> So basically, you don't like these facts so we must be skeptical of them? You appear to be uncritically accepting rumours on a leaked cable as a fact - inste

> So basically, you don't like these facts so we must be skeptical of them? You appear to be uncritically accepting rumours on a leaked cable as a fact - instead I only urge caution on such emotional matters. Were people run over? Were bodies moved by bulldozer? Those statements can be true without that particularly gruesome scene being accurate. It is its gruesomeness that makes me suspect - a property that makes urban legends infectious - the sensationalism outweighs the substance, evidence and rationality e.g. who saw it, when did it happen, how many people were subject to it, why was that a rational thing to do etc. > These were not two hostile countries in a war of whataboutism like the US and USSR. We are not discussing an official statement from the British government so geopolictical relationships are hardly relevant. Governments and civil services are full of agendas in every direction but more likely this is an embassy doing its job i.e. reporting on the various rumours circulating in the host nation. The reason for caution is that people are describing their emotional reactions to these words without considering the grounds. At the best of times there is some pretty horrid anti-Chinese xenophobia on this board. People want the worst things to be true irrespective of evidence. US citizen's casually describe Russia and China as enemies today. Something you only have to say enough times for it to become true.