【新唐人2013年06月10日讯】7号发生在中国厦门的公交车起火爆炸案，至今已造成47人死亡、34人受伤。对于事故原因，厦门警方曾宣布是由于轮胎起火，但随后不久当局改称案件为严重刑事案件，纵火者是长期上访人员陈水总。但这一说法受到专业人士和很多民众的质疑，网民认为事有蹊跷，陈水总有可能做了“替罪羊”。
8号，福建省厦门市政府新闻办公室发布消息说：经警方侦查，7号发生的厦门公交车纵火案告破。犯罪嫌疑人陈水总是厦门本地人，59岁，已被当场烧死。
报导说，惨案发生的前一天，没什么文化的陈水总注册了微博，并连发11条信息，叙述了他从今年3月上访以来连连碰壁的过程。虽然外界一时还无法确认是否陈水总本人发布了微博，但这些博文已经被官方当成纵火证据。
北京律师刘晓原：“我不知道警方还有什么证据。那么从官方媒体的报导来看，提到他发了微博。那个微博上也没有说一定要怎么制造爆炸案。”
去年5月10号，云南省巧家县花桥社区服务大厅，曾发生一起自杀式爆炸袭击案件，造成多人伤亡。当时警方曾根据网上留言，认定已当场死亡的摩的司机赵登用是犯罪嫌疑人，但事后证明，是其他人制造了这起爆炸案。
刘晓原：“现在上网的人很多，可能有一些人会在网络上发现一些对社会的不同看法。下次出现了一个重大事件，他们刚刚在场，就把他们锁定为犯罪嫌疑人。锁定犯罪嫌疑人要有充分的证据，如果警方有充足的证据，我希望它公开，因为这个也不是涉及国家秘密的案件。”
6月7号下午6点半左右，厦门一辆快速公交车在行驶过程中突然起火，冒起黑烟。报导说，公交车燃烧大约10分钟后，至少发生三次爆炸。当时正值下班高峰期，车上挤满近百人。厦门警方在调查后曾对外表示，事故原因是由于轮胎起火引发油箱燃烧爆炸。
最近，中国大陆连续发生几起大火，备受舆论关注。厦门公车起火案发生后，正在美国访问的中共总书记习近平特别对案件作出批示。国务院的专门工作组也在8号进驻厦门。
民众质疑，是否因为高层指示尽快破案，厦门警方才前后说法不一，将案件由责任事故转为刑事案件。
厦门市民曾先生：“现在有一些质疑，是否有高层的指示，尽快破案。是否要缓和中国最近连续发生的，包括北方、黑龙江连续发生的大火，是否有这种迅速破案、定性为刑事案件、减少社会舆论跟压力，不知道高层上有没有这种考虑。”
媒体报导，陈水总家住厦门思明区，因为生活贫困，想申领社保。但因警方过失，使他无法办理社保，于是他开始上访，但一直没有结果。
陈水总家附近饭店的员工表示，事件的发生很可能有背后的冤情。
厦门居民：“走向这一步可能也不是一天、两天的事情了。每个人可能也都有憋屈的事情吧，也许有政府部门的不得力吧，也许是他的生活真的是糟糕透顶了。”
大陆网络上，很多网民除了质疑陈水总是“替罪羊”之外，也深入分析了惨剧的根源。学者吴祚来在网上留言指出：应该让每位官员人手一份陈水总的微博，让他们知道，一个人是如何被官家逼疯、逼成魔鬼的。如果要让这样的灾难不再发生，当局就得替百姓着想，给百姓一条活路。
采访/易如 编辑/李谦 后制/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."
