The content of this article comes from the Internet, if it is inconsistent with the actual situation or there is infringement, please contact to delete. This article is only published in today's headlines, please do not move.
Jiang Qing, a figure who is deeply curious and feared by people. Her true appearance has always been shrouded in mystery. In the eyes of Yang Yinlu, Jiang Qing's personal secretary, Jiang Qing's personality is changeable, leaving him with many unusual experiences. However, the working environment around Jiang Qing is a place where people dare not act rashly. So, what did Jiang Qing do to the people around her?
The first thing was Yan Changgui's "business trip" incident. On the morning of January 9, 1968, Chen Boda and Yao Wenyuan suddenly appeared in Building 11 of Diaoyutai and directly found Yan Changgui's office. At that time, Yan Changgui did not know, and they told Yan Changgui two news: first, Yan Changgui needed to go on a business trip to complete an important task; Secondly, the secretarial work will be taken over by Yang Yinlu, and the handover needs to be completed as soon as possible. After receiving the emergency order, Yan Changgui did not hesitate to start the busy and tense handover work, and there were people urging him from time to time along the way, and even finally, the handover work was inexplicably interrupted.
Yan Changgui was taken to a place and did not see the leader for four days, which made him feel anxious. Previously, he worked by Jiang Qing's side almost every day, standing by 24 hours a day, but this time, Jiang Qing did not summon him. Until the fifth night, Chen Boda brought bad news: Jiang Qing identified Yan Changgui as a "Sanxiucai" and was sent to monitor her.
This injustice shocked Yan Changgui, he did not expect that sending the wrong letter would lead to such serious consequences. The letter, from a Beijing-based actress, mentioned that she was under attack and hoped that Jiang Qing would help. Although Yan Changgui's previous letters did not need Jiang Qing to check personally, the name "Jiang Qing" was mentioned in this letter, which made him feel the need to hand it over to Jiang Qing for handling.
Jiang Qing was furious about this incident, she thought that Yan Changgui deliberately helped the actress and sent her name to Jiang Qing. Jiang Qing's suspicion of Yan Changgui caused him to suffer severe punishment, and he was eventually transferred to Qincheng Prison, where he spent seven and a half years in prison. During this time, he lost his personal identity and was left with only one number, 6820.
In 1975, Yan Changgui was transferred to work on a farm in Hunan Province, and it was not until 1979 that he was able to return to the magazine "Hongqi". Jiang Qing's explanation for this matter at that time was that Yan Changgui was Guan Feng's closed disciple, and Guan Feng was a careerist, so Yan Changgui was his "little minions". And the reason why Yan Changgui became a target is also related to the fact that he was once recommended by Qi Benyu.
Jiang Qing's sensitivity and suspiciousness led her to send people she had dealings with to prison. For Yan Changgui, he inadvertently touched the sensitive nerves in Jiang Qing's heart, and eventually suffered unfair treatment.
The second thing involved Yang Yinlu, who almost fell into a trap. In 1968, Yang Yinlu received an urgent telegram saying that his father was critically ill and needed to return home immediately. At that time, he had just worked in Diaoyutai Building 11 for three months, and he was too busy to take leave. However, the next day, Yang Yinlu received another telegram saying that his father had died, making him even more painful and guilty.
After Yan Changgui learned of the situation, he asked Wang Dongxing for instructions, hoping to approve Yang Yinlu to go home to deal with the funeral. Wang Dongxing considered that Yang Yinlu had just arrived and had not yet formally contacted Jiang Qing, so he agreed to his leave. However, when Yang Yinlu returned to his hometown, he received an urgent notice on the fourth day of his father's funeral, asking him to return to Beijing immediately.
After returning to Beijing, Jiang Qing questioned Yang Yinlu, believing that he had deliberately taken leave to complete some improper task. Yang Yinlu's explanation did not change Jiang Qing's opinion, and she even threatened to send someone to Yang's house to dig up the grave to check. In the end, Wang Dongxing's intervention resolved the crisis, but Yang Yinlu's mood was seriously hit, and he felt that he was like a tiger.
The third incident, which occurred in 1972, was known as the "poison" incident. One night, Jiang Qing took sleep aids and asked the nurse to put another one on the bedside table in case of emergency. However, Jiang Qing called a nurse at 4 a.m., claiming that she had not prepared medicine for her, resulting in her sleeping for only an hour. The nurse explained repeatedly, but Jiang Qing firmly believed that the nurse was lying, and even tore off the nurse's collar cockade.
Jiang Qing then called a meeting of Politburo members to discuss the so-called "poison" she had eaten. At the meeting, Jiang Qing's emotions were extremely excited, and leaders such as Premier Zhou and Ye Jianying also came to persuade. Jiang Qing eventually ended the meeting, but her bizarre behavior still angered Chairman Mao and criticized her.
These three things outline the working environment around Jiang Qing, which is full of uncertainty and risks. A small mistake or misunderstanding can lead to serious consequences. Jiang Qing's sensitivity and suspiciousness made the staff around her feel stressed and tormented. It was a daunting place, and Jiang Qing's shadow shrouded everything.
The above content and materials are derived from the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or allude to any real country, political system, organization, race, individual. The above does not mean that the author of this article endorses the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising above or related to any of the above, nor does it assume any direct or indirect legal liability.