【新唐人2013年06月10日訊】7號發生在中國廈門的公交車起火爆炸案，至今已造成47人死亡、34人受傷。對於事故原因，廈門警方曾宣佈是由於輪胎起火，但隨後不久當局改稱案件為嚴重刑事案件，縱火者是長期上訪人員陳水總。但這一說法受到專業人士和很多民眾的質疑，網民認為事有蹊蹺，陳水總有可能做了「替罪羊」。
8號，福建省廈門市政府新聞辦公室發佈消息說：經警方偵查，7號發生的廈門公交車縱火案告破。犯罪嫌疑人陳水總是廈門本地人，59歲，已被當場燒死。
報導說，慘案發生的前一天，沒甚麼文化的陳水總註冊了微博，並連發11條信息，敘述了他從今年3月上訪以來連連碰壁的過程。雖然外界一時還無法確認是否陳水總本人發佈了微博，但這些博文已經被官方當成縱火證據。
北京律師劉曉原：「我不知道警方還有甚麼證據。那麼從官方媒體的報導來看，提到他發了微博。那個微博上也沒有說一定要怎麼製造爆炸案。」
去年5月10號，雲南省巧家縣花橋社區服務大廳，曾發生一起自殺式爆炸襲擊案件，造成多人傷亡。當時警方曾根據網上留言，認定已當場死亡的摩的司機趙登用是犯罪嫌疑人，但事後證明，是其他人製造了這起爆炸案。
劉曉原：「現在上網的人很多，可能有一些人會在網絡上發現一些對社會的不同看法。下次出現了一個重大事件，他們剛剛在場，就把他們鎖定為犯罪嫌疑人。鎖定犯罪嫌疑人要有充分的證據，如果警方有充足的證據，我希望它公開，因為這個也不是涉及國家秘密的案件。」
6月7號下午6點半左右，廈門一輛快速公交車在行駛過程中突然起火，冒起黑煙。報導說，公交車燃燒大約10分鐘後，至少發生三次爆炸。當時正值下班高峰期，車上擠滿近百人。廈門警方在調查後曾對外表示，事故原因是由於輪胎起火引發油箱燃燒爆炸。
最近，中國大陸連續發生幾起大火，備受輿論關注。廈門公車起火案發生後，正在美國訪問的中共總書記習近平特別對案件作出批示。國務院的專門工作組也在8號進駐廈門。
民眾質疑，是否因為高層指示儘快破案，廈門警方纔前後說法不一，將案件由責任事故轉為刑事案件。
廈門市民曾先生：「現在有一些質疑，是否有高層的指示，儘快破案。是否要緩和中國最近連續發生的，包括北方、黑龍江連續發生的大火，是否有這種迅速破案、定性為刑事案件、減少社會輿論跟壓力，不知道高層上有沒有這種考慮。」
媒體報導，陳水總家住廈門思明區，因為生活貧困，想申領社保。但因警方過失，使他無法辦理社保，於是他開始上訪，但一直沒有結果。
陳水總家附近飯店的員工表示，事件的發生很可能有背後的冤情。
廈門居民：「走向這一步可能也不是一天、兩天的事情了。每個人可能也都有憋屈的事情吧，也許有政府部門的不得力吧，也許是他的生活真的是糟糕透頂了。」
大陸網絡上，很多網民除了質疑陳水總是「替罪羊」之外，也深入分析了慘劇的根源。學者吳祚來在網上留言指出：應該讓每位官員人手一份陳水總的微博，讓他們知道，一個人是如何被官家逼瘋、逼成魔鬼的。如果要讓這樣的災難不再發生，當局就得替百姓著想，給百姓一條活路。
採訪/易如 編輯/李謙 後製/周天
A petitioner becomes the scapegoat for the Xiamen bus fire?
A bus fire on the 7th in Xiamen claimed 47 lives
and injured 34.
Initially, authorities blamed the tire as the cause
of the deadly fire.
But shortly after, a criminal investigation was opened,
and a long time petitioner, Chen Shuizong, was identified as the suspect.
Many people questioned why the authorities’ story changed,
and suspected Chen Shuizong to be a scapegoat.
On the 8th, Xiamen officials issued a press release
stating that the bus fire was a case of arson.
The suspect was identified as the 59-year-old local,
Chen Shuizong, who died at the scene.
Chen Shuizong was reportedly an uneducated petitioner
who registered a Weibo microblog account just one day before the incident.
He was said to have sent 11 messages that day describing
his frustrations since his petition began this March.
It is yet to be confirmed whether or not Chen had indeed
issued the online messages, which were officially used as evidence.
Beijing lawyer Liu Xiaoyuan:
“I don’t know what other evidence the police have.
The official report mentioned he posted the microblogs.
But the microblog did not say anything
about setting up an explosion."
On May 10 of last year, a suicide bombing at a community
center in Yunnan resulted in many casualties.
Police identified the suspect as Zhao Dengyong,
a motorbike taxi driver who died at the scene.
But later it was determined that someone else
manufactured the explosion.
Liu Xiaoyuan: “Many people express opinions online.
When a major incident occurs they become an easy target.
Sufficient evidence is needed to identify a suspect.
I hope the police will make their evidence public
since it’s unrelated to state secrets."
At 6:30 pm on June 7th, an express public commuter
caught on fire in Xiamen.
It was reported that at least three explosions occurred
about 10 minutes after the fire started.
It was during rush hour, and there were nearly
100 people on the commuter.
After investigation, police reported that the
tire fire ignited the fuel tank, causing the explosions.
Recently, several major fires in China
have drawn much attention.
After the Xiamen commuter bus fire, president Xi Jinping
made particular demands during his visit to the U.S.
The Chinese State Council also sent a special team
to station in Xiamen on the 8th.
People suspect the central government instructed police
to change the investigation status from accident to criminal case.
Xiamen resident Mr. Tsang: “Some question whether
high-level instruction was given to solve the case quickly.
There have been too many fires in China recently.
It could be the high-level authorities idea to alleviate criticism
and ease their pressure by characterizing it as a criminal case."
Chen Shuizong was reportedly a resident of Xiamen.
Due to police negligence, he couldn’t apply
for social security. He started his petition to no avail.
According to a worker at a hotel near Chen Shuizong’s home,
there must have been some underlying grievances.
Hotel worker: “This is not just a one or two-day incident.
Anyone who would do such a thing – the government
has a certain responsibility. Perhaps he indeed suffered a lot."
Many netizens suspected that Chen Shuizong
could have been a scapegoat.
Many also shared their opinions of the tragedy
and its cause.
A scholar, Wu Zuolai stated, “Every official should own
a copy of Chen Shuizong’s microblogging messages.
They need to know how someone can go crazy
and become the devil. He was forced by officials.
To prevent such an incident from happening again, authorities
need to think for the people and help the people out."
