新足迹 › 论坛 › 澳洲生活区 › 新闻汇总 › 国际新闻 › SMH社论：枪手直接瞄准美国政治进程

精华好帖回顾
· 毕业八年转行3次 (征文分享你的成功之路,更新) (2008-5-12) Artcore	· 看了一国产偶像剧叫《奋斗》 (2007-10-7) 东食西宿
· 谈谈女儿去FAMILY DAY CARE一年的体会，希望给由有此想法的TX做参考 (2007-10-11) joy4land	· Web of Pearls (2014-9-17) silvia

查看: 2031|回复: 22

[北美] SMH社论：枪手直接瞄准美国政治进程 [复制链接]

dootbear

版主

发表于 2024-7-15 09:32 |显示全部楼层

此文章由 dootbear 原创或转贴，不代表本站立场和观点，版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 dootbear 所有！转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明，并保持内容完整

SMH社论：枪手直接瞄准美国政治进程

隐藏在美国例外主义另一面的疯狂可能确保了前总统特朗普以压倒性优势赢得总统大选。

对特朗普的暗杀未遂事件创造了一幅反抗的标志性图像，视频显示前总统在宾夕法尼亚州的一次集会上演讲时，被子弹击穿右耳，血流满面，但他举起拳头。

在这次事件中，枪手杀死了一名旁观者，重伤了另外两人，随后被美国当局击毙。

世界曾多次目睹美国特勤局特工在其他美国政治暗杀事件中跃身保护目标人物，但特朗普从特工的包围中脱身，高喊“战斗，战斗，战斗”，并高举拳头，这既是对其支持者的火炬，也是一个即时提醒，他不是一个普通的政治人物。

总统拜登过去几周一直在努力保持支持并应对人们对他能否再担任四年总统的担忧，但在一个暴力时刻，特朗普一扫拜登的风头。

在血腥、混乱、恐慌和恐怖中，特朗普能够专注于他的主要目标，记住在他的世界里，视觉效果可以产生巨大的影响。

在特朗普遇袭后，拜登表示，每个人都有权利在没有子弹威胁的情况下参加政治集会，但无论枪手的动机如何，美国人再次认识到没有一个领导人是安全的。

周末的枪击事件为特朗普创造了一个新的身份：也许是他战斗生涯中第一次，他唤起了人们的同情。

自1963年约翰·F·肯尼迪遇刺以来，特朗普是第三位遭遇枪手袭击的总统。

世界对此表示震惊，澳洲总理阿尔巴尼斯与许多领导人一道谴责这次袭击，称在民主进程中没有暴力的立足之地。

他说，“这是一场对民主价值观的不可原谅的攻击，这些价值观是澳洲人和美国人所共享的，是我们珍视的自由”。

他说，“我们必须降低辩论的温度。在我们的政治辩论、政治话语中，我们看到了一些言辞升级，这对我们没有任何好处。在民主世界中，这不是美国独有的现象。”

《SMH》也对此表示同意。

这是美国的悲剧，枪手伤害了拜登和特朗普，枪手直接瞄准了美国的政治进程。

当然，在民主进程中没有政治暴力的立足之地，尽管特朗普令许多人厌恶，他在美国两方煽动了狂热，美国政治需要回归文明和尊重，让思想、意识形态和个性能够相互竞争。

像自由女神像一样，美国曾经是向世界展示民主可以创造一个更公平、更公正和更幸福社会的火炬。诉诸暴力削弱了民主，威胁到这道光。

来源：

https://www.smh.com.au/world/nor ... 0240714-p5jthg.html

The Herald's View

Updated July 14, 2024 — 5.58pmfirst published at 3.52pm

管理人员评分

哇哇哇在2024-7-18 09:39 +22分 并说

集会枪击

评分

参与人数 2	积分 +5	收起理由
AFL123	+ 3	感谢分享
APSTNDP	+ 2	我很赞同

查看全部评分

symeteor

钻石靴族

发表于 2024-7-15 11:10 |显示全部楼层

此文章由 symeteor 原创或转贴，不代表本站立场和观点，版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 symeteor 所有！转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明，并保持内容完整

SAland 发表于 2024-7-15 09:54
当初他具体哪句话或言论 “号召人们暴力攻击国会山” 了？

这个提问挺有意思的，专门查了下，第一次认真看看当时的川普演讲稿

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/9 ... f-impeachment-trial

Today I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election and we won it by a landslide. This was not a close election.

...

All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats, which is what they're doing. And stolen by the fake news media. That's what they've done and what they're doing. We will never give up, we will never concede. It doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's theft involved.

...

Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that's what this is all about. And to use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with: We will stop the steal. Today I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election and we won it by a landslide. This was not a close election.

And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.

...

So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we're going to the Capitol, and we're going to try and give.

基本上就是不承认败选，认为选举被偷了，号召人民继续战斗，不战斗国家就没了。
然后号召大家沿路走下去去国会大厦。

没有明确的说要武力，但是在当时那个情况，个人看法是出现暴利行为基本是可以预见的。

关于论坛新闻版发帖标准的问题

https://www.oursteps.com.au/bbs/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1827326

gravercc48

皮靴族

发表于 2024-7-15 11:13 |显示全部楼层

此文章由 gravercc48 原创或转贴，不代表本站立场和观点，版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 gravercc48 所有！转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明，并保持内容完整

懂王要王者归来了

SAland

金靴族

发表于 2024-7-15 11:27 |显示全部楼层

此文章由 SAland 原创或转贴，不代表本站立场和观点，版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 SAland 所有！转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明，并保持内容完整

symeteor 发表于 2024-7-15 10:10
这个提问挺有意思的，专门查了下，第一次认真看看当时的川普演讲稿

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966 ...

因为 “基本上就是不承认败选，认为选举被偷了，号召人民继续战斗，不战斗国家就没了。然后号召大家沿路走下去去国会大厦。”

所以他 “号召人们暴力攻击国会山” 了

嗯，三段论论证非常严密，guilt proven beyond reasonable doubt! 左派逻辑的确强大无敌

评分

参与人数 1	积分 +2	收起理由
APSTNDP	+ 2	你太有才了

查看全部评分

yanqishui32

金靴族

发表于 2024-7-15 11:29 来自手机 |显示全部楼层

此文章由 yanqishui32 原创或转贴，不代表本站立场和观点，版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 yanqishui32 所有！转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明，并保持内容完整

我是美国老百姓，我也选懂王。懂王在的时候，美国物价低，治安也好，世界也太平。
睡王这4年，一塌糊涂。

symeteor

钻石靴族

发表于 2024-7-15 11:41 |显示全部楼层

此文章由 symeteor 原创或转贴，不代表本站立场和观点，版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 symeteor 所有！转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明，并保持内容完整

SAland 发表于 2024-7-15 10:27
因为 “基本上就是不承认败选，认为选举被偷了，号召人民继续战斗，不战斗国家就没了。然后号召大家沿路 ...

文革中

你站到红卫兵中，拿大喇叭喊，保家卫国，打到刘少奇，打倒反革命分子姚桐斌。

然后姚桐斌被打死了。

你说，我只说打倒，我没说要用暴力打倒啊。我更没说要打死，这事可和我没关系。

嗯嗯，确实和你无关。

从法律上讲，你确实没直接说用暴力。但是煽动呢？

而川普案，而法庭上的辩论也是在于此

What is incitement under the law?

Incitement is not a crime under the First Amendment unless it meets certain criteria.

First of all, it has to be intended to cause violence (and you infer that intent from the circumstances). It also has to be likely to cause violence.

If I go downtown and I say to two drunks standing in front of a bank, "let's rob this bank right now", I haven't really incited anybody, because it's not very likely they'll rob the bank.

If I say let's meet here tomorrow and rip things up, I'm not inciting because - in the words of the Supreme Court - where there is time for better counsels to prevail, the remedy for speech is more speech.

The speech has to be likely to cause - and this is very important - imminent violent action.

If this was a court of law, does Trump cross the line?

It's quite rare that somebody can be convicted of incitement. In applying that to the president's speech at the rally, it's an agonisingly close case.

It's pretty goddamn imminent because he's telling people to march to the Capitol and I will march with you. There wouldn't be any time for better counsels to prevail because you're just going to leave the Ellipse and walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

He said we have to fight and show strength, but he also said we're very peacefully and patriotically going to ask, so he's covering himself. In the end, I think it's a jury question.

I'm not sure he's entitled to a dismissal of charges as a matter of law. There's some discussion that government leaders have more leeway, but I don't know how that would play out.

He clearly knew there were people in that crowd who were ready to and intended to be violent, and he certainly did nothing to discourage that. He not only did nothing to discourage it, he strongly hinted it should happen.