槍擊案,連家人不滿 News released as such. 馬面確認是誤殺連家人不滿 The former President Lien, at the very first moment the night his son Sean Lien (連勝文)was shot, said his feel that the gun-shot at was "an organized crime"(集團性犯罪). The feel might 室內設計 refer to the mafias as well as any political entity. Based on his experience in 2004, Lien seemed to presume the opposition party led the gun-shot. He called for the just 裝潢ice by the ballot. It was "correct" in a way. He showed himself an experienced politico. However, the party he might refer to is too weak and too naive to do this. He started to think other 襯衫 possibility. He was making the scenario day by day. The Chair of AIT Raymond F. Burghardt commented the shoot "too complicated"(太複雜) in Chinese. He commented on 2nd December, six day after the shoot. That showed 住商房屋AIT had reviewed many possibilities by then. Burghardt's comment implied Lien's "organized crime" presumption. A friend of Sean Lien said連勝文不反對公佈槍擊影帶, which meant the gun-shot was merely a mafia's mis-shot does n 票貼ot satisfied their scenario. They must know more inside stories than us. An observer found the place of the gun-shot, Yong-he city, caused KMT supporters there went out and vote on the next day. KMT's superiority there and the neighboring area Chung-he city 面膜 were so apparent and overwhelming. Tsai Ying-wen's lost there was about her lost in total. It means no one knows the result if no gun-shot. The gun-shot did have the power to overturn the election. And this basic fact leads to the question: Who invited Sean Lien to ther 澎湖民宿e? He had no plan be there that night... It was not good. That implies some agitators might know how to alter the result of election and did it. Will it be a story in Burghardt's :too complicated"? Will it mark the end of Taiwan democracy? Too hard to tell. The late professor Harold H. Lasswell 租房子 wrote a famous book "Politics: Who Gets What, When and How" in which he defined politics as a procedure of such. He focused on: "Who governs? For what ends? By what means?" Observers used Professor Lasswell's model and revised it an application one that "the one who makes the profit most from the incident did it 膠原蛋白." Lien as well as KMT presumed that CSB led the gun-shot of 2004 because he earned the most from the incident. It seemed logical if we ruled out all the evidences. Now who earned the most in Sean's gun-shot? .msgcontent .wsharing ul li { text-indent: 0; } 分享 Facebook Plurk YAHOO! 酒店打工  .
創作者介紹
創作者 bfcxlaxspfxgi 的頭像
bfcxlaxspfxgi

五月天

bfcxlaxspfxgi 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()