Funny how reddit libs will just downvote this comment asking for sources but not dare engage with it.
It’s an intellectually honest question. Can anyone actually provide a source that China does not discuss the events surrounding the square? Or do they just assume it’s true and have never actually looked to confirm that claim themselves?
Since they’re banned we can’t see the comments from inside the 'grad (and they can’t see yours since you’re apparently banned from .world). He edited in an encyclopedia article, with no sources:
Thanks for clarifying.
Can you share your source that China does not discuss the events surrounding the square?
I’d love to see your source on what happened there as well.
Funny how reddit libs will just downvote this comment asking for sources but not dare engage with it.
It’s an intellectually honest question. Can anyone actually provide a source that China does not discuss the events surrounding the square? Or do they just assume it’s true and have never actually looked to confirm that claim themselves?
Since they’re banned we can’t see the comments from inside the 'grad (and they can’t see yours since you’re apparently banned from .world). He edited in an encyclopedia article, with no sources:
deleted by creator
BWA ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
You’re right, it’s pretty funny to see you get banned
Fuck off, cracker
* You got banned so I can’t respond to your comment asking for a source. It’s pretty funny, though. My source is that you typed “bwahaha”
@brimnac, since you’re banned from the 'grad (good), I can’t interact with you. I can see your responses if I dip into lemmy.world.
An encyclopedia article is not a primary source.
An encyclopedia article without any actual links to sources or references may as well be a work of fiction.
That’s not a fucking source and you’re still a cracker.
i’D lOvE tO SeE yOuR sOUrCe sTaTInG i’M a CrAcKeR.