推 Julien:辛苦了~~網上大家資訊越來越多元化，也重視多方 128.12.173.46 05/02
→ Julien:查證....好現象~~~ 128.12.173.46 05/02
昨天有大陸網友拿李敖的說法來將64跟肯特事件類比
私以為這是大錯特錯的類比
以下為李敖說法
http://64.77.54.18/principle/15.html
一、朝學生開槍之事，美國自己，早優為之。試看一九七O年美國歷史上
「肯特大學槍殺事件」，便知端詳。一九七O年四月三十日尼克森下令進軍柬埔寨之後，
激起了肯特大學學生們的滿腔怒火。五月四日上午，當學生不顧禁止集會的命令、
敲響校鐘、數千名學生立即從四面八方奔向操場、參加抗議集會的時候，
美國政府出動了坦克、出動第一O七裝甲騎兵團、第一四五步兵團、出動了大批
國民警衛隊和警察，前去鎮壓。排槍齊放，當場打死男女學生四名、打傷十名，
然後又用刺刀戳傷學生多人。死難者的鮮血染紅了肯特大學的校園。接著，
又進行了大逮捕。九百名軍警占묊滮F學校。一個目擊者憤慨的說：這是「有組織的屠殺」。
在「有組織的屠殺」當時，一名學生懷著對死難同學的無限悲痛，
和對政府當局的滿腔仇恨，奮不顧身，爬上校園裏一座高大雕像的頂上，
他用手指做出「V」字形的象徵勝利的手勢，號召學生們繼續堅持鬥爭。
一千多名教職員義憤填膺的到學校附近的一個教堂舉行集會，強烈抗議美國政府的暴行。
一位被打傷的學生的母親聞訊趕到肯特巿，譴責美國政府「像在越南戰場上一樣」，
派出大批軍隊和坦克屠殺學生。一位死難女學生的父親憤怒控訴說：
「一個年輕的女孩子，僅僅因為她不同意政府的行動，就應該被槍殺嗎
?」但是，槍殺了又怎樣，又有誰有了制裁的行動了？
以下為美國人說法
http://www.spectacle.org/595/kent.html
http://dept.kent.edu/sociology/lewis/LEWIHEN.htm
由於原文太長 我只根據網友跟李敖的說法回應
1 有網友說 因為反戰所以美國政府就鎮壓實為野蠻做法
根據這點為無的放矢 美國國民警衛對在這次錯誤行動
並沒有針對反戰進行鎮壓 根據當時市長的想法
是擔心抗議行動演變為種族衝突 而做的
雖然市長考量有其道理 不過不足以衛期錯誤的行動找藉口
但是要說此鎮壓行動是針對反戰 是大錯特錯的說法
而64事件 卻是針對民主速球的鎮壓 64之後再也沒有人敢要球民主
而肯特事件後 美國各地仍然持有反戰示威
The next day, Saturday, May 2, Mayor Satrom met with other city officials
and a representative of the Ohio National Guard who had been dispatched
to Kent. Mayor Satrom then made the decision to ask Governor Rhodes to
send the Ohio National Guard to Kent. The mayor feared further disturbances
in Kent based upon the events of the previous evening, but more disturbing
to the mayor were threats that had been made to downtown businesses and
city officials as well as rumors that radical revolutionaries were in
Kent to destroy the city and the university. Satrom was fearful that local
forces would be inadequate to meet the potential disturbances, and
thus about 5 p.m. he called the Governor's office to make an official
request for assistance from the Ohio National Guard.
2 國民警衛隊 故意槍殺學生????
肯特事件死亡的4名學生根據調查結果 死亡學生距離國民警衛隊
分別在270 330 390 390 英尺 國民警衛隊的槍法這麼準???
其中一名還是在停車場被擊中 距離學生包圍的大樓友好長一段距離
但是讓荷槍實彈的警衛隊近學校仍是一錯誤做法
主要在於在當地警察已經無法控制示威行動 市場才請求州長要球警衛隊進住
而在國民警衛隊進來前在ROTC大樓這邊 已經有人在放火燒大樓了
至於誰放的仍有爭議 不過 調查請向事種族主義者在茲事
全部13秒的開槍過程中 大約打了60多發子彈 絕大部分都是朝天空打的
這跟64坦克車直接輾斃中國人民 機關槍直接掃射有極大不同
況且中國人民的反抗是在解放軍開始進駐才有的
這跟肯特事件在警衛隊進駐前已開始茲事有極大的不同
Four Kent State students died as a result of the firing by the Guard.
The closest student was Jeffrey Miller, who was shot in the mouth while
standing in an access road leading into the Prentice Hall parking lot,
a distance of approximately 270 feet from the Guard. Allison Krause was
in the Prentice Hall parking lot; she was 330 feet from the Guardsmen and
was shot in the left side of her body. William Schroeder was 390 feet
from the Guard in the Prentice Hall parking lot when he was shot in the left
side of his back. Sandra Scheuer was also about 390 feet from the Guard in
the Prentice Hall parking lot when a bullet pierced the left front side of
her neck.
3 事後政府處理態度
很遺憾這點美國政府也是楚於被動消極的情況下
不過在強大輿論的壓力下 州政府最後仍對此行動表達後悔(REGERT)
並且賠償受害學生 這跟李敖裡面說 槍殺了又怎樣，又有誰有了制裁的行動了？
是絕隊與事實不伏的
而64事件 中國政府仍在裝瘋賣傻中
4 坦克車是否進駐 裝甲季兵團是否進駐
根據我目前看到的美國調查報告中 沒有提到有坦克車漢裝甲季兵團
有在此行動中 全部的行動都是警方 國民警備隊 和市長州長有關
5 警備隊為何開槍
目前看到的說法 警備隊基於自衛理由 還有 警備隊訓練不足
The answer offered by the Guardsmen is that they fired because they were
in fear of their lives. Guardsmen testified before numerous
investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the
demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and
immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen,
and they therefore had to fire in self-defense.
由於人群逐漸接近警備隊 警備隊害怕之虞 開槍警告
不過不同調查反駁這說法認為人群始終沒有靠近威脅警備隊
Since all were wearing gas masks, it is impossible to identify them in
pictures (many had also removed or covered their name tags, a classic ploy
of law enforcement officers about to commit brutality in the '60's
and '70's), and though many confessed to having fired their weapons,
none admitted to being in the first row and therefore, among the first to
fire. The ballistic evidence could have helped here, but none was taken.
所有警備隊都否認他們開了第一槍 明顯認為是聽到槍聲後才跟著開槍
這就是所謂第一槍效應 兩幫匪徒拿槍互指對方 不開槍都沒事
一開槍就所有人跟著開 可是國民警備隊不是匪徒 沒有聽到開槍命令竟然
出現第一槍效應 可見其訓練之差勁
不論任何調查報告都否認有市長或州長要球開槍鎮壓學生
這跟李敖文中引述一人說 有組織的屠殺 更是一個莫須有的罪名
而64事件卻是中共高層直接下令開槍 坦克車進駐 這才是有組織的屠殺
6示威人數有多少
根據目前看到的說法 核心成員約500名 1000是外圍支持活動的群眾
而另外1500只是來看熱鬧的 所以可以說約千餘名參與這活動
李敖文中說數千名 不只不精確還有引人放大規模之嫌
Although University officials had attempted on the morning of May 4 to
inform the campus that the rally was prohibited, a crowd began to gather
beginning as early as 11 a.m. By noon, the entire Commons area contained
approximately 3000 people. Although estimates are inexact, probably about
500 core demonstrators were gathered around the Victory Bell at one end of
the Commons, another 1000 people were "cheerleaders" supporting the active
demonstrators, and an additional 1500 people were spectators
standing around the perimeter of the Commons
結尾 板上某些網友處心積慮要把美國政府妖魔化成跟CCP 一樣
選擇性閱讀 選擇性解釋症狀嚴重的程度 真是令人驚訝
稿的我第一次這麼認真打一篇文章跟大家說說
--
言論自由是中國神聖但可分割的一部分
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 218.160.89.54