【禁闻】厦门公车炸案藏黑幕?幸存者述起火一刻

FacebookPrintFont Size繁体

【新唐人2013年06月11日讯】福建厦门发生公车大火爆炸案后,由于警方说法前后不一,加上24小时内迅速破案,却不透露办案细节、不公布调查证据和视频,官方又禁止媒体记者深入采访等,一系列作法,引发了大陆民众对官方说辞的强烈质疑。网民不禁疑问:从“中储粮”粮仓大火至公车爆炸,如此多的灾难,究竟谁该负起责任?

发生在6月7号的厦门快速公交车大火惨案,造成了47名乘客死亡,8人失踪。警方在案发后不到24小时公布破案,宣称是一位名叫陈水总的60岁访民,因生活不顺和厌世而泄愤纵火,证据是他生前的遗书和微博,但当局拒绝对外公布遗书,加上案件本身疑点重重,一时间,网上诞生了无数“侦探版”的“分析贴”和“质问贴”,但随后多被删除。

此外,据《法国国际广播电台》6月9号报导,中宣部要求各大媒体“不派记者前往福建采访厦门公车纵火案,已派出的立即撤离”。并且一律用《新华社》通稿和当地权威部门发布的消息,尤其是案情要以公安机关权威结论为准,报导要所谓适度、适量,和不炒作犯罪嫌疑人和作案细节,以及,不渲染现场惨烈场面。

大陆专栏作家刘逸明:“宣传部门为此事专门下禁令是非常不正常的,就说明在这个案件当中,有很多见不得光的东西,比如说,这位纵火者为什么纵火﹖可能跟这个社会制度,跟他的个人遭遇有很大的关系,他们可能非常担心,媒体过度渲染了这个方面,会引起公众对纵火犯的同情,会引起更多的人模仿这位纵火者。”

公车大火案中的幸存者向《新唐人》证实,现场确实有人纵火,但不确定是陈水总。

《新唐人》记者:“您有看到点火的人是多大年龄,什么样子吗?”
福建厦门公车大火幸存者:“50多岁吧,瘦瘦的。人好像挺沉默的,他脚底下拿了一个毛毯。”
记者:“您觉得真的是那个访民做的吗? ”
幸存者:“这我不清楚,反正我看到了,我看到他点火了,然后一下子火就很大,整个人、整身都是火。他点的是一个像毛毯类型的棉被。”

这位幸存者认为,这次大火死伤惨重与应急窗砸不开有很大关系,他说,车厢后半部的人基本没能逃出来。

幸存者还透露,他在车厢着火前正好在用手机拍照,因此幸运的拍下了一段起火前后10多秒的视频,并把视频交给了媒体和警方,但警方和媒体却没有对外公布。

幸存者:“车厢着火的瞬间,我拍下了,我都已经给他们了,我都已经删了,其余的都被警察拿走了。”

有网民表示,即使公车大火是由于陈水总纵火引起的,但政府也难逃其责。有媒体爆料,陈水总为办理社保,22次跑派出所没有结果,反复被推诿,对此,官方在通报中只字不提,仅强调他生活不顺。

杭州仲裁委员会首席仲裁员吴有水律师:“其实折射出中国大陆一个社会矛盾的问题,百姓他个人的情况由于政府没有很好的处理,那么导致的这种矛盾结果损害了其他的无辜者,政府也应当要反思。其实我们现在的社会矛盾已经放到一个很尖锐的地步了。所以我们如果社会矛盾得不到解决的话,那么以后这类事情会越来越多。”

厦门公交车爆炸时,中共国家主席习近平正在访问美洲四国,有网民细心总结,在这期间,全中国居然发生了中储粮粮仓、大连石化、吉林禽业、江西化工厂、济南润滑油厂等十多起大火。网民不禁疑问:究竟是谁制造了如此多的灾难?

采访编辑/张天宇 后制/李若琳

Questions Raised Over Who is Behind Nationwide Fire Disasters in China

An unexpected bus fire and bombing
occurred in Xiamen, Fuijian Province.
Local police authorities have given different accounts,
and have announced a swift clearing up of the case.
However, no details of the handling of the case was made
public, nor was evidence collected during the investigation.
The Chinese Communist Part (CCP) authorities have
openly banned media reporters from taking local interviews.
All theses actions have been
strongly questioned by the public.
Netizens are asking who were behind so many
disasters that have taken place in the past few days?

A bus fire occurred on June 7 in Xiamen city,
causing 47 deaths, with a further 8 people missing.
Within 24 hours, local police authorities claimed
that they have tracked down the criminals responsible.
The arsonist was Chen Shuizong, a local petitioner
aged 60, who started the fire to vent his resentment.
Police authorities alleged that the proof of guilt
was his farewell letter and micro-blog messages.
However, they refused to make this farewell letter public.

Meanwhile, many other doubts have
been cast over the official allegations.
Many posts have flooded the internet,
containing analyses and questioning.
Most were removed quickly by the CCP internet censors.

On June 9, Radio France Internationale reported
on the CCP Propaganda authorities’ orders
regarding news coverage of the incident.
Major media reporters are banned from
going to Xiamen to take interviews.
All reporters who have set off or who have
arrived there are required to return immediately.
All media in China are only allowed to use
Xinhua News Agency news scripts, and
information announced by local authorities.
The description of the incident should be
based on the police authorities’ conclusion.
The incident should be “moderately”
reported in content and in quantity.
No hypes shall be made on the criminal suspect,
his criminal details, and on the horrifying scene.

Liu Yiming, Columnist in China: “It’s very unusual that
the propaganda authorities issued such a specific ban.
This indicates that there’s a lot of darkness behind it.
For example, why did the arsonist start the fire?
This may have more to do with the social
order, and his personal experiences.
The authorities might fear that media exaggeration
will arouse public sympathy for the arsonist.
They may fear this could trigger more people to follow suit.”

A survivor of the bus fire confirmed to
NTD that there was an on-the-spot arsonist.
But they couldn’t be identified as Chen Shuizong.

NTD journalist: “Did you witness the arsonist?
How old was he and what he looked like?”

Anon survivor: “He was thin, in his 50s. He seemed very
silent, and carried a blanket that was put under his feet.”

NTD journalist: “Do you believe that
the arsonist was that petitioner?”

Anon survivor: “I don’t know. But anyhow,
I really saw him igniting the fire.
It diffused all over his body instantly.
He set a blanket-like quilt on fire.”

The survivor says that the high rate
of casualties was mainly caused by
failure to break the emergency window.
He revealed that nearly all passengers who stayed
in the latter part of the bus were engulfed by the fire.

The survivor says he took camera
phone pictures before the fire started.
So he filmed a 10-second video clip covering
the scenes, before and after the fire was ignited.
He sent it to the media and the police,
which was subsequently never announced.

Anon survivor: “I filmed the fleeting
moment when the carriage caught fire.
I’ve given it to the police, and it didn’t keep personally.”

Netizens commented that even if Chen Shuizong was the
arsonist, the government couldn’t absolve itself from blame.
Media reported that Chen Shuizong
visited a local police station 22 times.
He was trying to apply for social security.
But he was repeatedly refused.
None of these facts were mentioned
in the official announcements.
The authorities only claimed that Chen
had “experienced disappointment in his life”.

Wu Youshui, Chief arbitrator, Hangzhou city: “This
reflects social conflicts commonly existing in China.
An ordinary citizen was treated badly by
the authorities in getting social welfare.
This had caused a social conflict,
which later victimizes other innocents.
So the authorities should take this introspectively.
Today, social conflicts are actually very acute in China.
If these problems remain unchanged, there will be
further similar cases to be expected in the future.”

When the bus fire broke out, the CCP
leader Xi Jinping was visiting the U.S.
During Xi’s overseas trip, over
10 fires have occurred across China.
These included a Sinograin grain depot in Helongjiang,

a petrochemical plant in Dalian, a poultry farm in Jilin,
a chemical plant in Jiangxi, and a lubricants plant in Jinan.
Netizens question who was
really behind so many disasters?

相关文章
评论