On 6/10/15 8:47 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 3:00:26 AM UTC-4, J Burns wrote:


A
student who was shot in the neck was taken to Akron, IIRC. The
attending physician called the press. He'd treated more than 1,000
gunshot wounds in WWII. The victim was in good shape because the
bullet had ricocheted off his jaw. A military round would have torn
half his head off. He said the guardsmen had no weapon that
harmless. He said it must have been similar to a 22.

When the talking heads rebutted him, he sent photos to pathologists
at Walter Reed. They agreed with him. The best Nixon could do was
vague testimony by a New York City doctor who I believe had never
treated any kind of gunshot wound.


So, Nixon was the mystery unseen gunman?


Ah, facetiousness! Excellent tactic!


And it would make no sense for the govt to have done it
deliberately, because all the negative results that came with it
were easily predictable. It was what it was.

Nixon had been the ******* who had promised to end the war, then
sent our boys into harm's way in Cambodia. The Kent State Stunt
allowed people who loved to hate to be disgusted with American
troops and student protestors alike. Hail to the chief, Nixon could
now send troops to Vietnam three more years without political cost,
and being antiwar didn't look respectable.


What world were you living in? Kent State was a political disaster.
It didn't further enable Nixon or the war effort, it did exactly the
opposite. But then it's typical of the total reversals of reality so
essential to conspiracy theorists.

It was a political disaster for American troops and antiwar
demonstrators, but the Gallup Polls found a surge in Nixon's popularity.
It was two more years before he was again as popular has he'd been in
the wake of Kent State.




Students, too, told investigators they'd heard three shots a few
seconds before the soldiers fired. It seems nobody checked the
student's tape, which he donated to the library. It was decades
before somebody remembered the tape and checked. The three shots
are there.

So what? Proves nothing.

The shots could be identified as coming from rifles similar to M1's, not
firecrackers. Thousands of eyes were on the guardsmen. They didn't
shoot. And you say it proves nothing. The day after the shootings, the
Adjutant General of the Ohio National Guard told reporters there was a
sniper. Talking heads scoffed.



Are you insinuating that the four victims were provoking the
troops?

I'm telling you that students, agitators had been throwing bottles
and rocks at police, committing crimes and provoking them for days
before the shooting. And that anytime you do that, you're setting
up a very bad environment, where it's not unusual for someone to wind
up seriously injured or dead. And that when you create that kind of
environment, which the protestors/agitators had done, to rely on law
enforcement to perform perfectly, to not make any mistakes, is nuts.



The
propagandists claimed concrete particles had been found in the
pockets of Krauss's army jacket, proving she'd been throwing chunks
of concrete. The Life photographer took several photos of her in
the last minutes of her life. She wasn't wearing an army jacket.
She was dressed like a 1940s coed or an LL Bean fashion model.

The day the soldiers had arrived on campus, a coed had come forward
and put a flower into a soldier's rifle barrel. There were
thousands of students on campus, but she was recognized wherever
she went because she was tall and strikingly beautiful. It was
Krauss, a living doll. The soldier must have been tickled pink.
Relations between students and soldiers had been very friendly
since then.

Baloney,

Witnesses who gladly identified themselves to investigators, reporters,
and researchers said they saw it. Are you saying it didn't happen
because your talking heads didn't mention it? Was Allison Krauss
fictitious?

From Wikipedia:

Great. An anonymous article. His eyewitnesses are Unidentified Speaker
1 and Unidentified Speaker 2. That why the talking heads tell us a
soldier shot Miller in his open mouth. Let's ignore his father and the
doctors. Unidentified Speakers 1 and 2 would never misinform us.


The dispersal process began late in the morning with campus patrolman
Harold Rice,[23] riding in a National Guard Jeep, approaching the
students to read them an order to disperse or face arrest. The
protesters responded by throwing rocks, striking one campus patrolman
and forcing the Jeep to retreat.[7]




When it became clear that the crowd was not going to disperse, a
group of 77 National Guard troops from A Company and Troop G, with
bayonets fixed on their M1 Garand rifles, began to advance upon the
hundreds of unarmed protesters.


There you have the lead up to the shooting.

I'd suggest that you read it again, but it wouldn't do any good. You're
not interested in facts, only the conclusions the talking heads gave
you. I commend you on your allegiance.

The campus cops had always had good relations with the student body.
Rice was like Andy Griffith as Sheriff Taylor. He'd been laid up with a
groin injury after being hit with a concrete missile when radicals
burned a campus building in the dark, but now he volunteered to go
forward and remind the crowd that the rally was illegal. That's because
he was very concerned for the safety of the demonstrators, his son, and
thousands of other students. They stoned him, but he was patient. I'm
sure he approved of the bayonets to deter violence. Outside instigators
had told the suckers that the soldiers had only blanks, but they
couldn't be convinced to confront bayonets.

There were guard units standing peacefully all over the campus. A major
and a warrant officer commanded the unit in question, but Robert
Canterbury, commanding general of the Ohio National Guard, took personal
command.

The guardsmen and the student body considered the illegal rally
harmless. Some in the crowd later told investigators that a professor
had told all the students they would flunk if they did not attend.
Except that one or more had thrown stones at Rice, it was clear that
instigators could not get the crowd to attack anyone or burn any
buildings in broad daylight with guardsmen everywhere. They predicted
that participants would get bored and go about their business.

Canterbury, in civilian clothes, took the contingent to force the crowd
to move on. They followed the retreating demonstrators up a hill. In
removing stone throwers from the commons, it was a tactical success, but
it could be considered a strategic blunder by making the situation
interesting to demonstrators.

Why was he in civilian clothes? Soldiers needed to be able to spot their
commander in the event of a crisis. Why was he marching with the little
unit? The major could have handled it. At any moment, there could have
been trouble anywhere on campus. He belonged with the headquarters
group, where he could get reports immediately, confer, and issue orders.

He ordered them to veer off and march back down to an empty tennis
court. He had indeed spurred the interest of demonstrators. With the
soldiers fenced in hundreds of feet from the rally point, demonstrators
returned, and some began throwing rocks. At that range, it was harmless
self-expression. So far, the only violence had been the rocks a handful
had thrown at Rice. Thanks to the presence of the guard, the campus was
calm and safe.

Canterbury ordered soldiers to kneel and aim at the crowd. That was
outrageous, pointing rifles at students who weren't harming anyone.
Such a bluff also made the soldiers look stupid. It was bound to spur
the demonstrators. It would also alienate the student body, who wanted
the soldiers present. It was a bluff to kill harmless demonstrators and
anybody in the background.

The talking heads claim the soldiers first huddled, as if they were a
criminal gang conspiring. It's not far-fetched to say Nixon orchestrated
the incident to gain a political advantage by giving his followers
someone to hate. He'd made a career of it. It's absurd to suggest the
guardsmen conspired. They did it only because they were sworn to obey
orders.

Nixon put a gag order on the soldiers, preventing them from saying what
they thought of those orders. You and your talking heads could speak
for them, telling us what they did and what was on their mind.

Years later, when he was out from under the order, Sergeant Shafer, a
fireman, contacted a reporter. Among other things, he expressed utter
contempt for Canterbury.

After ordering them to march to the tennis court, where they were fenced
in away from the action, then ordering them to threaten the distant
students by kneeling and aiming, Canterbury ordered them to march to a
hilltop, where there was no mob and nothing to protect.

On the way up the hill, they marched past a crowd of men with golf clubs
and baseball bats, loitering by a building. The soldiers were there to
stop such armed mobs from attacking anyone, but Canterbury marched the
unit right past so that their backs were to the mob. If they'd been
told the soldiers didn't have live rounds, Canterbury invited the
ensuing attack.

It was not forcing the demonstrators off the commons that led to the
shootings, as you claim. It was Canterbury's subsequent series of
bizarre commands. The general was right there giving the orders, but you
and the talking heads pretend it was something the enlisted troops did
on their own. He has never been called upon to explain his bizarre
orders. Wearing civvies was a pretty good disguise, as if he were an
innocent bystander who happened to be with the unit, giving commands.

Going back to the bank robbery
example, it's like ignoring all the evidence that shows who actually
robbed the bank, the 8 witnesses that saw them do it, and instead
focus on the two witnesses that claim the get away car was a
different color, went the other way, they saw a third guy, whatever.

So now you compare the troops to bank robbers, and, despite evidence to
the contrary, say the victims brought it on themselves. That's the
contempt the Nixon-Agnew team liked to engender among their disciples.

So witnesses see bank robbers fire and people are hit. In most places,
including Ohio, the law isn't as closed-minded as you about homicide.
Autopsies are required. Witnesses said the victims were facing the
shooters, but autopsies found that the bullets came from other
directions. You say that doesn't matter.

Two radicals went inside a moment before the shootings and emerged with
small wounds that they attributed to buckshot. They said they'd come
back out just in time to be shot. Told the guardsmen's only shotgun had
been loaded with birdshot and fired at the sky, they said in fact they'd
been hit by 30-06 rounds.

The first said the round had passed through his wrist at 20 yards. He
went about his business, checking on people, then noticed he was
bleeding. Did he seek help? Wrap it for pressure? Enter an adjacent
building? No, he said he walked a couple of hundred yards to the street,
then turned left and turned right at the next street. Down that street
he went into a building and rinsed his wrist in a water cooler. He says
then another student offered him a ride to the hospital. To this day, he
says the little marks on his wrist came from an M1 round that passed
through it.

The second said he'd just come back outside when an M1 round hit him in
the ass. Others helped him inside and he lay in a corridor. He got a
ride in the same ambulance that carried Krauss, who would die later from
the bullet that came in through her left side and tore up her heart. He
said he rode up front, sitting up.

He was very annoyed that the hospital staff treated him as if he hadn't
been wounded at all. He phoned his parents and they took him to a
distant hospital, in Cincinnati, I think. He was going to drop out
because nobody but the radicals liked him. They kept visiting, and he
returned for the fall semester. He said the doctors in Cincinnati had
discovered that the bullet in his ass had ricocheted down through his
thigh, shattering his femur. Not only had he ridden to the hospital
sitting on an M1 wound, he'd walked around on a shattered femur. Those
Kent State radicals were some mighty tough hombres!

Of course the were shot by M1's. Otherwise, they must have been prepared
in advance to go inside and get fake wounds at the same time other
students were murdered. That would mean a conspiracy. Only loons could
believe such gentlemen would participate in a conspiracy.