I don't listen to Rush, Fox News, or Hannity. Below I have copied the order
of events from the Kent May 4 Center www.may4.org. A web site to
remember those killed at Ohio State, so hopefully it will not happen again.

I can't imagine many 18 - 21 yr old soldiers who would not be scared to
death. If you saw pictures of the students yelling at the guardsmen and the
guardsman faces you would agree they were very scared.

A real man would realize that it was a terrible situation for all, the
students and the guardsmen. Both of them were put in that position due to
a failed attempt to wage a ill conceived war, that LBJ escalated. LBJ knew
the war was totally out of control, and for that reason he refused to accept
his parties nomination for presidency

This is from May4.org web site

May 2

On the morning of May 2, some KSU students assisted with the downtown
cleanup. Rumors of radical activities were widespread, and KSU's ROTC
building was believed to be the target of militant student actions that
evening. During the Vietnam War, students on many college campuses opposed
the presence of ROTC and often were successful in forcing the removal of
ROTC from their campuses. A dusk-to-dawn curfew was imposed on the city of
Kent, and students were restricted to the campus. At 5 p.m., shortly after
assessing the situation, Mayor Satrom alerted the Ohio National Guard. KSU
officials were unaware of this decision.
Shortly after 8 p.m., about 300 people gathered on the Commons, where a few
anti-war slogans were chanted and a few brief speeches given. An impromptu
march began and participants headed toward the dormitories to gain strength.
Large numbers of people joined the march.

The now 2,000 marchers swarmed down the hill over looking the Commons,
crossed the Commons. They then surrounded the ROTC building, an old wooden
World War II barracks which was scheduled to be demolished. Windows were
broken, and a few persons eventually set the building on fire.

Plain-clothed police who were standing nearby mce who were standing nearby
made no attempt to stop the students at this point. Firemen arrived on the
scene but their action were abandoned because some of the crowd attacked the
firemen and slashed their hoses. The blaze quickly died out.The firemen
eventually regained control and the fire died out.

The building was ignited again. This time, however, firemen arrived with
massive police protection. Police surrounded the building and dispersed the
students with tear gas. The firemen again got the tire under control. The
crowd then moved to the front of the campus and were astonished to see units
of the Ohio national Guard arriving on their campus. The students retreated
to the Commons to find the ROTC building smoldering at both ends. Within
minutes, the building was fully ablaze.

The crowd then assembled on the wooded hillside beside the Commons and
watched as the building burned. Many shouted anti-war and anti-ROTC slogans.
In the first two weeks of May, thirty ROTC buildings would be burned
nationwide.

Armed with tear gas and drawn bayonets, the Guard pursued students,
protesters and bystanders alike, into dormitories and other campus
buildings. Some stones were thrown and at least one student was bayoneted.
The question of who set the fire that destroyed ROTC building has never been
satisfactorily answered by any investigative body.



May 3

May 3rd was a relatively quiet day. By now, however, the campus was fully
occupied by Ohio National Guard troops, and armored personnel carriers were
stationed throughout the campus. Although some students and guardsmen
fraternized, the feeling, for the most part, was one of mutual hostility.
That morning, Ohio Governor James Rhodes, who was running for U.S. Senate,
arrived in Kent and along with city officials, held a news conference.
Rhodes, running on a "law and order" platform, attempted to use this
opportunity to garner votes in the primary election, which was only two days
away.
In a highly inflammatory speech, Rhodes claimed that the demonstrations at
Kent were the handiwork of a highly organized band of revolutionaries who
were out to "destroy higher education in Ohio." These protesters, Rhodes
declared, were "the worst type of people we harbor in America, worse than
the brown shirts and the communist element...we will use whatever force
necessary to drive them out of Kent!"

Later that evening, a National Guard commander would tell his troops that
Ohio law gave them the right to shoot if necessary. This merely served to
heighten guardsmen's hostility toward students.

Arity toward students.

Around 8 p.m., a crowd gathered on the Commons near the Victory bell. As the
group increased in size, Guard officials announced the immediate enforcement
of a new curfew. The crowd refused to disperse. At 9 p.m., the Ohio Riot Act
was read. Tear gas was fired from helicopters hovering overheard, and the
Guard dispersed the crowd from the area.

Students attempted to demonstrate that the curfew was unnecessary by
peacefully marching toward the town, but were met by guardsmen. Students
then staged a spontaneous sit-in at the intersection of East Main and
Lincoln streets and demanded that mayor Saytrom and KSU President Robert
White speak with them about the Guard's presence on campus. Assured that
this demand would be met, the crowd agreed to move from the street onto the
front lawn of the campus.

The Guard then betrayed the students and announced that the curfew would go
into effect immediately. Helicopters and tear gas were used to disperse the
demonstrators. As the crowd attempted to escape, some were bayoneted and
clubbed by the guardsmen. Students were again pursued and prodded back to
their dormitories. Tear gas inundated the campus, and helicopters with
searchlights hovered overheard all night.

,


May 4, 1970
At 11 a.m., about 200 students gathered on the Commons. Earlier that
morning, state and local officials had met in Kent. Some officials had
assumed that Gov. Rhodes had declared Martial law to be in effect * but he
had not. In fact, martial law was not officially declared until May 5.
Nevertheless, the National Guard resolved to disperse any assembly.

As noon approached, the size of the crowd increased to 1,500. Some were
merely spectators, while others had gathered specifically to protest the
invasion of Cambodia and the continued presence of the National Guard on the
campus. Upon orders of Ohio's Assistant Adjutant General Robert Canterbury,
an army jeep was driven in front of the assembled students. The students
were told by means of a bullhorn to disperse immediately. Students responded
with jeers and chants. When the students refused to disperse, Gen.
Canterbury ordered the guardsmen to disperse them. Approximately 116 men,
equipped with loaded M-1 rifles and tear gas, formed a skirmish-line toward
the students. Aware of the bayonet injuries of the previous evening,
students immediately ran away from the attacking National Guardsmen.
Retreating up Blanket Hill, some students lobbed tear some students lobbed
tear gas canisters back at the advancing troops, and one straggler was
attacked with clubs.

The Guard, after clearing the Commons, marched over the crest of the hill,
firing tear gas and scattering the students into a wider area. The Guard
then continued marching down the hill and onto a practice football field.
For approximately 10 minutes, the Guard stayed in this position. During this
time, tear gas canisters were thrown back and forth from the Guard's
position to a small group of students in the Prentice Hall parking at, about
100 yards away. Some students responded to the guardsmen's attack by
throwing stones. Guardsmen also threw stones at the students. But because of
the distance, most stones from both parties fell far short of their targets.
The vast majority of students, however, were spectators on the veranda of
Taylor Hall. While on the practice field, several members of Troop G which
would within minutes fire the fatal volley, knee and aimed their weapons at
the students in the parking lot.

Gen. Canterbury concluded that the crowd had been dispersed and ordered the
Guard to march back to the Commons area. Some members of Troop G then
huddled briefly. After reassembling on the field, the guardsmen seemed to
begin to retreat as they marched back up the hill retracing their previous
steps.

Members of Troop G, while advancing up the hill, continued to glance back to
the parking at, where the mos parking at, where the most militant and vocal
students were located. The students assumed the confrontation was over. Many
students began to walk to their next classes. As the Guard reached the crest
of the Blanket Hill, near the Pagoda of Taylor Hall, about a dozen members
of Troop G simultaneously turned around 180 degrees, aimed and fired their
weapons into the crowd in the Prentice Hall parking lot. The 1975 civil
trials proved that there was a verbal command to fire.

A total of 67 shots were fired in 13 seconds. Four students; Allison Krause,
Jeffrey Miller, Sandra Scheuer and William Schroeder were killed. Nine
students were wounded: Joseph Lewis, John Cleary, Thomas Grace, Robbie
Stamps, Donald Scott MacKenzie, Alan Canfora, Douglas Wrentmore, James
Russell and Dean Kahler. Of the wounded, one was permanently paralyzed and
several were seriously maimed. All were full-time students.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Harry are you talking about those bunch of scared kids who were
surrounded
by 1000's of anger protestor throwing rocks and bottles?

Oh, Christ!!!
Some things cannot be left unchallenged.
Aplogies in advance to all:

No. Harry is not talking about a group of scared kids "surrounded by
1000's of
anger (sic) protestors throwing rocks and bottles"

Shut off the Limbaugh show and do some acutal research on Kent State.
Think it
might be signfiicant that not a *single* guardsman was injured? Those
thousands
of protestors with rocks and bottles must have all been lousy shots. If no
t,
thousands of peope throwing rocks would have simply killed off the entire
squad
on the spot. The shooters were initially separated from the crowd by the
brow
of a hill, and had to
crest that hill in order to open fire. You must be very young.
Here are a few incidents related to Kent State and its aftermath to help
you
begin your liberation from propanganda and set you upon your quest for
truth.

May 3 Ohio Governor James A. Rhodes personally appears on campus and
promises
to use "every force possible" to maintain order. Rhodes denounces the
protesters as worse than brownshirts and vows to keep the Guard in Kent
"until
we get rid of them."

May 4 Four students are killed and nine others are wounded when a
contingent of
Guardsmen suddenly opens fire during a noontime demonstration.

July 23 Key portions of a secret Justice Department memo are disclosed by
the
Akron Beacon Journal. The memorandum describes the shootings as
unnecessary and
urges the Portage County Prosecutor to file criminal charges against six
Guardsmen.

October 4 The President's Commission on Campus Unrest concludes: "The
actions
of some students were violent and criminal and some others were dangerous,
reckless, and irresponsible." The shootings are branded as "unnecessary,
unwarranted, and inexcusable."

October 16 The "special" state grand jury exonerates the Guardsmen, but
indicts
25 individuals, mostly students, for a variety of offenses that occurred
on
campus before the shootings.

Late October-November Demands for a federal grand jury mount after it is
revealed that the "special" state grand jury ignored key evidence and that
one
of the "special" prosecutors told a newsman he felt the Guardsmen should
have
shot more students.

Following year:

The "special" state grand jury is even further discredited when Ohio
officials
dismiss charges against 20 of the 25 individuals indicted by the grand
jury.
Ohio prosecutors claimed they had insufficient evidence to convict any
protesters.

1973:

May 10 In a meeting with the student petitioners, K. William O'Connor, a
high-level Justice Department official, admits that the Justice Department
already has sufficient evidence to prosecute six Guardsmen.


A bit of truth leaks out:

August 3 Assistant Attorney General J. Stanley Pottinger announces that
the
Justice Department will officially conduct a new inquiry. Senator Birch
Bayh
follows Pottinger's announcement by releasing a letter he received from
one of
the Guard's company commanders. On the basis of that letter Bayh charges
that
armed FBI informant Terry Norman may have been "the fatal catalyst" for
the
tragedy.

NOTE: That letter was from one of the Guard's own company commanders, not
some
left wing apologist.

1974:

October 7-17 Attorneys for James A. Rhodes unsuccessfully try to block the
release of Rhodes's deposition in the civil case until after the Ohio
gubernatorial election. The deposition reveals that Rhodes's attorney, in
a
move reminiscent of the Watergate cover-up, offered into evidence an
incomplete
transcript of Rhodes's May 3, 1970, press conference. Among the remarks
deleted
was a comment by an official that the Guard would resort to shooting if
necessary.


Etc, etc, etc,


Now, other than "Everybody knows" and/or "I heard on Fox News, Hannity, or
Limbaugh" what facts can you cite that support your allegation that
thousands
of angry protestors surrounded the troops and pelted them with rocks and
bottles?

Those innocent kids exercising their First Amendment Rights don't deserve
to
have their memories villified, especially when there isn't a shred of
evidence
supporting the wild allegation.

A real man would apologize for such a slanderous error.

John Smith wrote:
I don't listen to Rush, Fox News, or Hannity. Below I have copied the order
of events from the Kent May 4 Center www.may4.org. A web site to
remember those killed at Ohio State, so hopefully it will not happen again.

I can't imagine many 18 - 21 yr old soldiers who would not be scared to
death. If you saw pictures of the students yelling at the guardsmen and the
guardsman faces you would agree they were very scared.

How about the pictures of kids putting flowers in the Guardsmen's
rifles? That must have been scary too.

Yelling is not the same as shooting. When a man yells at you, you are
not allowed to shoot him in self-defense. There were rocks thrown, and
some of the students threw back tear gas cannisters (which fell short)
fired at them. Basically, the crowd of protestors was dispersing when
the Guardsmen opened fire. IMHO it was murder.

Thanks for posting the quote from the may4.org web site. It corresponds
pretty well with what I remember, except that some of the student
leaders later apologized for attacking the firemen and the court
decision that the soldiers were "ordered" to fire was widely considered
a whitewash since the "order" was given by "person or persons unknown."

BTW please note that this factual account does not ever once mention the
students surrounding the soldiers. Please acknowledge this error in your
earlier post.

DSK

You are correct, my use of the word surround was inaccurate. They were
facing them. Do you think the guardsman were not aware that the students
had attacked the fireman for trying to put out the fire the students had
started? I know that would scare the hell out of me.

It was a scary situation for most of the guardsman, and most of the students
at Kent State.

I have never said the Guardsman were justified in firing their guns, I said
it was done by young kids (who enlisted into the National Guard as a way to
get out going to Viet Nam). They were faced with a situation they were not
qualified to handle and were scared to death. As Gould pointed out, if the
students wanted to, they could have overwhelmed the National Guard..

If you believe the National Guard fired on the students because they
disagreed with the students position on the war, and decided to murder them,
there is not much for me to say.

My guess is everyone involved in this tragedy have nightmares about it


"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
John Smith wrote:
I don't listen to Rush, Fox News, or Hannity. Below I have copied the
order
of events from the Kent May 4 Center www.may4.org. A web site to
remember those killed at Ohio State, so hopefully it will not happen
again.

I can't imagine many 18 - 21 yr old soldiers who would not be scared to
death. If you saw pictures of the students yelling at the guardsmen and
the
guardsman faces you would agree they were very scared.

How about the pictures of kids putting flowers in the Guardsmen's
rifles? That must have been scary too.

Yelling is not the same as shooting. When a man yells at you, you are
not allowed to shoot him in self-defense. There were rocks thrown, and
some of the students threw back tear gas cannisters (which fell short)
fired at them. Basically, the crowd of protestors was dispersing when
the Guardsmen opened fire. IMHO it was murder.

Thanks for posting the quote from the may4.org web site. It corresponds
pretty well with what I remember, except that some of the student
leaders later apologized for attacking the firemen and the court
decision that the soldiers were "ordered" to fire was widely considered
a whitewash since the "order" was given by "person or persons unknown."

BTW please note that this factual account does not ever once mention the
students surrounding the soldiers. Please acknowledge this error in your
earlier post.

DSK

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:Sp%hc.5114$cF6.275326@attbi_s04...

I said
it was done by young kids (who enlisted into the National Guard as a way
to
get out going to Viet Nam).

Heh...sort of like our current president.

John Smith wrote:
You are correct, my use of the word surround was inaccurate. They were
facing them.

Yep, "facing them" from at least 100 yards away.


... Do you think the guardsman were not aware that the students
had attacked the fireman for trying to put out the fire the students had
started? I know that would scare the hell out of me.

Possibly, but that had been several days before. AFAIK none of the
firemen were hurt. Meanwhile, the Guardsmen had been clubbing and
bayoneting the students for two days.


It was a scary situation for most of the guardsman, and most of the students
at Kent State.

Much scarier for the students, doncha think?


I have never said the Guardsman were justified in firing their guns, I said
it was done by young kids (who enlisted into the National Guard as a way to
get out going to Viet Nam).

Sure. So in a way, they agreed with the students.


If you believe the National Guard fired on the students because they
disagreed with the students position on the war, and decided to murder them,
there is not much for me to say.

Somebody either gave the order to fire when there was no threat, or
simply started pulling the trigger and others followed suit. When you
shoot at people for no reason, that's murder. I do not think it was
because of the students position on the war, I think it was the whole
situation... the inflammatory rhetoric of "law & order" politicians, the
hatred of hippies and of priviledged college kids, etc etc.


My guess is everyone involved in this tragedy have nightmares about it

It's possible that many (most) of the protestors, and a few of the
Guardsmen, do indeed. But IMHO at least a couple of the Guardsmen were
glad to get away with it.

Who gave the order to fire on unarmed students, who were dispersing, and
were over 100 yards away? Who pulled the first trigger?

Your position seems to be that the killing of the students (and two of
the dead were not even protestors, remember) is fully justified and
warrantable. So, by inference, you think it's OK for Americans to shoot
other Americans over disagreements about politics. Is that right?

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..


Sure. So in a way, they agreed with the students.

I think this topic is so emotional that it makes it hard for people to read.
Where did I stated the killing of students was either justified or
warrented. I stated it was a tragedy. I stated that the troups "freaked
out". American's have the right to peaceful protest. and even if protestors
are acting in a threatening way towards the police, they do not have the
right to shot into a crowd. That said, there were many leaders of the
antiwar movement who believed the end justifies the means and whatever they
could do to bring the war home to Middle America was justified. The burning
of the ROTC building was designed to make their protest front page news
across America. Unfortunatly, once the protest went beyond being a peaceful
demonstration mob mentality took over, on both on the sides. If you have
ever seen a mob at work, it is a very scary situation.

My guess is the vast majority of the guardsmen completly agreed with the
Student Protest for America to get out of Vietnam. Most Americans and most
politicans felt that we should get out of Vietnam as quckly as possible. A
week before Kent State, Nixon stated he was withdrawing an additional
150,000 troups by the end of year.







If you believe the National Guard fired on the students because they
disagreed with the students position on the war, and decided to murder
them,
there is not much for me to say.

Somebody either gave the order to fire when there was no threat, or
simply started pulling the trigger and others followed suit. When you
shoot at people for no reason, that's murder. I do not think it was
because of the students position on the war, I think it was the whole
situation... the inflammatory rhetoric of "law & order" politicians, the
hatred of hippies and of priviledged college kids, etc etc.


My guess is everyone involved in this tragedy have nightmares about it

It's possible that many (most) of the protestors, and a few of the
Guardsmen, do indeed. But IMHO at least a couple of the Guardsmen were
glad to get away with it.

Who gave the order to fire on unarmed students, who were dispersing, and
were over 100 yards away? Who pulled the first trigger?

Your position seems to be that the killing of the students (and two of
the dead were not even protestors, remember) is fully justified and
warrantable. So, by inference, you think it's OK for Americans to shoot
other Americans over disagreements about politics. Is that right?

DSK

John Smith wrote:
I think this topic is so emotional that it makes it hard for people to read.

That may the case for many people.

Where did I stated the killing of students was either justified or
warrented.

When you repeated the falsehood that the Guardsmen were surrounded, and
then later when you said that they were threatened, faced with angry
yelling protestors, and probably very scared... all that implies that
you think the shooting was justified.

... I stated it was a tragedy.

Agreed.

... I stated that the troups "freaked
out".

Well, there's lots of ways to "freak out"... buying 1968 VW and painting
it neon swirls, going to Tibet and hanging around ancient monasteries,
growing strangely barbered facial hair, etc etc. These are not
necessarily good, shooting people dead is a very very bad way to "freak
out." One that can easily be considered murder.


... American's have the right to peaceful protest.

Sure. Although the US gov't has less and less tolerance for it as time
goes by. Nowadays you have to go to an authorized "protest area" and
sign a waiver. Isn't freedom wonderful?

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:
I think this topic is so emotional that it makes it hard for people to
read.

That may the case for many people.

Where did I stated the killing of students was either justified or
warrented.

When you repeated the falsehood that the Guardsmen were surrounded, and
then later when you said that they were threatened, faced with angry
yelling protestors, and probably very scared... all that implies that
you think the shooting was justified.

... I stated it was a tragedy.

Agreed.

... I stated that the troups "freaked
out".

Well, there's lots of ways to "freak out"... buying 1968 VW and painting
it neon swirls, going to Tibet and hanging around ancient monasteries,
growing strangely barbered facial hair, etc etc. These are not
necessarily good, shooting people dead is a very very bad way to "freak
out." One that can easily be considered murder.


... American's have the right to peaceful protest.

Sure. Although the US gov't has less and less tolerance for it as time
goes by. Nowadays you have to go to an authorized "protest area" and
sign a waiver. Isn't freedom wonderful?

DSK


Many of us know the following quote, by the Rev. Martin Niemöller:

"When they came for the communists, I didn't speak up because I wasn't a
communist. When they came for the Jews, I didn't speak up because I wasn't a
Jew. When they came for the Catholics. I didn't speak up because I was a
Protestant. Then they came for me... and there was no one left to speak up."

and recent events have spawned a new version, without attribution:

"When they came for the 4th amendment, I kept silent because I am not a drug
user. When they came for the 5th and amendment, I kept silent because I am
innocent. When they came for the 2nd amendment, I kept silent because I do
not own a gun. When they took the 1st amendment, I could no longer speak
out."

I wish I could take credit for this quote, but in fact I found it when
looking for the one by Martin Niemöller