(Clearwisdom.net)
Recently, Xinhua.net carried two major news items: the "gas explosion" incident in Chongqing City, and the verdict on the murder case from poisoning by Chen Fuzhao in Zhejiang Province.
Both incidents cost human lives. The gas explosion killed 233 people, while the poisoning resulted in 16 dead. But the latter was used to frame Falun Gong, slandering millions of innocent Falun Gong practitioners. The damage it caused effected far more lives than that of the gas explosion, but the investigations and explanations were vastly different in the two cases.
Xinhua.net reported on January 2, "In recent days, the State Council's accident investigation unit conducted onsite inspection many times. They had gathered relevant material evidence, and reviewed extensive volumes of the laws, codes, regulations, documentations, standards and related materials, as well as original records. They interviewed the operating and administrative personnel. They obtained strong evidence for the causes of this incident. After the experts' analyses and deliberation, they excluded the possibility of intentional or unpreventable human factors as the cause of the incident, and affirmed that this extremely serious gas explosion from 'No. 1223' well of Chinese Oil Chuandong Exploration and Extraction Company was caused by negligence."
We can see that only after they "conducted onsite inspection many times," "gathered relevant material evidences," "reviewed extensive volumes of legal documents," and "interviewed the operating and administrative personnel" were any conclusions drawn.
In the poisoning case however, how did they attribute Mr. Chen Fuzhao's homicidal behavior and motives to Falun Gong? It was a mere "After a hearing to discover."
How was the hearing conducted? Who did they cross-examine? Did they research Falun-Gong related materials? Did they talk to any true Falun Gong practitioners? None whatsoever, there was only the conclusion.
Xinghua.net reported it thus, "After a hearing to discover: Mr. Chen Fuzhao began practicing in 1996...He gradually developed the idea of killing people to enhance his 'power', and decided to target the beggars and the homeless." The remainder of the report was just a blitz attacking Falun Gong.
In the investigation of the gas explosion case, they were going to proceed "according to the stipulations by the laws on production safety and other related codes and regulations to apportion blames." In Chen's case, did they do that?
First, the statements made by Chen were either subjective statements of his own, or words by reporters of Xinhua News Agency; none were from any Falun Gong texts. How could one presume that Chen was a Falun Gong practitioner?
Second, how could Chen's individual conduct be extrapolated to and used as basis to affix blame over everyone who practices Falun Gong? The malicious intention to frame Falun Gong is obvious.
Category: Perspective
