Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
dragster

It was 38 years ago on the 4th

Recommended Posts

Protesting might be fine. But I wouldn't recommend throwing any rocks at them.

Besides, how can one claim to be a peaceful protester (talking about Kent State), and then throw a rock at somebody? And even if people claim that they didn't participate in the rock throwing, why would any so called "peaceful person" continue to be involved with a demonstration where others are throwing rocks?

But it's a bit different if one person is armed with a rock or a can, and the other person is armed with guns...

Why were the National Guard even called in to Kent State? I thought it was a gross overreaction, and we have seen countless times that protests can be controlled and dispersed without soldiers there firing their guns on people

It was a draconian reaction to send the National Guard in there, and look at what the result was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On June 13, 1970, President Nixon established the President's Commission on Campus Unrest, known as the Scranton Commission, which he charged to study the dissent, disorder, and violence breaking out on college and university campuses across the nation.[23] The Commission's establishment was a consequence of the killings of protesting students at Kent State and Jackson State. The Commission issued its findings in a September 1970 report that concluded that the Ohio National Guard shootings on May 4, 1970 were unjustified. The report said:

Even if the guardsmen faced danger, it was not a danger that called for lethal force. The 61 shots by 28 guardsmen certainly cannot be justified. Apparently, no order to fire was given, and there was inadequate fire control discipline on Blanket Hill. The Kent State tragedy must mark the last time that, as a matter of course, loaded rifles are issued to guardsmen confronting student demonstrators.

Karnow further documented that on May 9, 1970 at 4:15 a.m., the president met about 30 student dissidents conducting a vigil at the Lincoln Memorial where upon Nixon "treated them to a clumsy and condescending monologue, which he made public in an awkward attempt to display his benevolence." Nixon had been trailed by White House Deputy for Domestic Affairs Egil Krogh, who saw it differently than Karnow, saying, "I thought it was a very significant and major effort to reach out."[20] In any regard, neither side could convince the other and after meeting with the students Nixon expressed that those in the anti-war movement were the pawns of foreign communists.[20] After the student protests, Nixon asked H. R. Haldeman to consider the Huston Plan, which would have used illegal procedures to gather information on the leaders of the anti-war movement. Only the resistance of J. Edgar Hoover stopped the plan.[20]

During a press conference, Governor Rhodes called the protesters un-American and referred to the protesters as revolutionaries set on destroying higher education in Ohio. "They're worse than the brownshirts and the communist element and also the nightriders and the vigilantes," Rhodes said. "They're the worst type of people that we harbor in America. I think that we're up against the strongest, well-trained, militant, revolutionary group that has ever assembled in America."[12]

So what can we see from that?

That the Guardsmen were not in enough danger to warrant using their guns...

That Nixon was keen to use illegal means to keep tabs on people who did not agree with a war (Boy, that's really a democracy, Isn't it? The shining example of freedom and hope where in your country your own President was happy to use illegal means against you and break the law because you were expressing a different point of view...makes a sad joke out of American democracy)

And the Governor of Ohio already had a deeply negative and combative attitude against the protestors...

It's no wonder people died when at the time America was so militant and corrupt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The shootings killed four students and wounded nine. Of those wounded, none was closer than 71 feet (22 m) to the guardsmen. Of those killed, the nearest (Miller) was 265 feet (81 m) away.

The nearest, the nearest killed was nearly 100 yards away ! I wish I had an arm to throw rocks or bottles 100 yards, I'd have been a Pro baseball pitcher! I'm sure those were the ones threatening the Guard, or maybe they were running away and easier to shoot in retreat or something. Who knows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The shining example of freedom and hope where in your country (blah blah blah)

Still waiting for you to cite whom you believe to be the world's best, brightest hope for freedom and democracy if not the United States...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Still waiting for you to cite whom you believe to be the world's best, brightest hope for freedom and democracy if not the United States...

You really think it comes down to my country is better than yours bullshit?

No country is the 'best brightest hope for freedom and democracy'

The brightest hope for freedom and democracy is people, not Governments, not countries, but people...

The best hope for freedom and democracy in Iraq is the Iraqi people, not the Americans. Freedom and democracy will only happen in Iraq when the Iraqi's want it.

Anyway America isn't that altruistic that it's in Iraq to liberate the Iraqi people, the US is in Iraq in an attempt to safeguard America.

No country is interested in liberating the people in any other country...

Democracy doesn't come from the barrel of a gun, Steve...

Democracy doesn't come about when people blindly follow the Republic Party over the cliff like mindless sheep...Nor if you were to follow The Democrats...

Democracy is when a well-informed people cast well-thought votes and ask questions and demand answers...

I don't see a lot of that in the USA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The brightest hope for freedom and democracy is people, not Governments, not countries, but people...

That's a given, but in the real world there exists a community of nations. I thought you might like the opportunity to cite one as more promising than the United States for the advancement of freedom and democracy. I can appreciate the overwhelming evidence (world history) suggests there isn't one, despite your diatribes. Thank you.

Edited by SteveAJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's a given, but in the real world there exists a community of nations. I thought you might like the opportunity to cite one as more promising than the United States for the advancement of freedom and democracy. I can appreciate the overwhelming evidence (world history) suggests there isn't one, despite your diatribes. Thank you.

So why did you ask me then?

Dear God, *dingdong* Anybody home?? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

You really think it comes down to my country is better than yours bullshit?

No country is the 'best brightest hope for freedom and democracy'

The brightest hope for freedom and democracy is people, not Governments, not countries, but

people...

The best hope for freedom and democracy in Iraq is the Iraqi people, not the Americans. Freedom and democracy will only happen in Iraq when the Iraqi's want it.

Anyway America isn't that altruistic that it's in Iraq to liberate the Iraqi people, the US is in Iraq in an attempt to safeguard America.

No country is interested in liberating the people in any other country...

Democracy doesn't come from the barrel of a gun, Steve...

Democracy doesn't come about when people blindly follow the Republic Party over the cliff like mindless sheep...Nor if you were to follow The Democrats...

Democracy is when a well-informed people cast well-thought votes and ask questions and demand answers...

I don't see a lot of that in the USA

Getting back to Kent State,f*up? yes it was,did people die for no reason,some say yes and some of the same people say no and vis-s-vice.I always wondered watching all this,why would folks -protesting death/violence act the same way they were protesting about,.......mmmm,...weather underground anyone?

KB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But it's a bit different if one person is armed with a rock or a can, and the other person is armed with guns...

The students should have been "armed" with pencils and books and in their classrooms. Isn't that the reason why taxpayers support public education, and not as a place for rioting and lawlessness?

Why were the National Guard even called in to Kent State?

Because that is their job, to keep the peace in times of riot and insurrection. Called upon by the local and state law enforcement to aid them when those agencies do not have the recources to deal with these situations.

I thought it was a gross overreaction, and we have seen countless times that protests can be controlled and dispersed without soldiers there firing their guns on people

Why should ANY public school, office building or other publicly owned institution be hijacked for days on end by anyone with a political axe to grind? The "gross overreaction" was on the part of the demonstrators and those radical elements behind their calculated plan to disrupt a publicly owned and taxpayer supported instution of higher learning for their own end. In my opinion, the law enforcment did not overreact, they put up with this baloney for far too long. I'm not saying I thought it good that people ended up getting shot. But let's at least accept that there will always be unintended consequences once matters like these are allowed continue.

From a law enforcement perspective it was that they saw these protests (including the rock throwing and burning of banners and other threatening behavior) as possibly becoming even more widespread... it's not like that wasn't happening in other cities. And besides, there was already incidents of vandalism and small riots happening in and around the college beginning from when the protests rallys first started on May 1st (no coincidence that these things happen on May 1st either) And therefore, at the point where it then becomes necessary to take action -- of course they need overwhelming force to effect a police action! It's not like you can show up with a couple of squad cars and blow-horn and convince rioters to disperse. WE SEE THESE SITUATIONS ALL THE TIME. And what we do know, is that by not making a show of force, you then allow the situation to escalate and then end up costing millions in property damage and loss of business revenue. This happens all the time, even just this week with a bunch of anarchists in the Washington (state) captial building. We also saw this situation (although nobody was killed but many were injured) during a so called "peaceful" MAY DAY immigration rally in Los Angeles last year... And even nearly 40 years after Kent State -- and with the new police tactics and training... things still end up getting out of control and people got hurt.

It was a draconian reaction to send the National Guard in there, and look at what the result was.

KENT STATE WAS ABOUT LAWLESSNESS AND THE RESULT OF THAT BEHAVIOR. And subsequent to that event, Kent State became another rallying 'symbol' for the radical elements to use in their plan to but forward their agenda. And to that end it was very effective. But to assume that college campuses and other publicly owned institutions should not be protected from unecessary disruption is naive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From this American's point of view -- Kent State could have been avoided....

... those students should have been in class doing what they were supposed to be doing. Instead of causing trouble by throwing rocks and bottles at other young men who were in uniform.

It was incidents like Kent State, the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, and other displays of lawlessness. That convinced me and many other Americans that the liberal left was a threat to our national identity. In fact, it was that period of our history (which despite the efforts of the radical left to create a "new progressive" society) -- actually helped to lay the seeds of neo-conservatism and the Reagan revolution. And Republican Presidential victories for 7 out of 10 times over the next 40 years.

This is why i think McCain has an advantage. Their are some people still pissed about losing Vietnam and coming home and being treated like criminals. I think there is alot of the Vietnam vets votes out there that will feel the same thing is being done with todays vets.

One thing i will never know is how people have such disrespect for the troops and police. Groups like operation Code Pink are no better than the KKK and the black panthers in my book. They are wannabe hippes who triped on some bad acid one too many times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:(:( LEST WE FORGET.....hands up who has never been a student at least once in his/her life.......no hate mail, pls!:

KENTUNIMAY1970.jpg

Mary Ann Vecchio, the girl who is shown bending down near the body of one of the students in the picture above....

KENTSTATEUNI25thAnniversarycommwith.jpg

The Kent State shootings, also known as the May 4 massacre or Kent State massacre,[2][3][4] occurred at Kent State University in the city of Kent, Ohio, and involved the shooting of students by members of the Ohio National Guard on Monday, May 4, 1970. Four students were killed and nine others wounded, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis.[5]

Some of the students who were shot were protesting the American invasion of Cambodia, which President Richard Nixon announced in a television address on April 30. However, other students who were shot were merely walking nearby or observing the protest at a distance.[6][7]

There was a significant national response to the shootings: hundreds of universities, colleges, and high schools closed throughout the United States due to a student strike of eight million students, and the event further divided the country along political lines.

Contents

[hide]

  • <LI class=toclevel-1>
1 Historical background <LI class=toclevel-1>2 Timeline
  • <LI class=toclevel-2>
2.1 Thursday, April 30 <LI class=toclevel-2>2.2 Friday, May 1 <LI class=toclevel-2>2.3 Saturday, May 2 <LI class=toclevel-2>2.4 Sunday, May 3
2.5 Monday, May 4

<LI class=toclevel-1>3 Casualties <LI class=toclevel-1>4 Aftermath and long-term effects

  • <LI class=toclevel-2>
4.1 Legal action against the guardsmen
4.2 Long-term effects

<LI class=toclevel-1>5 Memorials at Kent State <LI class=toclevel-1>6 Artistic tributes

  • <LI class=toclevel-2>
6.1 Music <LI class=toclevel-2>6.2 Literature
  • <LI class=toclevel-3>
6.2.1 Prose <LI class=toclevel-3>6.2.2 Poetry
6.2.3 Plays

[*]6.3 Multimedia

<LI class=toclevel-1>7 Films

  • <LI class=toclevel-2>
7.1 Documentary
7.2 Drama

<LI class=toclevel-1>8 See also <LI class=toclevel-1>9 Notes and references <LI class=toclevel-1>10 Further reading <LI class=toclevel-1>11 External links

//</a>

[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kent_State_shootings&action=edit&section=1" target="_blank">edit] Historical background

Richard Nixon had been elected President in 1968, promising to end the Vietnam War. In November 1969 the My Lai Massacre was exposed, prompting widespread outrage around the world and leading to increased public opposition to the war. In addition, the following month saw the first draft lottery instituted since World War II. The war had appeared to be winding down throughout 1969 so a new invasion of Cambodia angered those who felt it only exacerbated the conflict.

Many young people, including college students and teachers, were concerned about being drafted to fight in a war that they strongly opposed. The expansion of that war into another country appeared to them to have increased that risk. Across the country, campuses erupted in protests in what Time called "a nation-wide student strike", setting the stage for the events of early May 1970.

</a>

[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kent_State_shootings&action=edit&section=2" target="_blank">edit] Timeline

</a>

[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kent_State_shootings&action=edit&section=3" target="_blank">edit] Thursday, April 30

President Richard Nixon announced to the nation that an "incursion" into Cambodia had been launched by United States combat forces.

</a>

[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kent_State_shootings&action=edit&section=4" target="_blank">edit] Friday, May 1

At Kent State, a massive demonstration was held on May 1 on the Commons (a grassy knoll in the center of campus traditionally used as a gathering place for rallies or protests), and another had been planned for May 4. There was widespread anger, and many protesters issued a call to "bring the war home." As a symbolic protest to Nixon's decision to send troops, a group of about five hundred students watched a graduate student at Kent State burying a copy of the U.S. Constitution.

Trouble erupted in town at around midnight when intoxicated bikers[citation needed] left a bar and began throwing beer bottles at cars and breaking downtown store fronts. In the process they broke a bank window which set off an alarm. The news spread quickly and it resulted in several bars closing early to avoid trouble. Before long more people had joined the vandalism and looting, while others remained bystanders.

By the time police arrived, a crowd of about 100 had already gathered. Some people from the crowd had already lit a small bonfire in the street. The crowd appeared to be a mix of bikers, students, and out-of town youths who regularly came to Kent's bars. A few members of the crowd began to throw beer bottles at the police, and then started yelling obscenities at them. The disturbance lasted for about an hour before the police restored order. By that time most of the bars were closed and the downtown area of Kent and the campus were quiet.

</a>

[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kent_State_shootings&action=edit&section=5" target="_blank">edit] Saturday, May 2

Kent's Mayor Leroy Satrom declared a state of emergency on May 2 and, later that afternoon, asked Ohio Governor James A. Rhodes to send the National Guard to Kent to help maintain order.

When the National Guard arrived in town that evening, a large demonstration was already under way on the campus, and the campus Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) building (which had been boarded up and scheduled for demolition[citation needed]) was burning. The arsonists were never apprehended and no one was injured in the fire. More than a thousand protesters surrounded the building and cheered the building's burning. While attempting to extinguish the fire, several Kent firemen and police officers were hit with rocks and other objects by those standing near the fire. More than one fire engine company had to be called in because protesters carried the fire hose into the Commons and slashed it.[8][9][10] A call for assistance went out and at 10:00 p.m., the National Guard entered the campus for the first time, setting up camp directly on campus. There were many arrests made, tear gas was used, and at least one student was wounded with a bayonet.[11]

</a>

[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kent_State_shootings&action=edit&section=6" target="_blank">edit] Sunday, May 3

By Sunday, May 3, there were nearly 1,000 National Guardsmen on campus to control the students.

During a press conference, Governor Rhodes called the protesters un-American and referred to the protesters as revolutionaries set on destroying higher education in Ohio. "They're worse than the brownshirts and the communist element and also the nightriders and the vigilantes," Rhodes said. "They're the worst type of people that we harbor in America. I think that we're up against the strongest, well-trained, militant, revolutionary group that has ever assembled in America."[12]

Rhodes also claimed he would obtain a court order declaring a state of emergency, banning further demonstrations, and gave the impression that a situation akin to martial law had been declared; however he never attempted to obtain such an order. [13]

During the day some students came into downtown Kent to help with cleanup efforts after the rioting, which met with mixed reactions from local businessmen. Mayor Satrom, under pressure from frightened citizens, ordered a curfew until further notice.

Around 8:00 p.m., another rally was held on the campus Commons. By 8:45 p.m. the Guard used tear gas to disperse the crowd, and the students reassembled at the intersection of Lincoln and Main Streets, holding a sit-in in the hopes of gaining a meeting with Mayor Satrom and President White. At 11:00 p.m., the Guard announced that a curfew had gone into effect and began forcing the students back to their dorms. Ten Guardsmen were injured[11] and a few students were bayoneted by Guardsmen.[1]

</a>

[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kent_State_shootings&action=edit&section=7" target="_blank">edit] Monday, May 4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Question_book-3.svgThis section needs additional citations for verification.

Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2008)300px-Ruffnerveccio.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ruffnerveccio.jpgAnother photo taken at almost the same time as the iconic Filo image; this one was taken by Howard Ruffner.On Monday, May 4, a protest was scheduled to be held at noon, as had been planned three days earlier. University officials attempted to ban the gathering, handing out 12,000 leaflets stating that the event was canceled. Despite this, an estimated 2,000 people gathered[14] on the university's Commons, near Taylor Hall. The protest began with the ringing of the campus's iron victory bell (which had historically been used to signal victories in football games) to signal the beginning of the rally, and the first protester began to speak.

Fearing that the situation might escalate into another violent protest, Companies A and C, 1/145th Infantry and Troop G of the 2/107th Armored Cavalry, Ohio ARNG, the units on the campus grounds, attempted to disperse the students. The legality of the dispersal was later debated at a subsequent wrongful death and injury trial. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that authorities did indeed have the right to disperse the crowd.

The dispersal process began late in the morning with a police official, riding in a Guard Jeep, approaching the students to read them an order to disperse or face arrest. The protesters pelted the Jeep with rocks, forcing it to retreat. One Guardsman was injured in the attack.

Just before noon, the Guard returned and again ordered the crowd to disperse. When they refused, the Guard used tear gas. Because of wind, the tear gas had little effect in dispersing the crowd, and some began a second rock attack with chants of "Pigs off campus!" The students threw the tear gas canisters back at the National Guardsmen. However they had put on gas masks upon first using tear gas.

When it was obvious the crowd was not going to disperse, a group of 77 National Guard troops from A Company and Troop G began to advance on the hundreds of protesters with bayonets fixed on their weapons. The guardsmen had little training in riot control. As the guardsmen advanced, the protesters retreated up and over Blanket Hill, heading out of The Commons area. Once over the hill, the students, in a loose group, moved northeast along the front of Taylor Hall, with some continuing toward a parking lot in front of Prentice Hall (slightly northeast of and perpendicular to Taylor Hall). The guardsmen pursued the protesters over the hill, but rather than veering left as the protesters had, they continued straight, heading down toward an athletic practice field enclosed by a chain link fence. Here they remained for about ten minutes, unsure of how to get out of the area short of retracing their entrance path (an action some guardsmen considered might be viewed as a retreat[improper synthesis?]). During this time, the bulk of the students were off to the left and front of the guardsmen, approximately 50 to 75 meters away, on the veranda of Taylor Hall. Others were scattered between Taylor Hall and the Prentice Hall parking lot, while still others, perhaps 35 or 40, were standing in the parking lot, or dispersing through the lot as had been previously ordered.

While on the practice field, the guardsmen generally faced the parking lot which was about 100 meters away. At one point some of the guardsmen knelt and aimed their weapons toward the parking lot, then stood up again. For a few moments several guardsmen formed a loose huddle and appeared to be talking to one another. The guardsmen appeared to be unclear as to what to do next. They had cleared the protesters from the Commons area, and many students had left, but many stayed and were still angrily confronting the soldiers, some throwing rocks and tear gas canisters. At the end of about ten minutes the guardsmen began to retrace their steps back up the hill toward the Commons area. Some of the students on the Taylor Hall veranda began to move slowly toward the soldiers as the latter passed over the top of the hill and headed back down into the Commons.

At this point, at 12:22 PM,[1] a number of guardsmen at the top of the hill abruptly turned and fired their M1 Garand semi-automatic military rifles into the students. The guardsmen directed their fire not at the closest students, who were on the Taylor Hall veranda, but at those on the grass area and concrete walkway below the veranda, at those on the service road between the veranda and the parking lot, and at those in the parking lot.[improper synthesis?] Bullets were not sprayed in all directions, but instead were confined to a fairly limited line of fire leading from the top of the hill to the parking lot. Not all the soldiers who fired their weapons directed their fire into the students. Some soldiers fired into the ground while a few fired into the air. In all, 29 of the 77 guardsmen claimed to have fired their weapons. A total of 67 bullets were fired. The shooting was determined to have lasted only 13 seconds, although a New York Times reporter stated that "it appeared to go on, as a solid volley, for perhaps a full minute or a little longer." The question of why the shots were fired is widely debated.

The Adjutant General of the Ohio National Guard told reporters that a sniper had fired on the guardsmen, which itself remains a debated allegation. Many guardsmen later testified that they were in fear for their lives, which was questioned partly because of the distance of the wounded students. Time magazine later concluded that "triggers were not pulled accidentally at Kent State". The President's Commission on Campus Unrest avoided the question of why the shootings happened and harshly criticized both the protesters and the Guardsmen, but concluded that "the indiscriminate firing of rifles into a crowd of students and the deaths that followed were unnecessary, unwarranted, and inexcusable."

On May 1, 2007, various news agencies reported the claim of a former student who was injured in the shooting to have uncovered new evidence that the guardsmen were ordered to fire upon the crowd. Terry Strubbe, a student who lived in a dormitory overlooking the anti-war rally site, placed a microphone at a windowsill and recorded[15] nearly 30 minutes of the event on reel-to-reel tape. He sent a copy of the tape to the FBI and kept a copy in a safe deposit box. The government copy has been archived at Yale University. According to Alan Canfora, who was injured in the wrist that day by a gunshot, a voice can be heard on the tape yelling, "Right here! Get Set! Point! Fire!" before the 13-second volley of gunfire.[15] Canfora said he has obtained a copy of that tape and that he plans to release it on CD. He wants the government to reopen the investigation of the 37-year-old case.[16]

In another step towards this goal, Canfora provided a copy of the tape to musician Ian MacKaye of the bands Minor Threat and Fugazi, and co-founder of Dischord Records, who digitally enhanced the recording by boosting the volume level and removing tape hiss.[15][17][18]

The shootings killed four students and wounded nine. Two of the four students killed, Allison Krause and Jeffrey Miller, had participated in the protest, and the other two, Sandra Scheuer and William Knox Schroeder, were walking from one class to the next. Schroeder was also a member of the campus ROTC chapter. Of those wounded, none was closer than 71 feet (22 m) to the guardsmen. Of those killed, the nearest (Miller) was 265 feet (81 m) away.

Are you kidding me? Just today, I was listening to the radio, and the D.J. said that Neil Young wrote a song about this. It was a protest song. It's called "Ohio". The D.J. played the sng after he described what happened on that day.

You're right! Not cool!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is why i think McCain has an advantage. Their are some people still pissed about losing Vietnam and coming home and being treated like criminals. I think there is alot of the Vietnam vets votes out there that will feel the same thing is being done with todays vets.

US Census Bureau (2004) reports there are 8.2 million "Vietnam Era Veterans". Of these 2.59 million are reported to have served "in country". Ten million votes in a country of

300 million may or may not make a difference. Personally, he'll win in a landslide anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the government aggravated the situation, and showed very poor leadership and was just as much a part of the problem as the demonstrators, who also deserved to have their rights protected. Those students who were at work in their offices and classrooms effectively became sitting ducks for all the nonsense. It is the government's job to protect everyone's rights.

Edited by eternal light

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you kidding me? Just today, I was listening to the radio, and the D.J. said that Neil Young wrote a song about this. It was a protest song. It's called "Ohio". The D.J. played the sng after he described what happened on that day.

You're right! Not cool!

You just today heard about that?

Either you are very very young, or just got your first radio yesterday.

Btw, and before you hear it on the radio...

John Lennon is dead.

... you know, that dude from the Beatles.

... you know--- THE BEATLES?

nevermind.

(don't get mad, I'm just being Del) :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
US Census Bureau (2004) reports there are 8.2 million "Vietnam Era Veterans". Of these 2.59 million are reported to have served "in country". Ten million votes in a country of

300 million may or may not make a difference. Personally, he'll win in a landslide anyway.

only 120 milion people vote, So lets say 10 million vote for McCain, that 8% of the total vote. But if i recall, bush won both elections by two million votes combine so every votes does count. Now the question is, what is the typical Vietnam vet, is he a G.O.P. or a Dem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From this American's point of view -- Kent State could have been avoided....

... those students should have been in class doing what they were supposed to be doing. Instead of causing trouble by throwing rocks and bottles at other young men who were in uniform.

It was incidents like Kent State, the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, and other displays of lawlessness. That convinced me and many other Americans that the liberal left was a threat to our national identity. In fact, it was that period of our history (which despite the efforts of the radical left to create a "new progressive" society) -- actually helped to lay the seeds of neo-conservatism and the Reagan revolution. And Republican Presidential victories for 7 out of 10 times over the next 40 years.

:thumbdown::thumbdown::burp: (barfing)

:hippy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You just today heard about that?

Either you are very very young, or just got your first radio yesterday.

Btw, and before you hear it on the radio...

John Lennon is dead.

... you know, that dude from the Beatles.

You're right, I was just a tot when this happened. Not exactly a topic for the dinner-table. And, yes, I know the beatles. And Peggy Lee, Martin Denny, Joe Cocker, Gene Crupa (You know him?), Chubby checker, the Stones.....need I go on? The only thing my family was interested in was music, dancing, and togetherness. Politics and negativity just wasn't part of the environment.

BTW, you're such a nutter! :D

... you know--- THE BEATLES?

nevermind.

(don't get mad, I'm just being Del) :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^

You messed up on the quote tags.

You're right, I was just a tot when this happened. Not exactly a topic for the dinner-table. And, yes, I know the beatles. And Peggy Lee, Martin Denny, Joe Cocker, Gene Crupa (You know him?), Chubby checker, the Stones.....need I go on? The only thing my family was interested in was music, dancing, and togetherness. Politics and negativity just wasn't part of the environment.

BTW, you're such a nutter!

Of course I know Gene Krupa. I even have some old Benny Goodman 78's I got from my Grandmother that feature Krupa on drums.

Music was big in my house too, but so was politics and the REALITY of the political landscape.

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One thing i will never know is how people have such disrespect for the troops and police. Groups like operation Code Pink are no better than the KKK and the black panthers in my book. They are wannabe hippes who triped on some bad acid one too many times.

I won't try to speak for anybody else but I can tell you why I no longer automatically have 'high respect' for troops, police, or other authorities.

I was raised with the notion that cops were the good guys, our troops were the good guys, our leaders had our best interests at heart, etc. etc. etc. That was also the attitude police, military, and governmental folks pushed... and often, along with that, anyone who didn't automatically trust them and believe that was subversive, 'dirty hippie fags', 'commie pinko fags', un-American, etc. etc.

I always accepted the 'official' versions of events, etc. After years and a few decades of accepting all that, I discovered that it wasn't always the case. Sometimes cops lie, sometimes they make a mistake or do something with a more malicious intent, and then lie to cover it up... and the coverup isn't motivated by some altruistic desire to save me from the truth. It's even moreso with government officials... leaders did all kinds of things they shouldn't have and then covered it up, or tried to, etc.

Eventually, I figured out that the emperor wore no clothes. Sometimes cops lie, sometimes innocent people get injured or killed by mistake (or deliberately), sometimes those things get covered up, etc. Same again with government leaders.

Of course, I don't like getting lied to, but I really resent the notion that I'm somehow unpatriotic for not continuing to automatically believe everything they say. [to clarify- 'they' are the ones who claim that, not you.] Sometimes the disillusionment can lead to a lot of resentment and frustration. That's especially true when the folks who are lying or pulling some other kind of power crap not only deny it, but claim the moral high ground, and then denigrate those who dare to question.

FWIW, I'm not anti-police or anti-military, but I no longer automatically assume they're right, fair, and honest.

People who protest or demonstrate want someone to pay attention to what they're saying. If traditional and passive attempts are ignored or thwarted, then they have to either shut up and go away or up the ante. (Don't get me wrong, I don't think protestors, demonstrators, etc. are automatically altruistic or on the side of 'truth, justice, and the american way' either). Both 'sides' can have have agendas that aren't as lofty as what they claim.

In other words...

Question Authority!!!!

Oh yeah?... Says who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^^^

You messed up on the quote tags.

Of course I know Gene Krupa. I even have some old Benny Goodman 78's I got from my Grandmother that feature Krupa on drums.

Music was big in my house too, but so was politics and the REALITY of the political landscape.

:P

My mom liked Gene Krupa. That's how I know him. Always telling us what a great drummer he was. Was he really that good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I always accepted the 'official' versions of events, etc. After years and a few decades of accepting all that, I discovered that it wasn't always the case. Sometimes cops lie, sometimes they make a mistake or do something with a more malicious intent, and then lie to cover it up... and the coverup isn't motivated by some altruistic desire to save me from the truth. It's even moreso with government officials... leaders did all kinds of things they shouldn't have and then covered it up, or tried to, etc.

Eventually, I figured out that the emperor wore no clothes. Sometimes cops lie, sometimes innocent people get injured or killed by mistake (or deliberately), sometimes those things get covered up, etc. Same again with government leaders.

The trouble with a lot of Americans is that they're still very naive when it comes to politics. They still believe their politicians are honourable, decent, upstanding moral members of the community. Americans have too much respect for Politicians.

Another problem too is that a lot of Americans are too caught up in the Republican/Democrat dichotomy.

There's always been Police corruption , Government corruption, Nixon lied many times. So did Reagan. Clinton lied, Bush lied (in fact his whole administration lied) but that doesn't worry most Americans...

I remember a cartoon of Richard Nixon which had him saying "It's all right to be guilty, as long as you don't look guilty..." and that's exactly what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I won't try to speak for anybody else but I can tell you why I no longer automatically have 'high respect' for troops, police, or other authorities.

I was raised with the notion that cops were the good guys, our troops were the good guys, our leaders had our best interests at heart, etc. etc. etc. That was also the attitude police, military, and governmental folks pushed... and often, along with that, anyone who didn't automatically trust them and believe that was subversive, 'dirty hippie fags', 'commie pinko fags', un-American, etc. etc.

I always accepted the 'official' versions of events, etc. After years and a few decades of accepting all that, I discovered that it wasn't always the case. Sometimes cops lie, sometimes they make a mistake or do something with a more malicious intent, and then lie to cover it up... and the coverup isn't motivated by some altruistic desire to save me from the truth. It's even moreso with government officials... leaders did all kinds of things they shouldn't have and then covered it up, or tried to, etc.

Eventually, I figured out that the emperor wore no clothes. Sometimes cops lie, sometimes innocent people get injured or killed by mistake (or deliberately), sometimes those things get covered up, etc. Same again with government leaders.

Of course, I don't like getting lied to, but I really resent the notion that I'm somehow unpatriotic for not continuing to automatically believe everything they say. [to clarify- 'they' are the ones who claim that, not you.] Sometimes the disillusionment can lead to a lot of resentment and frustration. That's especially true when the folks who are lying or pulling some other kind of power crap not only deny it, but claim the moral high ground, and then denigrate those who dare to question.

FWIW, I'm not anti-police or anti-military, but I no longer automatically assume they're right, fair, and honest.

People who protest or demonstrate want someone to pay attention to what they're saying. If traditional and passive attempts are ignored or thwarted, then they have to either shut up and go away or up the ante. (Don't get me wrong, I don't think protestors, demonstrators, etc. are automatically altruistic or on the side of 'truth, justice, and the american way' either). Both 'sides' can have have agendas that aren't as lofty as what they claim.

In other words...

"Question Authority!!!!

FWIW I am not a big fan of the police either. I know lots of them, even have some as family and friends. If I know anything about the police, it's that they don't get into the job "to protect and to serve"... other than to serve their own egos or other interests. Which is probably why we often have the problems that you speak of. It's just that over time most people in that job become extreamly hard hearted and unfeeling. In my observation and opinion.

But I'm not saying that the police are all bad. Not any more so than in any civilian profession. And I suppose they serve a purpose, especially in crime ridden areas. But as far as where I live or in my own experience, I really don't have much need for them. Mostly the police in my town are pretty dumb anyway. I am way more capable of protecting my home, family and property than the cops are. In fact, they would probably screw things up so badly if I ever called them that I wouldn't.

But with that being said, I also would make a huge distinction between state and local law enforcement and the Military. While people in the militiary get into that job for many different reasons, most do so becuase they need a good job... at least for a few years. But I also know that for a large number of people in the military they take the job (and often re-enlist) because they come to find that they are part of something very positive. The camaradare and purpose to their mission is a good fit for many people. And in my opinion, the modern military is a very honorable profession. It's not for everyone, and maybe not even for most people. But I don't believe that the career military are nearly as "jaded" or self serving as the police. For one, the money is a lot less than in the civilian life. The are no unions in the military, and also no guarantees that you will not be put in harms way. So peoople who make the military a career do so out of many of the same motivations that teachers do. In other words, to serve. A very honorable thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Best post in the thread.

Del you're an Island of common sense in a sea of Dumb Asses.

WOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOO....getting touchy and HIGHLY BITCHY are we??......if you can say that, then I can say YOU ARE THE FUCKIN' WArMONGER SHITHEAD THAT YOU SURELY ARE!!!!!

Robert!!! :):):)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...