falun Gong issues. She conducted interviews with detained Falun Gong practitioners and produced reports slandering Falun Gong for the print and TV media. In all of the filmed interviews, however, Li Yuqiang was never shown from the front, only a darkened silhouette could be seen, so that Li Yuqiang's identity has not been clarified to this day. In early 2003, WOIPFG received reports from Li Yuqiang that Li Yuqiang was not a simple reporter. "On countless cases, she has gone to labor camps and brainwashing centers across the country where Falun Gong practitioners have been detained to 'transform' them." Li is believed to have worked for the 610 Office . In 2001, Li Yuqiang was awarded 2nd place at the 12th China News Prize for her TV report on "Self- Immolation".

Contradictions in the Chinese media: Wang Jindong described in his personal statement that he first hung the plastic bottle with the gasoline around his neck and then tied it under his armpit with tape. Then he pulled a wool sweater over it. Then in Tiananmen Square, he slit open the clothes and bottle, threw away the knife, and took out the lighter. When the police approached him, he lit the gasoline. According to Wang's description, the gasoline on his body came from the bottle that he had placed under his armpit. However, on January 30th, Xinhua reported that Wang was sitting cross-legged on the floor, continuously pouring gasoline from a green bottle on his body and then setting it on fire. In the film footage, the bottle could then be seen intact between Wang's legs.

"Beyond the Limit of Forbearance"

Some observers speculated, based on the assumption that the participants might have been Falun Gong practitioners, that they might have immolated themselves in response to a new scripture from the founder. On January 1st, 2001, Li Hongzhi released the book "Beyond Forbearance" for publication. A collection of articles written by Falun Gong practitioners in mainland China and published on the Chinese-language Falun Gong website noted that the script caused confusion among both Falun Gong practitioners and "society" some wondered if Falun Gong could use violence to withstand the persecution. However, the collection's authors wrote that this would not happen because violence is both counterproductive and contrary to the teachings of practice. A Falun Gong spokesman clarified that the new scripture indicated that it was time to "bring the truth to light" because of the human rights abuses committed by the Chinese government. However, Gittings found that the writing may have puzzled followers of Falun Gong, especially in China, and Matthew Forney wrote in Time magazine that Li's message had spread to China via the Internet and informal networks of followers, speculating that that maybe there could have been more radical practitioners there.

David Ownby found the short message "difficult to interpret": On its surface, the script resembled a "call to arms" against what Li described as "evil beings who no longer have any human nature or righteous disposition". However, none of the practitioners Ownby spoke to saw this writing as a “green light” for violent acts. Instead, practitioners interpreted it to mean that they could withstand the suppression without guilt. They could now stop “just at the first moment of a confrontation, to surrender to the police. They could run away, organize, they were - in a word - free from any restrictions on the need for 'forbearance' that had previously been placed on them ”. In an interview with the Washington Post, Ownby stated that Li did not approve of suicide in any of his recent statements, "but a practitioner at the end of his tether in China could certainly and maybe take [the statements] as confirmation of the ordeal." choose his or her own means to achieve that. "

On February 1, 2001, a press release was issued by Falun Gong regarding the misunderstanding: "Some readers, Falun Dafa practitioners and others, have interpreted the concept of" forbearance "as meaning that all passively and quietly endure it Injustices meant. However, through the scripture "Beyond the Limits of Forbearance," Li Hongzhi explains that exposing the crimes of the communist regime during the crackdown is compatible with the principles of Falun Dafa. For example, it is not against the principle of forbearance to appeal against the unjust persecution, nor is it wrong to speak out actively and nonviolently against the brutality, torture and sexual abuse of the police. In the past 18 months, Falun Dafa practitioners in China have never resorted to violence. Your commitment to finding a peaceful solution to the crackdown is clear, and that will never change. "

Reactions

After the incident, the inconsistencies in the process, the possible identities of the people involved, and the coverage of the Chinese media remained the subject of discussion among representatives of Falun Gong, the Chinese government and other observers. However, as there was no independent confirmation of the claims by the Chinese government, the allegation of "fabricated self-immolation to discredit Falun Gong" could not be refuted.

According to Human Rights Watch it was extremely difficult for reporters in Beijing due to the lack of independent information about the event to report on this incident. The New York Times wrote that conflicting claims were difficult to gauge, "mainly because the rest of the Falun Gong practitioners were driven underground," but also because of "propaganda pouring in apparently from opposite ends of the universe. .. ".

Philip Pan's investigation and other inconsistencies highlighted by Falun Gong organizations led some journalists and other observers to believe that the self-immolation was not as manageable as official Chinese media reports had suggested.

media

Time / Guardian - Conflicting Views: Time magazine reported confusion surrounding the conflicting views of self-immolation. Some Beijing Falun Gong practitioners seemed to accept that the self-immolators could have been practitioners engaged in a protest, while Falun Gong organizations abroad denied any involvement. Time speculated that a "lack of solidarity" in Falun Gong may have contributed to the despair of mainland China practitioners because they may have lost contact with the exiled leadership. The Guardian's John Gittings reported that some observers believed it was possible that the self-immolators acted in despair and confusion.

World Journal - one more lie is no problem for them: Justin Yu of the World Journal referred to the confusion many Chinese people had about what to believe and what not to believe. According to Yu, the Chinese government's propaganda campaign against Falun Gong is based on an understanding of recent events in Asian history, such as the self-immolation of the 73-year-old Buddhist monk in Saigon or the hara-kiri in Japan. In the case of Falun Gong, however, Yu states that the situation is not clear and asks, “Who do we believe? The communists? You have already lied to us so often, another lie is no problem for you. "

Danny Schechter - Threaded by the Chinese Government: In his book on Falun Gong (2001), journalist and media critic Danny Schechter referred to evidence from Falun Gong sources, Philip Pan and interviews with other journalists, and concluded that that the self-immolation was orchestrated by the Chinese government. Schechter made it clear that “in relation to the circumstances surrounding this event”, a great deal remains unclear. “Nobody knows what happened in the week after the incident and until the news and television programs were completely fabricated by the Chinese media. We must remember that the Chinese regime strictly controls every aspect of this incident and that none of the claims made by Xinhua have been confirmed by independent sources. "

Schechter asked some media colleagues why they, instead of exercising the usual journalistic care, had simply taken over the media propaganda of the Chinese government, ie "why the deeply rooted, institutionalized skepticism of our own media has crumbled so quickly in the face of what was going on smells like a fabricated incident that is blatantly exploited for political reasons? ”Schechter questioned why some American news outlets had been so gullible:“ Is it because of the touch of spirituality and mysticism in a culture that few of us understand, some of is uncomfortable for us in your journalistic practice? "

More observers

Francesco Sisci - Failure to Arrest Foreign Journalists: Francesco Sisci, Asia editor of La Stampa newspaper, supported the possibility that the self-immolators could have been Falun Gong practitioners and wrote in the Asia Times that no one would believe a mother "Was so loyal to the Communist Party that they pretended to be a Falun Gong member and killed themselves and their only daughter, even though Falun Gong's Master Li Hongzhi prohibited suicide ..." According to Sisci, they did Chinese officials made a mistake when they arrested foreign journalists in Tiananmen Square because independently produced news footage of the event would have been the best evidence for the government that they were really Falun Gong practitioners. Instead, the government's reporting to Sisci looked more like propaganda.

Barend ter Haar - Try to Explain the Contradictions: Other human rights activists speculated that the five who set themselves on fire did so to protest the government's crackdown on Falun Gong. Barend ter Haar, a professor of Chinese at the University of Oxford, was open to the idea that the self-immolators might have been Falun Gong practitioners and posited that former Buddhists might have used the "respectable Buddhist tradition of immolating oneself as sacrifices to the Buddha" might have offered. Ter Haar tried to explain the contradictions that emerged by stating that the government might not have produced its own video until it recognized the indirect potential of suicides for itself.

David Ownby - Difficult to Come to a Final Judgment: In reviewing the dissenting accounts of the identity of the self-immolation victims, historian David Ownby concluded, “Although the arguments of Falun Gong practitioners seem to be valid, it is very strong difficult to come to a final judgment on self-immolation. ... There are desperate people in China (and elsewhere too) who would do anything for money (which in that case would go to their families, we suppose). Unless the authorities promised to save them from the flames before they could harm them. Or the entire event was staged. But it also seems possible that those who set themselves on fire could have been new or untrained Falun Gong practitioners who discovered and practiced Falun Gong on their own (and sadly) during the period of oppression that followed, and for whatever reason Anyway, decided to make the ultimate sacrifice. "

Gerry Groot - Classic 1950s Tactics: Gerry Groot, Professor of Asian Studies at Adelaide University in Australia, described the events as “really classic 1950s tactics. That's exactly what they did during the Korean War to undermine the Americans. "

Laogai Research Foundation - Incident Staged: In National Review magazine , Ann Noonan of the Laogai Research Foundation pointed out that the "hypothesis" that the government might have staged or allowed the incident to affect Falun Gong is hardly a stretch to discredit "as the government had vowed to destroy the practice before the Communist Party's eightieth anniversary celebrations in July [2001]".

Clive Ansley - Fully Staged by the Government: Clive Ansley, a Vancouver-based attorney who was living in China during the self-immolation incident, suggested that a dramatic response from Falun Gong would have been understandable, but ultimately concluded that it was Event was staged: “We have people who practice Falun Gong in this country; they have been suppressed over and over again; they are not allowed to speak, they are not allowed to defend all of their rights as citizens; the level of disappointment must be terrible, terribly high ... I can understand that people do ... but ironically, we finally found out that it was staged anyway, it wasn't real. It was completely staged by the government. "

Noah Porter - complete hoax: Citing Schechter's research, anthropologist Noah Porter wrote that suicide was a traditional form of protest in China, and assuming that Falun Gong might have protested this way, it would be acceptable. On the other hand, the belief in Falun Gong forbids killing, which includes suicide. With this in mind, Porter notes that “even if there were people who set themselves on fire and thought they were Falun Gong practitioners, they would be as unrepresentative of Falun Gong practitioners as they would be by people to represent Christianity as a whole who drop bombs on abortion clinics ”. Porter concludes that "there has been compelling evidence that the events described by the Chinese media are at least deceptive, if not a total hoax."

Beatrice Turpin (APTV) - typical China strategy: Beatrice Turpin, China correspondent for Associated Press Television , said of the self-immolation incident : “There was a great spectacle during the last Chinese New Year with Falun Gong protests and police footage who beat practitioners, and it would certainly fit the typical China strategy to stage an event this year [2001] and make the show their own. "

Impact of the Incident on the Persecution of Falun Gong

Fate of the self-immolators

According to Chinese media reports, a total of nine people were involved in the self-immolation - Liu Chunling, who died right on Tiananmen Square; her daughter Liu Siying, who died suddenly in hospital two months later; Wang Jindong, who was the first to set himself on fire; Hao Huijun and her daughter Chen Guo, who are also said to have set themselves on fire; Liu Yunfang and Liu Baorong, who are said to have been in the square without setting themselves alight; and Xue Hongjun and Liu Xiuqin, who are said to have assisted the self-immolation.

Five of the seven survivors were sentenced in August 2001: Liu Yunfang, to life imprisonment for being labeled a mastermind and for printing pamphlets encouraging Falun Gong practitioners to commit suicide. Wang Jindong said he was 15 years old for helping Liu distribute the pamphlets and prepare for the self-immolation. 49-year-old Xue Hongjun for ten years because he is said to have encouraged the group. Liu Xiuqin, 34, from Beijing, was sentenced to seven years in prison for providing shelter for the group and helping to get the plastic bottles. Liu Baorong was the only person to go unpunished. CNN reported that the court found Liu Baorong also guilty of the murder, but failed to convict her for admitting her crime and disclosing the others involved. Nothing was reported about Hao Huijun or her daughter Chen Guo.

China's official Xinhua news agency described the trial as a "public hearing," but only the last day of the month-long trial was public. However, this last day of the trial consisted mainly of reading out the judgments. According to the Guardian , Xinhua had published a full report of the verdicts before noon, and People's Daily followed with an editorial in the afternoon.

After the incident, foreign journalists were refused to interview the self-immolation victims or their relatives. In April 2002, however, the Chinese government arranged for 12 Chinese and foreign media outlets to question the alleged self-immolation survivors, but only in the presence of state officials. The BBC was skeptical of the invitation because "the Chinese government had always refused to give international media interviews on the self-immolation incident, but suddenly an interview with the survivors was arranged with foreign journalists". This led a BBC reporter to believe that the Chinese government's intention behind this arranged interview was apparently to try to prove the legality of the government's persecution of Falun Gong.

First, the reporters were taken to Wang Jindong in Henan Province Prison. Wang pointed out that the self-immolation was not staged and pointed to the burns on his face. Wang said he was ashamed of his "stupid and fanatical ideas". The journalists were then taken to a hospital in Kaifeng, where they met another "four survivors." This was strange because, according to Chinese media, two of the five victims died (Liu Chunlin and Liu Siying). Most of those interviewed said that they had given up Falun Gong and that the Chinese government's ban on Falun Gong was right. During the interview, they condemned Falun Gong while also approving of the authorities' behavior in dealing with the group. When asked why they set themselves on fire, Hao Huijun replied that she recognized the futility of writing letters and waving banners, “so we finally decided ... to make a big event for the world to show our will. ... We wanted to show the government that Falun Gong is good ”. Hao Huijun and her daughter Chen Guo are believed to have lost their hands, ears, and noses. Chen Guo and her mother Hao Huijin are said to have been under house arrest at the Beijiao Welfare Home in Kaifeng in 2014 and are being guarded by former police officer Zhan Jungui. Zhan is said to be responsible for preventing the two of them from coming into contact with the outside world. The police reportedly admitted that the government is taking care of both of them and not allowing them to die so that they can continue to attack Falun Gong with them.

Media campaign and public opinion

The state media's coverage of the event destroyed the public's sympathy for the group and made people more supportive of the Party's persecution against Falun Gong. The Time reported that prior to the event of self-immolation many Chinese felt that Falun Gong did not constitute a real threat and the prosecution had gone through the state too far. However, after the event, China's media campaign against Falun Gong gained significant ground. The World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong reported that public hostility towards Falun Gong was escalating; the government had stepped up its campaign, ordering that "hate crimes" against Falun Gong be increased. A Western diplomat mentioned that the propaganda campaign had become much more effective since the self-immolation incident. If the public's attitude towards Falun Gong was previously compassionate, it has now sided with the government. "Only since the incident has there been a social consensus," said the diplomat, noting that the most recent propaganda consists largely of emotionally moving stories and records of so-called rehabilitation measures. Østergaard believed that the New Year's writing Lis was in hindsight the greatest gift to the state, as the self-immolation incident marked a turning point where popular support for the movement ended.

The self-immolation event received prominent coverage in the official Chinese media. Analysts reported that it took a propaganda line. According to Philip Pan, the Communist Party "had launched a large-scale campaign to use the incident to prove its claim that Falun Gong was a dangerous cult, turning public opinion in China and abroad against the group." .. Every morning and evening, the state-controlled media had fresh attacks on Falun Gong and its US-based teacher Li Hongzhi in store ”. Posters, brochures and videos were produced detailing the alleged harmful effects of the practice of Falun Gong. The New York Times reported that the public was "bombarded with graphics on television and in newspapers." Anti-Falun Gong classes were held regularly in China's schools. Eight million students across China joined the "Anti-Cult Action by the Nation's Social Youth Communities ".

Within a month of the Tian'anmen Square event, the authorities prepared a document entitled "The Full Story of the Self-Immolation Created by Falun Gong Addicts in Tian'anmen Square." The document contained color photographs of charred corpses. The "Office for the Prevention and Handling of Evil Cults" of the State Council announced after the event that it was now ready to form a united front with the global anti-cult struggle. Congregations were held in factories, offices, schools, and universities, and licensed religious leaders denounced Falun Gong across the country. In Kaifeng, the post office issued an anti-Falun Gong stamp and 10,000 people signed a petition denouncing the group.

Violence and re-education

The Washington Post reported that the Chinese authorities benefited from the turn in public opinion against Falun Gong that followed the self-immolation. They took this opportunity to approve the "systematic use of force against the group". According to the Washington Post, authorities "had set up a network of brainwashing centers and were doing every possible effort to weed followers from neighborhood to neighborhood and from workplace to workplace." The "transformation tactics" used included beatings, torture with electric batons, and intensive anti-Falun Gong classes.

The Wall Street Journal published that in February 2001, the 610 Office "increased pressure on local governments" to implement the anti-Falun Gong campaign. In particular, there were new, detailed instructions requiring that those who continue to actively practice Falun Gong be sent to prison or labor camp, and those who do not give up the practice should be socially isolated and monitored by their families and employers . This was a change from the past when local officials sometimes condoned Falun Gong on the condition that it be practiced privately. According to Freedom House , the year after the incident the extent of the persecution had increased significantly: “Months of relentless propaganda resulted in public opinion turning against the group. Over the next year, the arrests, torture, and even deaths of Falun Gong practitioners from ill-treatment in detention increased dramatically. "

Effects of Falun Gong's Resistance

The self-immolation incident required a change in tactics for Falun Gong. Tiananmen Square was "permanently contaminated" as a place for protests , according to China analyst Ethan Gutmann , and Falun Gong's daily demonstrations in Beijing had almost stopped. According to Human Rights Watch, practitioners may have decided that "the protests had outlived their usefulness to demonstrate against the Chinese abuse or to convince foreign audiences of the harmlessness of Falun Gong." Diaspora practitioners who lived overseas concentrated theirs Pay attention to spreading the news of the Chinese government's mistreatment of practitioners. They delivered reports to the United Nations and human rights organizations, held public marches and hunger strikes outside of China, and documented human rights violations on websites. In China, practitioners used mass emails and distributed leaflets, etc. to "clarify the facts about the persecution" and refute the government's claims. In a press release in August 2001, the Falun Dafa Information Center in the United States picked up on this shift in strategy and mentioned that Chinese practitioners “sometimes manage to put up large posters and banners on major roads. They also put loudspeakers on rooftops around labor camps and in densely populated areas or attach them to trees to broadcast news about human rights violations. "

In 2002, Falun Gong practitioners in Changchun were able to successfully broadcast the documentary False Fire on Chinese TV by interrupting the station's scheduled programming for 50 minutes. Falun Gong practitioner Liu Chengjun, who hacked into the satellite feeder, was arrested and sentenced to prison. The US State Department reported that Liu Chengjun was "ill-treated" and "beaten to death" by the police in Jilin City Prison . The remaining five people behind the television hijacking were also jailed; all reportedly died or been tortured to death in custody.

literature

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b Press Statement , Clearwisdom.net, January 23, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  2. ↑ On Ten Year Anniversary, Tiananmen Square Self-Immolation Continues to Be Deadly Frame-up , Falun Dafa Information Center, January 19, 2011, accessed November 19, 2016
  3. ↑ a b c d e Philip P. Pan, Human Fire Ignites Chinese Mystery , The Washington Post, February 4, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  4. ↑ a b c d Danny Schechter, Falun Gong's Challenge to China: Spiritual Practice or "Evil Cult"? , Akashic Books, ISBN 978-1-888451-27-6 , 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  5. ↑ a b c d e f g David Ownby, Falun Gong and the Future of China , Oxford University Press, 2008, accessed November 19, 2016
  6. ↑ a b c d The Tragedy of Falun Gong Practitioners - Rescue: Doctors, Nurses Rush to Save Life , China.org.cn, Xinhua News Agency, January 31, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  7. ↑ a b c d e Philip P. Pan, One-Way Trip to the End in Beijing, International Herald Tribune ( Memento of July 6, 2014 in the Internet Archive ), (Cult Education Institute), February 5, 2001, archived from the original on July 6, 2014, web.archive.org, accessed November 19, 2016
  8. ↑ a b c Responses To Information Requests CHN43081.E , Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, UNHCR, December 7, 2004. In a telephone interview on November 23, 2004 with the Research Directorate, the research director on China at Human Rights Watch said that it was not possible for independent organizations to conduct an independent investigation into the incident. He said the incident was one of the most difficult challenges for reporters in Beijing to report about at the time because of the lack of information and the difficulty in determining the extent and control of the information. accessed on January 31, 2016
  9. ^ A b c David Ownby, Falun Gong and the Future of China , Oxford University Press, p. 218, ISBN 0-19-532905-8 , 2008, accessed November 19, 2016
  10. ↑ Barend ter Haar, Chair of Chinese History at Leiden University (Sinological Institute) , accessed November 19, 2016
  11. ^ A b c Matthew Forney, The Breaking Point , Time, July 2, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  12. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k Mickey Spiegel, Dangerous Meditation: China's Campaign Against Falungong , Human Rights Watch, 2002. ISBN 1-56432-270-X , accessed November 19, 2016
  13. ↑ Chrandra D. Smith, Chinese Persecution of Falun Gong (PDF) ( November 10, 2006 memento in the Internet Archive ), Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion (Rutgers School of Law), October 2004, accessed November 19, 2016
  14. ↑ a b c d e f g h i Tiananmen tense after fiery protests ( Memento of July 6, 2008 in the Internet Archive ), Staff and wire reports, CNN.com, January 24, 2001, archived from the original on February 22, 2007, Retrieved November 19, 2016
  15. ↑ a b Philip Pan & John Pomfret, Torture is Breaking Falun Gong, China Systematically Eradicating Group ( April 22, 2016 memento in the Internet Archive ), Washington Post Foreign Service, page A01, August 5, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  16. ^ A b Sarah Cook, Be Skeptical of the Official Story on the Tiananmen Car Crash , Freedom House, November 4, 2013, accessed November 19, 2016
  17. ^ Seth Faison, In Beijing: A Roar of Silent Protestors , The New York Times, April 27, 1999, accessed November 19, 2016
  18. ↑ David Palmer, Qigong Fever: Body, Science and Utopia in China , New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 2007, ISBN 0-231-14066-5 , accessed November 19, 2016
  19. ^ A b c d James Tong, Revenge of the Forbidden City , Oxford University Press, 2009, accessed November 19, 2016
  20. ^ Danny Schechter, Falun Gong's Challenge to China: Spiritual Practice Or "Evil Cult"? , P. 66, Akashic Books, 2001, accessed September 7, 2016
  21. ↑ a b David Ownby, Falun Gong and the Future of China , New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2008, S-171, ISBN 978-0-19-532905-6 , accessed September 7, 2016
  22. ^ Danny Schechter, Falun Gong's Challenge to China: Spiritual Practice Or "Evil Cult"? , P. 69, Akashic Books, November 2001, ISBN 1-888451-27-0 , accessed September 7, 2016
  23. ↑ a b Ethan Gutmann, An Occurrence on Fuyou Street , National Review, July 20, 2009, accessed September 7, 2016
  24. ↑ Ethan Gutmann, An Occurrence on Fuyou Street , National Review, July 20, 2009, accessed November 19, 2016
  25. ^ Benjamin Penny, The Past, Present, and Future of Falun Gong , National Library of Australia, 2001, accessed September 7, 2016
  26. ^ A b Sarah Cook, Leeshai Lemish, The 610 Office: Policing the Chinese Spirit , China Brief Volume 11 (17), The Jamestown Foundation, September 16, 2011, accessed November 19, 2016
  27. ↑ a b Yiyang Xia, The illegality of China's Falun Gong crackdown — and today's rule of law repercussions (PDF) , European Parliament, June 2011, accessed October 27, 2016
  28. ↑ David Palmer, Qigong Fever: Body, Science and Utopia in China , New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 2007. ISBN 0-231-14066-5 , accessed October 27, 2016
  29. ↑ a b Ethan Gutmann, An Occurrence on Fuyou Street , National Review, July 20, 2009, accessed October 27, 2016
  30. ↑ a b China: The crackdown on Falun Gong and other so-called “heretical organizations” , Amnesty International, March 23, 2000, accessed November 19, 2016
  31. ↑ Ian Johnson, Death Trap-How One Chinese City Resorted to Atrocities To Control Falun Dafa , The Wall Street Journal, December 26, 2000, accessed November 19, 2016
  32. ^ Elisabeth Rosenthal, Falun Gong Holds Protests On Anniversary of Big Sit-In , The New York Times, April 26, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  33. ^ Ian Johnson, Defiant Falun Dafa Members Converge on Tiananmen ( memento October 27, 2016 in the web archive archive.today ), The Wall Street Journal, Pulitzer.org. S. A21, April 25, 2000, accessed November 19, 2016
  34. ↑ Elizabeth J. Perry; Mark Selden, Chinese Society: Change, Conflict and Resistance , Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2010, ISBN 0-415-30170-X , accessed November 19, 2016
  35. ↑ John Pomfret, Cracks in China's Crackdown, Falun Gong Campaign Exposes Leadership Woes , The Washington Post, November 12, 1999, accessed November 19, 2016
  36. ↑ James Pringle, China lashes out at Falun Gong: Mainland officials or state media to vilify organization, Ottawa Citizen, January 15, 2001
  37. ↑ a b c Press Release: Suicidal Blaze, Another Crime of Falun Gong ( February 18, 2012 memento on the Internet Archive ), Government of the People's Republic of China, January 31, 2001, web.archive.org, accessed on January 19, 2012. November 2016
  38. ↑ a b c d e f g h Philip P. Pan, China Mulls Murder Charges for Foreign Journalists , The Washington Post, February 8, 2001, clearwisdom.net, accessed November 19, 2016
  39. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Danny Schechter, "The Fires This Time: Immolation or Deception In Beijing?" ( Memento from December 2, 2002 in the Internet Archive ), mediachannel.org , February 22, 2001, web.archive.org, accessed November 19, 2016
  40. ↑ Ethan Gutmann, The Slaughter: Mass Killings, Organ Harvesting, and China's Secret Solution to Its Dissident Problem, pp. 164–166, 2014, ISBN 978-1616149406
  41. ↑ Mickey Spiegel, "DANGEROUS MEDITATION China's Campaign Against Falun Gong" , page 33, Human Rights Watch, 2002, ISBN 1-56432-270-X . January 2002, ISBN 978-1-56432-269-2 , accessed November 19, 2016
  42. ↑ Tiananmen 'suicide' girl dies , BBC News, March 18, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  43. ↑ David Ownby, Falun Gong and the future of China , p. 216, Oxford University Press US, ISBN 0-19-532905-8 , or ISBN 978-0-19-532905-6 , 2008, accessed November 19, 2016
  44. ↑ Suicidal blaze, another crime of Falun Gong cult ( October 14, 2013 memento on the Internet Archive ), Xinhua News Agency, zhihui.com.cn, January 30, 2001, web.archive.org, accessed November 19, 2016
  45. ^ A b David Ownby, Falun Gong and the Future of China, New York , NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 215-216, 2008. ISBN 0-19-532905-8 , accessed November 19, 2016
  46. ↑ Wang Jindong: Blindness, death and rebirth (Excerpt) , facts.org, October 7, 2009, accessed November 19, 2016
  47. ↑ Ann Noonan, Concept Director of the Laogai Foundation, "Beijing is Burning - More lies from the PRC" ( memento of October 29, 2013 in the Internet Archive ), National Review, February 13, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  48. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j Second Investigation Report on the "Tiananmen Square Self-Immolation Incident" ( Memento of November 19, 2007 in the Internet Archive ), World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong (WOIPFG), August 2003, accessed November 19, 2016
  49. ^ A b Highlights of Investigation of the Alleged Self-Immolation in Tiananmen Square ( October 11, 2007 memento in the Internet Archive ), World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong, accessed on November 19, 2016
  50. ↑ a b The Burn Down in Tiananmen Square ( Memento October 31, 2012 in the Internet Archive ), accessed November 19, 2016
  51. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af ag ah ai aj ak Analysis and Insights about the self-Immolation , falsefire.com , accessed November 19, 2016
  52. ^ Susan V. Lawrence, Falun Gong Adds Media Weapons in Struggle With China's Rulers , The Wall Street Journal, (Eastern Edition), SB21, New York, NY, April 14, 2004, facts.org.cn, accessed November 19, 2016
  53. ^ Second Investigation Report on the "Tiananmen Square Self-Immolation Incident" ( November 19, 2007 memento in the Internet Archive ), World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong, upholdjustice.org, August 2003, accessed November 19, 2016
  54. ^ A b c d e John Gittings, Chinese whispers surround Falun Gong trial , The Guardian, August 21, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  55. ↑ Hamish McDonald, What's wrong with Falun Gong , The Age, theage.com.au, October 16, 2004, accessed November 19, 2016
  56. ↑ a b c d e Danny Schechter, Falun Gong's Challenge to China: Spiritual Practice Or "Evil Cult"? , Akashic Books, pp. 20-23, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  57. ^ A b Investigative Report on the "Tiananmen Square Self-immolation" Incident (Part I) , WOIPFG, May 12, 2003, accessed on February 1, 2017
  58. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m Investigative Report on the "Tiananmen Square Self-immolation" Incident (Part II) , WOIPFG, August 2003, accessed on February 1, 2017
  59. ↑ a b Tiananmen tense after fiery protests ( Memento of November 28, 2007 in the Internet Archive ), CNN, January 24, 2001, accessed February 4, 2016
  60. ^ A b c d e Report on Chinese Media's Involvement in Persecuting Falun Gong , WOIPFG, January 10, 2004, accessed February 1, 2017
  61. ^ Daniel He, 54 Facts That Reveal How the "Self-Immolation" on Tiananmen Square Was Actually Staged for Propaganda Purposes - Part 1 , The Epoch Times, accessed on February 24, 2017
  62. ^ Report from the "World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong" Reveals Chinese Government Lies - Official Government Media Seriously Violate Basic Reporting Principles and Professional Ethics , Clearwisdom.net, September 5, 2003, accessed November 19, 2016
  63. ↑ Haiqing Yu, Media and Cultural Transformation in China , Taylor & Francis S. 133-134, February 24, 2009. ISBN 978-0-415-44755-3 , accessed on November 19, 2016
  64. ^ The Tragedy of Falun Gong Practitioners, Families of Falun Gong Victims After Tragedy , china.org.cn, Xinhua News Agency. February 1, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  65. ^ A b David Ownby, Falun Gong and the Future of China , New York, NY: Oxford University Press, p. 217, 2008, ISBN 978-0-19-532905-6 , accessed November 19, 2016
  66. ^ A b New Evidence Confirms Alleged Falun Gong "Tiananmen Square Self-Immolation" Was a State Conspiracy , WOIPFG, accessed February 1, 2017
  67. ↑ a b 54 Facts That Reveal How the "Self-Immolation" on Tiananmen Square Was Actually Staged for Propaganda Purposes - Part 2 , Falun Dafa Minghui.org, accessed on November 24, 2016
  68. ↑ Speaker Verification Report on CCP Media Reports on "Tiananmen Self-Immolation" , WOIPFG, March 2003, accessed on February 5, 2017
  69. ↑ a b c d Four jailed over Tiananmen blaze , CNN, August 17, 2001, accessed February 5, 2017
  70. ↑ Wang Jindong: My Personal Statement on the Tiananmen Square Self-immolation Incident , facts.org.cn, accessed February 1, 2017
  71. ↑ The Misdeeds of Xue Hongjun, a Part of the Staged Tiananmen Self-Immolation Incident , clearwisdom.net, March 19, 2005, accessed February 1, 2017
  72. ↑ a b c d e f 中国 安排 采访 法轮功 自焚 者 , BBCChinese.com, April 5, 2002, accessed February 17, 2017
  73. ↑ a b c d Jeremy Page, Reuters: Survivors say China Falun Gong immolations real , Facts.org, August 21, 2007, accessed November 19, 2016
  74. ↑ Philip P. Pan, Washington Post: China Mulls Murder Charges for Foreign Journalists ( memento September 2, 2013 in the web archive archive.today ), Washington Post, February 8, 2001, accessed February 4, 2016
  75. ↑ a b Press Statement: Who's Behind Tiananmen Self-immolation ( Memento from July 3, 2013 in the web archive archive.today ), Falun Gong Information Center, February 1, 2001, accessed on February 4, 2016
  76. ^ Zhe Jiang Beggar Murder Case III , WOIPFG, January 15, 2004, accessed February 6, 2017
  77. ^ CCP's Central Committee's Propaganda Department Is the Media Control Center in the Persecution of Falun Gong , WOIPFG, August 14, 2005, accessed February 6, 2017
  78. ^ Harmonizing Dafa, Not Going to Extremes , Minghui, January 11, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  79. ↑ a b c John Gittings, China prepares for new offensive against 'dangerous' sect , The Guardian, January 29, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  80. ↑ John Pomfret, “A Foe Rattles Beijing From Abroad,” The Washington Post, March 9, 2001, cesnur.org, accessed November 19, 2016
  81. ^ Elisabeth Rosenthal, Former Falun Gong Followers Enlisted in China's War on Sect , The New York Times, April 5, 2002, accessed November 19, 2016
  82. ↑ a b Hannah Beech, Too Hot to Handle , Time, February 5, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  83. ↑ a b Francesco Sisci, The burning issue of Falungong ( Memento April 3, 2016 in the Internet Archive ), Asia Times, April 10, 2002, web.archive.org, accessed November 19, 2016
  84. ↑ a b Barend ter Haar, Part One: Introductory remarks (click on Introductory remarks on the left side) ( Memento of February 16, 2015 in the Internet Archive ), Barend ter Haar, Leiden University, July 2002, accessed on November 19 2016
  85. ↑ Ann Noonan, National Review: Beijing is Burning - More lies from the PRC , February 13, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  86. ↑ Peter Rowe, Beyond the Red Wall: The Persecution of Falun Gong , CBC Newsworld's The Lens, November 6, 2007, accessed November 19, 2016
  87. ↑ Noah Porter, (Master Thesis for the University of South Florida), Falun Gong in the United States: An Ethnographic Study ( Memento September 9, 2006 in the Internet Archive ), Department of Anthropology, College of Arts and Sciences, University of South Florida , July 18, 2003, accessed November 19, 2016
  88. ↑ 54 Facts That Reveal How the "Self-Immolation" on Tiananmen Square Was Actually Staged for Propaganda Purposes - Part 3 , The Epoch Times, accessed on February 24, 2017
  89. ↑ Overview (Investigation Reports on the Persecution of Falun Gong: Volume 1) , World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong, 2003-2004, accessed November 19, 2016
  90. ↑ Jonathan Ansfield, "After Olympic win, China takes new aim at Falun Gong," (7th article), Reuters, July 23, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  91. ↑ Clemens Stubbe Østergaard, Jude Howell, Governance in China , p. 208 (Governance and the Political Challenge of Falun Gong), Rowman & Littlefield Publisher, 2004. ISBN 0-7425-1988-0 , accessed November 19, 2016
  92. ↑ Erik Eckholm, Beijing Judge Jails 4 for Promoting Falun Gong's Public Suicides , The New York Times, August 18, 2001, accessed November 19, 2016
  93. ↑ Charles Hutzler, Falun Gong Feels Effect of China's Tighter Grip --- Shift Means Even Private Practice Is Banned, Asian Wall Street Journal, April 26, 2001
  94. ↑ a b Ethan Gutmann, Into Thin Airwaves , The Weekly Standard, December 6, 2010, accessed November 19, 2016
  95. ^ TV hijacking puts Falun Gong protest on airwaves in China , Australian Broadcasting Corporation, March 8, 2002, accessed November 19, 2016
  96. ↑ 2003 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, China (includes Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau) , Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor; United States Department of State, February 25, 2004, accessed November 19, 2016.
  97. ↑ International Religious Freedom Report 2005, China (includes Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau) , Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor; United States Department of State, accessed November 19, 2016.