Tin soldiers and Nixon coming...

page: 2
45
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by dherik
 


Just to slightly tweak that, it is not a right.. it is a duty to disobey an unlawful order.. and that was the case then as it is now if that gives you any new ideas on the matter.




posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by dherik
 

I do believe the proof is in the pudding my friend. For every soldier willing to disobey the order to fire upon citizens how many are more than willing to spill a little blood whether it be that of an armed combatant of an unarmed protester? I have no statistics to back this claim up but I do believe that it is more than likely that given the order to fire upon a crowd of protestors some soldiers will follow that order, and once the shooting begins it won't stop, not in the tinderbox that America has become today.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:11 AM
link   
I wonder how many young people know anything about this. This is an event that should not be forgotten.

That would be a good effort to make today, ask people if they remember the event, and tell them about it.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
I will probably catch some heat for this post, but that is life.

Consider, for a moment, WHO was doing the firing. These were young, poorly-trained National Guardsmen, not front-line battle troops. They were surrounded by so many protesters that they were greatly out-numbered. They were scared. I can tell you this, when soldiers with rifles, especially they are "green" troops, if one person opens fire, it is a natural instinct for the others to follow. Ask any veteran that has been in a prolonged firefight. When a lull occurs, and everyone is tense to see what's going to happen next, if one soldier gets startled by something, and discharges his weapon, the other guys, unsure of what's going on, will discharge their weapons in response. They will try to figure out what's going down, but until they know they are safe, they keep firing.

It was a terrible event, but I would guarantee those guardsmen have rarely gone a day without being sorry for what they did, starting in just a split second of fear.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by azz420
 


There's one problem with that, the Uniform Code of Military Justice prohibits engaging unarmed non-combatants. Now during an armed uprising the rules change. But an unarmed peaceful protest should under no circumstance should any member of the US military fire upon the protesters. I'm just relaying what I was trained, and taught.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by The_Zomar
 


But the problem is that it could very well happen again:


But then again, think of the G20 protests in Pittsburgh just last year where tear gas and sonic weapons were used to break up crowds.

But oddly enough, it doesn't take a stand off situation for a death to occur and for a huge backlash to happen. 2001 Cincinnati Riots. I don't know Officer Stephen Roach, I may have seen him once or twice. But I do know his father Denny Roach who is now a retired police officer.

Steven Roach fired on Timothy Thomas in that dark alley out of instinct, fear and training. The very same things that caused those guardsmen to fire on the students of Kent State 40 years ago. And the very same thing that almost caused me to kill once when a drunk college kid had entered my apartment and I found him asleep next to me in my bed.

But to say it could never happen again, no it very well could indeed happen again.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Truth1000
 


You may catch flack from others but I believe both soldiers and victims deserve sympathy. The nature of the sympathy extended in the two cases my differ among different individuals depending on their relationship to this or similar events.

The telescoping lens of history provides the necessary distance as time goes on to see the fundamental intereconnectedness and interdependent origination of all phenomena; this is more apparent the farther one travels from a given event. 40 years ago was a long time for some and not that long for others; but already I think cooler heads that prevail will be able to extend sympathy to both parties in most cases.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Funny, just as I posted my comments, the radio reported the anniversary, and I was starting to think mainstream media would ignore this event.

A little searching, and all the major news outlets seem to be covering this memorial.

Good to see.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by azz420
reply to post by dherik
 

I do believe the proof is in the pudding my friend. For every soldier willing to disobey the order to fire upon citizens how many are more than willing to spill a little blood whether it be that of an armed combatant of an unarmed protester? I have no statistics to back this claim up but I do believe that it is more than likely that given the order to fire upon a crowd of protestors some soldiers will follow that order, and once the shooting begins it won't stop, not in the tinderbox that America has become today.


You are 100% right. I belong to a number of forums and this topic (firing on fellow Americans) comes up from time to time. Not long ago I, and others, had a heated discussion with a man who is active military (or so he claimed, I had no way to personally verify). He flat out stated that given the order to fire on Americans he would do it whether he liked it or not because "his job was to follow orders and not question his superiors".

He seemed rather unintelligent and failed to grasp the concept of an unlawful order. To him, if it came from a superior it was lawful regardless of what the actual order was. As long as it came from his legitimate superior.

There would be many who refused, or maybe just fire over their heads so as to not look like they are disobeying orders, but there is no doubt in my mind that there will be plenty who will follow orders.

Any look at history would show that some of the worst atrocities ever committed were done by governments to their own people. This would not be possible without the cooperation of the military. Though we can hope, I feel America would be no different.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by conspiracydude
How could anybody kill their own countryman! I thought only Stalin was capable of such hatred.


Are you kidding me? This was not the only instance of the Government strong arming those who they did not agree with - especially those they really considered countrymen. Back in 1932, when folks were starving and left, well pretty much like they are left today - no jobs and expected to pay for what rich people screwed up in 1929 (ah, history's foot right back in our rears); WWI Vets decided to ban together to ask Congress to fork over their bonuses ten years earlier than anticipated. Congress was polite enough to give them a veiled warning: take a train ticket home instead. Hoover the beloved, then ordered MacArthur to remove them from their Bonus Army encampment (called Hovervilles at the time) in Anacostia. The Federal troops moved in and reportedly injured many, blinded at least one man and murdered a baby. See, the encampment in question was just a shantytown and most there were poor families. Needless to say Hoover didn't get another shot as president, but it would explain the vacuum connotations. This, among all the actions that took place that day sprung out at me like prophecy:
snippet: At 4:45 p.m., commanded by Gen. Douglas MacArthur, the 12th Infantry Regiment, Fort Howard, Maryland, and the 3rd Cavalry Regiment, supported by six battle tanks commanded by Maj. George S. Patton, Fort Myer, Virginia, formed in Pennsylvania Avenue while thousands of civil service employees left work to line the street and watch the U.S. Army attack its own veterans. The Bonus Marchers, believing the display was in their honour, cheered the troops until Maj. Patton ordered the cavalry to charge them—an action which prompted the civil service spectators to yell, "Shame! Shame!" end snippet.
en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 4-5-2010 by DaWhiz]



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:32 AM
link   
wow. i had no idea this even happened.

never realized that is what that song was about either.

ill add thit to the "things i never learned in school" file right between waco and ruby ridge.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


Good to see indeed. And I can honestly say that this is not some of my better writing going on in this thread, especially on the OP. For point of reference, I was in the womb at the time and no where close to Kent State when it happened.

But it was an event that happened in my backyard so to speak, being an Ohioan, and was a story that was always told growing up. Which is what I meant by being under the shadow. Of course, this could be a contributing cause to the large population of Ohioans on ATS. Especially among those distrustful of the government.

Kent State, consciously or subconsciously, is a heavy wound for many in Ohio. A loss of innocence for many on many levels. At one time, Kent State changed their name to Kent University to try to distance themselves from the tragedy.

As a person that has observed people for a long time, Neil Young's "Ohio" is interesting for those here in Ohio that know the background story. In the opening bars some will change the station, most just pause for a moment, very few will just relax and listen to it as any other song. While living in Florida, a friend actually asked me if I knew the story behind it because they loved the song. He couldn't believe that it was not a very popular song in Ohio.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by heyJude
40 years ago, American men in uniform followed orders to shoot a bunch of American kids protesting against a corrupt government, and an illegal war.



Thanks for reminding ATS of what happened, and could very well happen again.


They were not ordered to shoot. They were ordered to load their weapons with live ammo. One nervous guardsman pulled the trigger that lead to the quick barrage of shots.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   
I remember my older sisters crying when this news hit the media. It was a sad say for our country. I was only 15 yrs old and it changed my way of thinking about what government is.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
This was undoubtedly a serious event, and it was wrong for those men to shoot our students, protesting, throwing rocks, etc., or not.

However, there were thousands of protests throughout that timeframe, and there was no American military decision to shoot down civilians. If that were true, why weren't there dozens of "Kent States?" This was a terrible mistake, but was never part of any "scheme" to kill all of the protesters. Not in Ohio, but for a while, I wore "Love beads" and protested the war myself. I was never threatened.

This far ahead, we can see that this was a sad anomaly in American history. Our sympathies go out to the students who died, were shot, were scared to death, the families of everyone involved, and even for those young men in the National Guard, who have daily with the knowledge of what their actions did, 40 years ago..



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Truth1000
 


From the wikipedia article


Tape recording

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 had been 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 nearly 30 minutes of the event on reel-to-reel tape.[30] 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.[30] 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.[54]
In another step toward 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.[30][55][56]
In April 2010, Terry Strubbe, the KSU communications student who recorded the 30 minute audio tape from his dorm room on May 4, 1970, and music producer Joe Bendo announced plans to have it analyzed by a film archivist who can digitize the audio reducing background noise to determine if an order to fire is audible.


You can listen to the original and enhanced recordings here at NPR. It takes a few times listening as the enhanced version is not overly clear either. But you can hear the words "poooint" as in a tone like a command and very staccato of the word "fire"



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Every single one of those National Guardsmen hated those college students like the people who support the war on here hate me. They were all itching to shoot them. They did not panic. They wanted to teach those kids a lesson. They considered them a threat to national security. The protesters were the terrorists of the day.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Fine, earthdude.

Everyone wants you dead.

Sleep well tonight.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Truth1000
I will probably catch some heat for this post, but that is life.

Consider, for a moment, WHO was doing the firing. These were young, poorly-trained National Guardsmen, not front-line battle troops. They were surrounded by so many protesters that they were greatly out-numbered. They were scared. I can tell you this, when soldiers with rifles, especially they are "green" troops, if one person opens fire, it is a natural instinct for the others to follow. Ask any veteran that has been in a prolonged firefight. When a lull occurs, and everyone is tense to see what's going to happen next, if one soldier gets startled by something, and discharges his weapon, the other guys, unsure of what's going on, will discharge their weapons in response. They will try to figure out what's going down, but until they know they are safe, they keep firing.

It was a terrible event, but I would guarantee those guardsmen have rarely gone a day without being sorry for what they did, starting in just a split second of fear.


Strange that there is no mention here of the KGB Colonel who stated in 1996 that one of the people in the anti-war group that he provided funds to confessed to being the person who yelled for the Guardsmen to fire. This was documented in KGB records that came to light in the 90's but, was hidden again with the approval of the Clinton Administration because they were afraid that their release would have created a rift in the Democratic Party that might have prevented Clinton from getting his second term.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Sorry, Jim.

I did not know that bit of history, so I could not have mentioned it. That is highly interesting, though!





new topics
top topics
 
45
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join