To those of us who attended college in the late sixties and early seventies, the killings at Kent State University on May 4, 1970 remain indelibly fixed in memory. They came at a particularly turbulent time in the country’s history, following the annus horribilis of 1968 and the murders of Martin and Bobby; the student strikes and uprisings, not only in the U.S. but in Europe, particularly France; the Cuban airplane hijackings, the rise of Middle Eastern terrorism and the tumult of the Nixon Administration.

For years, the media narrative has been fixed: that a skittish and undisciplined National Guard fired unprovoked into a crowd of student protesters, killing four. Now comes Fox News’s James Rosen with a revisionist take:
Previously undisclosed FBI documents suggest that the Kent State antiwar protests were more meticulously planned than originally thought and that one or more gunshots may have been fired at embattled Ohio National Guardsmen before their killings of four students and woundings of at least nine others on that searing day in May 1970.
As the nation marks the 40th anniversary of the Kent State antiwar protests Tuesday, a review of hundreds of previously unpublished investigative reports sheds a new — and very different — light on the tragic episode.
As Rosen correctly notes, lost in the “narrative” has been the three days of campus and civil unrest preceding the shootings, in protest over Nixon’s incursion into Cambodia, during which the university’s ROTC center was attacked and burned.
The upheaval that enveloped the northeastern Ohio campus actually began three days earlier, in downtown Kent. Stirred to action by President Nixon’s expansion of U.S. military operations in Cambodia, a roving mob of earnest antiwar activists, hard-core radicals, curious students and others smashed 50 bank and store windows, looted a jewelry store and hurled bricks and bottles at police.
Four officers suffered injuries, and the mayor declared a civil emergency. Only tear gas dispersed the mob…
Now largely forgotten, the torching of the ROTC building was the true precursor to the killings at Kent State because it triggered the deployment of the National Guard to the fevered campus.
That deployment climaxed in bloodshed on the afternoon of May 4, 1970, with the guardsmen, clad in gas masks and confronted by angry, rock-throwing students, firing their M-1 rifles 67 times in 13 seconds, killing Allison Krause, Jeffrey Miller, Sandra Scheuer and William Knox Schroeder.
g
For years, the question has been whether the Guardsmen were actually fired upon before loosing their fatal volley. Official investigations said no. Rosen says:
Yet the declassified FBI files show the FBI already had developed credible evidence suggesting that there was indeed a sniper and that one or more shots may have been fired at the guardsmen first.
Rumors of a sniper had circulated for at least a day before the fatal confrontation, the documents show. And a memorandum sent to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover on May 19, 1970, referred to bullet holes found in a tree and a statue — evidence, the report stated, that “indicated that at least two shots had been fired at the National Guard.”
Another interviewee told agents that a guardsman had spoken of “a confirmed report of a sniper.”
Rosen concludes:
At a minimum, the FBI documents strongly challenge the received narrative that the rioting in downtown Kent was spontaneous and unplanned, that the burning of the ROTC headquarters was similarly impulsive and that the guardsmen’s fatal shootings were explicable only as unprovoked acts.
The FBI files provide, in short, a hidden history of the killings at Kent State. They show that the “four dead in Ohio” more properly belong, in the grand sweep of history, to four days in May, an angry, chaotic and violent interlude when a controversial foreign war came home to American soil.
In the wake of the arrest of Faisal Shahzad in connection with the attempted bombing in Times Square over the weekend, suddenly everything old is new again.






Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
593 Comments
Neil Young is not amused.
I had returned from Viet Nam in 1966 and remember the extreme hatred shown by the leftists toward soldiers retuning home. That was a period of "Movements" that planned and carried out attacks on many government institutions and any innocent bystander was considered expendable by the anarchists. As in any crowd there are the curious but the dangerous are the ones who get caught up in the rhetoric of the leaders. The leaders are usually charismatic and have been schooled in ways to get a crowd riled up. Sort of like a community organizer. Then they hide behind the wave of fools who have bought into their meme and watch the carnage. The more the merrier because it means more press if someone bleeds.
Hardly matters now. The Left has done their damage. Anyone with commonsense and a little exposure to them knew what shits most of the war protestors were. Coulldn't have gotten much of the public to believe the truth back then, just as it is now.
Kent State also changed the way our soldiers are prepared for domestic duty. When my father was ordered to assist in the postal strike, they took all of the cartridges away from him and his men. If trouble broke out they were defenseless. In fact they refused to occupy the post office without police protection!
In my lectures on recent American history, 1945 to present, I have always pointed out the burning of the ROTC building as proof that the protesters were far from peaceful. I will incorporate the new material into my lectures. The leftst professors will disregard it simply because it comes from the FBI.
These Leftists are not Anti War, they are ok with our enemies winning but do not want America to win. (Hanoi Jane Fonda wanted the Viet Cong to win )
Well, I'd like to see the declassified FBI files he refers to. It's interesting to speculate who the information came from, as Terry Norman – a part time FBI informant who was also an agitator – was apparently seen waving a gun around. Google his name and some interesting things will come up.
Always useful not to take any piece of journalism at face value but to dig deeper and read opposing views. The only narratives ignoring that there were three days of rioting and protest before the killings are usually short, 1-2 page newspaper articles like this one. Whether the spin is left or right, they're all written in broad strokes.
I'm sure we'll never know the full truth, but I don't think the kids at Kent State were as organized or as mean-spirited as say, those in the SDS splinter group that became the Weather Underground.
I do know, however, that one of the dead was an ROTC student shot in the back while walking to class, and I wish that fact was remembered.
This new revelation would have more creditability if the "sniper" had been a better shot….
Until the "sniper" comes forward, I'm going with revenge for burning the ROTC building…
But it was an unbelievably turbulent time….
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vince Humphreys, Barry, greychampion, Lake Crazy ♫, Juli and others. Juli said: Forty Years Later, Fresh Revelations About What Really Happened At Kent State http://is.gd/bTGB7 [...]
[...] Read the rest. [...]
I remember this very well. I also remember arguing with people about the film that was being shot at the time of the incident. You could actually hear what sounded like gun shots, before the Guard fired back. I knew that it was bad for the returning guys, but I didn't understand how bad it was until years later. At the time I didn't understand why I had so many friends that were Viet Nam vets. I later realized that I was one of the few people that didn't call them names, judge them, or treat them like trash.
The National Guard has a series of "Heritage Paintings" that are oil originals and prints given to people leaving, retiring or for jobs well done. They depict National Guard events back to the very first muster in the 1600. THey've lost their meaning over time and now when they are received, they usually wind up in the trash as something else to should not be packed for the next move. A few years back, someone developed a fake image and placed it in the exact large scale frame as the heritage paintings. It was give the name "Buckeye Victory" and the notation on the plaque told the forbidden-to-mention story of the burnt ROTC building. It was quite funny and many spoke the damning words…"Well, a win is a win no matter how you look at it". THe individual that was responsible was denounced and is now a civilian. On only has to look at the Kent State photographs readily available on the web to see the burned and destroyed building. Wow…can't talk at all at leftitst violence because its not PC.
Whatever else one thinks about Kent State. Tea Party folks should always be aware of this incident as we move forward. The rhetoric of violence is there, and the ramping up of overt security is also there. Whether the tea party protestors are violent or not (and no evidence to date suggests they are), all it takes is a nudge in the wrong direction, and we wind up at Kent State all over again. Tea Party folks need to be well aware of their own as much as they are aware of the security and opposition. Not necessarily because one of the tea party folks could tip things over, but because an infiltrator could.
Well said. I'm no lefty, and I wasn't a college student back then, but the FBI has not been without taint themselves. We will probably never know exactly what happened after all these years.
I don't condone what the students did, but burning an unoccupied building in protest is not the same as shooting and killing four students.
Well it is Fox news telling this ridiculous story. Fox must be fabricating these lies to besmirch all the fine, upstanding students who attended this peaceful demonstration all those years ago. (I'm just weighing in with Obama's talking points to save him the trouble.)
Oh, and that picture that is being shown was staged a day or 2 after the event. It is not a picture of one of the students that were killed. But it's funny how everybody looks at it like it is such an iconic photo. Just look at the people around the 2 that are on the ground. They're just walking around minding their own business. The surrounding people sure don't look like they are at a riot scene where the National Guard just let loose 67 shots into the crowd.
We know from recent histories that Soviet active measures were extensive. Former Soviet KGB general Oleg Kalugin, who defected and is now an American citizen, has acknowledged (including an appearance at the 2003 Raleigh Spy Conference) that Soviet Communists pumped millions of dollars into active measures to promote socialist revolution in America. In Ayers’ memoir, Fugitive Days (2001), he obliquely mentions “mother country radicals here in the heartland” who directed the “movement.” Ayers’ words are clearly euphemisms for Soviet agents in America. “U.S. OUT OF VIETNAM!” was the chant of the American peace movement led by members of the Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA) and others like SDS, the Weathermen, and VVAW, whose Communist ties and sympathies are well documented. (Why is the CPUSA left out of public discussion and analysis?) Of course they wanted us “OUT OF VIETNAM” so their Soviet Union masters could take it over which they did! While Communists battled our troops in Vietnam, our Communists fought on the real front lines of the war: Winning the hearts and minds, usually stoned out of their minds, here in the United States.
I've reminded folks about this in the past. The tea parties have been completely peaceful up until this point, but it's an old trick to stick someone in a crowd during a protest and try to incite the people so that arrests can be made and the protest can be ended.
Never forget that we're protesting the government just like the kids at Kent State were. We may have different political philosophies, but were still protesting the government. The people in power don't ever like that sort of thing, which is why there were SWAT teams in Quincy, Illinois, when Obama came to town.
I was twelve. I had better things to do than worry about social upheavals… like learning to tie flies and fly cast.
John Kerry and his WINTER SOLDIER movement gave these clowns momentum. The reason Nixon was attacking Cambodia was because it had become a major supply route into South Vietnam and he was trying to get the South Vietnamese Army to begin defending their own country. These college nitwits were only concerned about saving their butts from possible service to their nation. As one other Vietnam Vet once asked…"I wonder where the anti-war protesters have THEIR reunions?"
Libertarians were against the war in Viet Nam, too. It wasn't just a bunch of commies, so please keep that in mind before you paint the entire anti-war movement as a product of far-left ideology.
Here's a question: Would you support Obama instituting a draft and sending your children to Afghanistan? Isn't this a war that must be won? If your answer is anything other than a resounding "Yes!" then maybe you'll understand why so many young folks were against the Viet Nam war.
The state does not own our children.
just like they deny Hayden's involvement, and Ayers and the panthers! disgusting isn't it?!
That's not true. The picture was taken the day of the incident, but it was altered in the '70s to take out a post that was behind the girl's head.
I would also suspect that Crosby, Stills and Nash are exactly giddy for joy either.
In August of '70, right after getting out of basic training and AIT, while going through O'Hare, a woman started beating on me and shouting, at me, at the top of her lungs "baby killer!" 'Never did make it to Viet Nam but she, like so many of the other geniuses on the Left, couldn't concern themselves with details like looking at my uniform to figure out if I had actually gone. I'm still pissed off about that crap. The only thing that went wrong at Kent is that so many of them WEREN'T shot.
"These college nitwits were only concerned about saving their butts from possible service to their nation.""
The nation does not own our butts. If you believe otherwise, you don't believe in limited government.
I was a guardsman in Los Angeles during the Rodney King riots. Our deployment out on the streets – except for one small MP company – was delayed more than 24 hours while we waited for delivery and fitting of small locking bars on our M-16 series rifles that blocked the full automatic selector switch. A prudent measure, but worth 24+ hours of mayhem?
Also, we had 8 levels of readiness posture ranging from weapons slung and unloaded to weapon loaded-bayonet fixed-carried at port. Posture dictated from headquarters-though leader on site could change in emergency.
I liked the Marine Col. who, when questioned by a reporter if they planned to arrest any looters: " No ma'm. We do not have authority to arrest anyone. We can shoot people, but we can't arrest them."
BTW. Forget what you might have seen on TV and Maxine Waters nonsense. An HOUR did not go by without someone thanking us for being there.
And I suppose there wasn't a chapter of the SDS on campus either. A lot of info was never told to the public. It would have caused fear in most and a loss of income for many. The fear to move about freely costs money.
We are not talking about a hayrick here. You just don't spontaneously strike a match and set a modern building on fire to the extent it is completely destroyed. Someone knew exactly what they were doing and came prepared to do it.
That is NOT the sole reason they were protesting! It was NOT just about the draft – c'mon, paint the WHOLE picture and be honest – thanks
The anti-war movement was not (and still isn't) just a left wing thing. Plenty of folks on the right were against the war, and that's pretty much where the modern Libertarian Party split from the Republican Party.
And I never said tea party members have the same beliefs as the protesters during the '60s. I said the exact opposite. I simply pointed out that protesters during the '60s protested the government—just like we do. And just like back then, the folks in charge don't like that.
WLR – thank you for your service. I was forward deployed on a guided missile frigate in the Persian Gulf at the time. In fact, I was an exchange officer on a Saudi missile boat when the riots broke out. The Saudi officers asked me: "so, how are things going with the civil war in America now?" I told them it was just a bunch of punks out looting so they go steal a new TV. I don't think the Saudis believed me.
I am doubtful there was a sniper. "Rumors" of a sniper could spread all too readily. The main points remain:
1. Protest were riots – full blown and destructive. Local police unable to handle.
2. Violence was actively promoted. You don't "spontaneously" burn down a modern building. This was a pre-planned arson.
3. Given points one and two, local authorities and Governor fully justified in calling in Guard.
4. With only 12 weekends and 2 weeks per year to train, Guardsmen get precious little training in riot control (except some MP units). No suprise if they panic in a tight spot. I consider a rock and molotov cocktail throwing mob that outnumbers me and my comrades by several factors a tight spot.
Yes, thank you for your service.
When I was 5 and 6, one of my neighbors was my baby sitter.
He served honorably as a helicopter pilot and was KIA.
I am glad you made it back and still pray for the souls that did not.
I disagree. We began as a liberty country, and we've devolved into a law and order country. Are you really going to argue we don't have more laws now than we did a hundred years ago? Fifty years ago? We were a far freer country at our founding than we are today, and there were far fewer laws on the books back then.
Things like the health care mandate are an unfortunate symptom of becoming a law and order country. Rules crafted by "the authorities" have become far too important to too many people. "Law and order" is for places like 1930s Germany and Italy or the Soviet Union. North Korea and China are good examples of "law and order" taken to the extreme. I don't think our founders intended for America to be like that.
Hey Skat….Stupid does not begin to define you,,,,Ever watch fox news? You might learn the truth once in a while. Look for the truth…it's out there…., so lets be intellectually honest here. Independent groups have studied the news and Fox is by far the most balanced. Look it up. Realize too that when you are young you are inexperienced. Keep your mouth a little more quiet until you learn how life really works and that the Left will twist you into whatever they want you to be. Wise up…
My cousin did go to VietNam. He was coming home and while walking through the airport, had the same thing happen to him. It was horrible. He lost his younger brother the following year in VietNam. He stepped on a land mine three weeks after arriving there. He was 20 years old.
The lefties wanted a riot, planned for a riot, did everything in their power to create a riot. And people died. It doesn't surprise me one bit that events may have been different than reported.
Now I have horrible thoughts of Tea Parties being "infiltrated" by a lefty with a gun. No matter how peaceful the whole rally is, all it would take is one shot at the guys in riot gear.
I was a child during this period.I belonged to a nice family. My mother got us all (4) our own POW/MIA bracelets, and I wore mine 24/7. My impression as I grew older was simple. These protesters were violent , drugged up , detached from humanity.
As creepy as they were and are, they certainly have taken over this gov. No telling where this will go.
Without our police and Army, I look around my home and city, knowing that it would all be gone.
I'm simply too sick of thses people voicing their opinion. Illegals need to be forced to leave.
Our government has completely failed us.
I always wondered about that. It hit me too, the obvious disinterest in the "tragedy" in front of the other students. I just figured they were stone cold Republicans.
))
Nobody is saying here that the four victims of the shootings were anything but innocent victims. But the detailed evidence of what actually was occurring over the four days of violence and arson at Kent State suggests the active participation of violent radicals like the Weathermen.
That no guardsmen were shot could indicate that the intent of the snipers was to provoke the return volley. For the radicals, this resulted in the best possible outcome—dead innocents to be exploited with no guard casualties to raise questions.
As an impressionable freshman the following year, I observed that there was an element within the organizers of protests in 1971 and 1972 which was intent on provoking a violent response from the police.
What's disturbing to me in Rosen's article is the fact that FBI higher echelons chose to ignore so much evidence in order to arrive at the "spontaneous violence" verdict. There are obviously elements within the FBI and intelligence community who follow an agenda which runs counter to the best interests of the United States.
40 years it takes to come up with a "sniper" theory. 67 shots were fired indiscriminantly during a 13 second period by trained, uniformed national guardsmen. Did all these guardsmen turn and fire as a reaction to a sinper's bullet? That is not a reaction any trained serviceman would have. The FBI will have to find better credible evidence than that.
I'm sorry about your loss, Cardi. Very sad times made a whole lot sadder by the Regressives. I was 18 and as naive as I could be–didn't, at first, realize what she was pushing.
It's a real picture, I meant that the subject matter is fake. The person on the ground and the woman over him are there for the sole purpose of creating a dramatic picture (i.e. anti-war propagand pic).
If you think that this is an actual picture of the actual Kent State incident, then tell me why all the people around them are just casually walking around. If the Army was firing into a crowd, don't you think people would be doing something more than strolling across the campus?
No mix there, MColins, I'm constantly baffled at the Left's ability to misuse/abuse reason, logic, facts, etc. I've often thought of that specific point you mentioned. These people have to be crushed.
While I do oppose a draft in peacetime, in war, especially in a republic, the nation must take steps to insure its safety and survival. Vietnam was a battle in the Cold War, and was an important component in the war. Not only did millions of South-East Asians died after we left (more then died during actual conflict), but a domino effect did happen. Not only in SE Asia, but because of the sense of victory by our leaving Vietnam (which by the way, 1973 Peace Accords obtained a Korea style peace, the 1975 invasion that we reneged on led to the communist victory) that propelled the communist takeovers in Africa and South America. So yes, there was an important reason to be in Vietnam.
Your posts on this topic is spot on Kristine – thank you! I seroiusly doubt the vast majority opposed us being in Veitnam! The push and propoganda was extensive -
Having graduated from Kent State in December 1969, the events of May 1970 were shocking but not unexpected. I recall SDS members taunting ROTC for years as the cadets practiced drills on the outdoor fields next to the dorm. I also recall years before the shooting, national SDS leaders and anti-Vietnam mongers, appearing mysteriously on campus, only to stir local students to their national agenda. The Kent State tragedy did not happen days before, but began years before.
You make an indefensible jump. According to this article, the actual plotters used the students as cannon fodder, hoping that some of them would get shot in order to use their deaths to push the agenda.
As for Norman, well, it would hardly be the first, or last, time a double agent suckered the FBI (or the CIA, or the … Doubles and triples are a hazard of the profession.) Him waving a gun like that suggests the FBI brass would have been embarressed by being suckered.
This was after the shots were fired. There's no point trying to argue the picture is fake. There are plenty of witnesses who all say it was real, and you're simply speculating that it was staged because people are standing around.
If it were staged, the photographer would have placed the girl so the pole wasn't coming out of her head.
When someone asks if you're a baby killer, you just say 'No, I don't believe in abortion.' Then you ask them if they have ever killed a baby or support the the baby killing policy of the left.
That should shut them up. For a few seconds anyway.
Thank you for your service and for your very well stated comment.
So you disagree with Reagan? He also opposed the draft. By the way, we "lost" in Viet Nam and now they're our trading partner. Funny how communism never seems to last…
Oh, Maxine Waters, there's a waste of human intelligence. How she every got elected, I'll never know. I hope California finally sees the light and votes all these leftist bums out, but I don't hold out much hope that that will happen.
That is a GREAT point. I'm very surprised the elitist left did not blame the Guard or others for starting the fire in the ROTC building in order to frame the "peacefully" protesting students in an attempt to resort to violence to quell the uprising.
The photographer was an amatuer. The post thing probably didn't occur to him. Plus after this picture won the pulitzer prize and has entered into near myth, nobody involved will admit the truth. And plenty of wannabes will tell stories to make themselves seem that they were a part of something so famous. Plus, any witnesses are sympathetic to the cause and will taylor their answers in support the anti-military theme the picture represents.
Considering the situation, the agitators only had to make sure the Guardsmen /though/ there was a sniper, and toss a single firecracker or fire off a single starter pistol.
The agitators were seeking martyrs among those who could be portrayed as "innocents". A single Guardsman with a single bullet wound would make such a protrayal much more difficult. They might be able to convince the common people the Guardsmen fired first and only, but the decision makers, the true opponents in the great game, would make their decisions based on intelligence the agitators did not want them to have.
This is like opening an old wound. I was a kid (9) and remember my Mom crying watching the TV. This is a past best not revisited and uncovered/newly released documents will not fix what happened, it will just start a blame game that tortured the Nation for years. Not sure what Rosen is trying to say or imply but reliving the sins of our fathers is not a game anyone wins!
Violence is not the answer.
Kevin, I'm an Air Force vet, came in long after Vietnam. I'm sorry that happened to you, but thanks for wearing the uniform. If you can, try and let this memory go, otherwise, she is still beating on you over and over, again. She was obviously either ignorant and misled or mentally unstable, either way, wasting a minute of mental energy on her isn't worth it.
disgusting — that photo is NOT staged
to take American Far Right Propaganda to this LOW is disgusting
that is a real photo
have seen the interview with the woman and the photographer
Andrew is scum and so is his willing audience that laps up his lies …. the level of disrespect for the murdered would be shocking if the American Far Right had not long ago become the scum of the earth
I can provide that answer-At COMMUNIST PARTY USA gatherings, ACORN meetings, SEIU meetings, The Obamascum White House, anywhere the POS Bill Ayers is at, or Jeremiah Wrights "church". Feel free to name anymore-ive just scratched the surface.
Look. The events at Kent State have never been as simple as the activist left has made them out to be. But the full article from today's Washington Times is terrible journalism. Michael Walsh knows better than to cherry pick as he has done. Imagine if some confrontation between today's government and Tea Party protesters turns violent. Would we accept that the Tea Partiers were to blame based on "evidence" like this?
" the FBI's investigation swiftly uncovered reliable evidence that suggested otherwise. Among the strongest was a pre-dawn conversation — never before reported — between two unnamed men overheard inside a campus lounge later that night. Their discussion was witnessed by the girlfriend of a Kent State student and conveyed up the FBI chain of command 15 days later."
This was amongst the "strongest" evidence? An alleged hearsay conversation between two unknown persons somewhere on campus reported two weeks later by somebody's girlfriend?
Read the whole article. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/04/n...
First, "the militia" is an outgrowth of the portion of a village able to bear arms in defense of the village. Keep that in mind.
One of the duties of the colonial militia, as proposed by the founders of the nation, was to control "riot or insurrection". By shooting arsonists and looters.
The founders' generation lived a lot closer to poverty and death than most people alive in the US today. Many of them had a greater appreciation of just what a building meant in terms of human effort and suffering than most today.
I've been close to that sort of raw and primative life.
(cont)
(cont)
I support shooting the arsonists, and anyone who steps forward to defend them.
"No material possession is worth a human life !"?
Bull. Those material possessions are the result of a part of a human life expended in effort to build or pay for it. You sniveled above about how the Statists thought they owned people, well what do you think working to pay taxes to pay for government property or working to afford insurance is, if not slavery to pay a required tithe?
An arsonist, or thief, steals a part of people's lives, just as certainly as anyone drafted has a part of his life stolen. You defend one and decry another?
"The only thing that went wrong at Kent is that so many of them WEREN'T shot."
That's just wrong. One of the four dead was a dedicated ROTC student who was just walking to class.
I heard a talk radio host on XM 158 this morning talking about Oleg Kalugin, including some sound bites from a speech he made in 2008(before Obama was elected) warning Americans about what the onescum was. There was another former KGB agent named Berezov who said the same thing, including apparently sending a letter to NBC in 2004 warning them that KERRY was a WILLING agent of the Soviets.
That doesn't make one lick of sense. Conscription has existed for years in many countries. We had it for the Civil War all the way to World War II, and we HAD to have it. I'm not sure you're taking what Reagan said out of context and would like to see what he said just before and after the paragraph you illustrate. But conscription was NOT the reason for the protests…don't even bother suggesting that again. It was a combination of things going on at that time and there was a lack of information available to people (no internet, no more than three networks on TV). That was worse than anything else as a single cause of the problems of the 60's.
I didn't defend either side. Reread what I posted.
[...] [...]
Support was down to 28% by 1971. Most people would argue that's a "vast majority."
Without condemning the article, it is speculation based on 2nd hand reports in 40 year old FBI files. I had always assumed that the guardsmen were provoked, but in all the anniversary stories published over most of my life, the burned ROTC building is either rarely mentioned or buried in passing.
Someone will have to do some serious archeology to substantiate this alternative story line.
How 'bout it, citizen journalists? Ready to get out your trowels?
You're right, FGrey, I guess I should have been more specific. Didn't know about the ROTC person.
What does staging the photo have to do with disrespecting the students that were killed? I think faking a photo to take advantage of the students' deaths is horrifyingly disrespectful. But this photo is so emotionally powerful, people just will not let any other possible explanation be considered.
This is why we can't have a civil discourse in this country any more. Basic facts. I mean BASIC facts about historical events are questioned by "revisionists" — not because there's any actual factual dispute but because it doesn't match someone agenda. So we have Holocaust deniers even as there are still people walking around with concentration camp tattoos. We have moon landing deniers even as there are still living men walking around who have been there. We have 9/11 'truthers' spinning their tales despite what we all saw with our own eyes. And yes, we have idiots who claim that a photo vouched for by contemporary witnesses is a fake. I saw the photo myself at the time. Unlike "Bosswang" I won't hide mwho I am.
The principle laws the founders were concerned about had to do with limitations on the government. At the time, gov't of other nations consisted of nobility, oligarchs, and aristocrats.
In the colonies, only the local gov't was concerned about the actions of the common citizen, and many of the laws were very intrusive.
I believe that was sarcasm if the part in parenthesis is any indication.
Yeah, sort of. She is on her stomach (writhing in pain flips people on their back), Legs straight and feet together, arms tucked in, no blood visible even where her head should have smacked into the ground. It's an oddly orderly way for someone who just died to end up.
Or any sudden, loud noise. I've nearly jumped out of my skin a few times when people let metal doors slam or drop pallets on cement floors. Watch for anyone lighting something that might be a cherry bomb.
Joe M – Sarcasm brother!! Did you notice I said I was beating Obama to the punch? Have you noticed Fox News and GW are always Obama's targets? GOOD GRIEF!
psCargile,
You are SO RIGHT! Does Obama ever take the side of law enforcement or the military?
A non-Lefty teaching history? There's hope for us yet
SARCASM people regarding Fox News! Do any of you doubt that will be Obama's response – Fox made it up. Isn't that always this White House's response to anything on Fox? I was just preparing for the inevitable attack on Fox News from Obama.
I wouldn't put it past Obama to say the FBI is making this up. I think Seaberry may mean it looks as though the protestors staged the photo.
Undeclared wars fought on the other side of the world while our borders are left unprotected do not tend to maintain public support. That's why Iraq and Afghanistan have lost support. If the wars are so necessary, why are our borders unsecured?
Support is lessened even more when parents are forced by their government to send their kids to some third-world hell hole even though the government can't list a single imminent threat posed by the third-world hell hole. That was the case with Viet Nam, which is why support for the war fell off a cliff.
Seth,
In your philosophy, I guess it's better to swallow what you are fed instead of "questioning" what seems wrong. Also, you may have misunderstood me. I'm saying that the photo was done recently. So the fact that you saw the photo at the time, proves nothing more than you saw the photo. It doesn't speak to the actual validity of the content. Plus, this is hardly the same thing as denying the holocaust or the moon landing. You can stand on the curb cheering the emperor, but I'd rather wonder why he has no clothes.
Thank you for your service, and I think you are spot on. You dont go to war, unless you want to win Unfortunitly, they are doing the same thing to our guys in Afghanistan, stupid ROIs, no clear objectives, and a task of community building instead of killing the enemy.
We also have the advantage that the Left does not really understand the protests, which makes their attempts to infiltrate stick out like a sore thumb, as they did on Tax Day. It's not like Jason Mattera infiltrating Lefty protests (if you want a laugh, look up his name on YouTube). We know what we're there for, the Left does not, and any Tea Partier who is reasonably alert should be able to spot infiltrators causing problems and defuse them no problem. Also stay alert for Tea Partiers who get overly ticked off and are at risk of losing control of their tempers; remember that it only takes one.
"Today, some Americans believe that any law they don't like is a law they should have the option to ignore."
True, and this is a result of a century-plus of piling new laws and rules on top of old laws and rules. I believe people have every right to ignore the federal mandate to buy health insurance. You may call that lawlessness, but I call it the free exercise of an individual's liberty.
Sometimes I think tea party folks forget what the original tea party was all about…
There is so much information written about this and yet people either don't know it or choose to ignore it –
it's beyond niave to not realize who Putin is and what he wants -
The next day someone with a camera says to the run away, 'Hey, let's stage a picture where you're crying out over one of the bodies. We'll sell it to the news agencies and blow everyone's minds man.'
She says, 'Cool let's do it.'
After all, it seems it wouldn't the last time she sold herself.
Next thing you know, it's on Life magazine and winning a pulitzer and everyone involved has their place in history. Who's going to come forward and say that the whole thing was a goof to make some bread so they could buy dope?
Very well said, Brianna.
Can't sing very well either.
Jane Fonda – the bigot that keeps on giving.
Semper Fi, inspectorudy
Current polls show most Americans don't support the health care mandate. Is that a result of "massive propaganda," or is it simply the case that Americans don't always support what their government does?
The Left might scream, "Massive propaganda!!!" but that doesn't make them correct.
Please allow me to add, thank you for your service to our nation.
I was just knee high to a grasshopper back in those days, but I'm damn glad that pathetic, horrible treatment is for the most part behind us.
At my niece's wedding last fall, one of the ushers was an Iraqi vet who was horribly wounded. I was thrilled to see how honored he was, and waited patiently for my turn to tell him thank you too.
I'm not so sure about that. Notice how quickly the huge protests petered out after the draft ended?
When they weren't on the line, they weren't really all that interested anymore.
I realize you believe you have a valid point, however, the reason the majority oppose healthcare is simple and in large part due to alternative methods to getting news! Back in '68 there was no balance to the news, you know this -
Unfortunately, violence often IS the answer. The rioters were engaged in violence against the public, and then against the National Guardsmen. Unfortunately for four of them, the National Guardsmen were equipped to stop the violence with more violence.
"Violence is not the answer" is really just a trite phrase meaning nothing. If someone is trying to kill you, I assure you that you will not be thinking "I just need to act with peace, love and understanding," instead you'll be trying to kill them back.
I've been attacked before, and found that I was able to use violence in a way that brought about an excellent result — I lived. The problem was violence, and the answer was violence.
FGP
For all we know at this point, and for all it matters now, it could have been one of those crazy, wacky projectiles from the Kennedy assassination in Dallas…
50,000 young people dead was not made up by Walter friggin' Cronkrite. That's what people saw. They didn't need to turn on the television or pick up a newspaper when kids down the street were coming home in caskets.
You must really think the American people are stupid and gullible. People don't want a health care mandate because they don't want the government telling them they have to buy something. People didn't want the war in Viet Nam because they didn't want their kids dying in a jungle on the other side of the world.
You must be logged in to post a comment.