I'd watched her speech and read the Chinese reporting, both of which matched the other and contradicted the preferred interpretation given it in western sources.Do I deduce that you sourced the original text as a result of my post ?
Why a cynic might suspect that the misinterpretation was deliberately chosen to give a false impression of what she actually said...
And the other side of both the First Opium War and the Boxer rebellion has been quite deliberately clouded by many modern reporters, who wish to present only one side of the story
The side which was entirely obscured for the previous 150-odd years.
It's understandable, really. We could hardly expect the Victorians to go around crowing about state-sponsored drug dealing or the moral rectitude of them forcing it on other countries to save the arse falling out of their own trousers. It's taken a while for the embarrassment to wear off to the point people can look through the post facto justifications at actions and intentions.