The Democracy Journal
Search Site
Get Involved
This form does not yet contain any fields.
    Support the PJRC

    Support the PJRC for continued original analysis on ending the wars, funding domestic priorities and preserving civil liberties.

    Make a contribution to benefit the PJRC now! 

    Conferences & Events

    Tom Hayden speaks in Port Huron, MI, in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Port Huron Statement.

    Invite Tom Hayden to speak in your town! 



    Follow Tom


    Contact Us
    This form does not yet contain any fields.

      Kent State Memorial Milestone

      Tom Hayden at Kent State University, Saturday, May 4, 2013.

      This article appeared at The Nation on May 15, 2013.

      Kent State, last week, commemorated the 43rd anniversary of the National Guard killings of four students and the wounding of nine others on May 4, 1970, by the opening of the official May 4 Visitors Center. It was a significant milestone for activists – some already dead, the rest gone gray – determined to uncover the truth and honor the memory of those who died in an anti-war protest on that fateful day.

      The random character of those deaths, and those at Jackson State two weeks later, drove home the message to millions of students that spring that they too might become victims of an escalating war at home. The Crosby, Stills and Nash song, “Four Dead in Ohio,” became a universal dirge.  

      Questions still remain, and this year’s formal events raised more, thanks to filmmaker Oliver Stone, the keynote speaker.

      Activists leading the long inquest demand that the Obama Justice Department take a new look at recently discovered cassettes from 1970, which, under modern forensic technology, may clarify at last whether orders to fire upon the students were issued to the guardsmen, or whether the shooters only reacted spontaneously to provocation by students.

      Oliver Stone went further, in an emotional speech to over 800 from the local community. Stone revived an old theory – long discredited by Ohio and federal investigators – that the chain of events was provoked by an informant doubling as a sniper that day. Stone’s theory was quickly denounced as a “red herring” by Alan Canfora, who was shot in 1970, and continues to be among the most respected researchers on the events. Stone’s theory, Canfora says, diverts attention from the explanation that researchers are closing in on – that orders to kill were given – and revives the “sniper” excuse given to justify the killing spree that day.

      The Longest Anti-War Memorial

      Tom Hayden at the May 4 Visitors Center at Kent State University, on Saturday, May 4, 2013.

      The 43 consecutive years of overnight vigils, demonstrations, conferences and memorials at Kent State is the longest such campaign in the history of the anti-war movement. Sixty-five thousand people have trekked over the years to the off-the-highway location, estimates Tom Grace, an activist shot that day and now a college professor in New York. The numbers are sure to increase with the opening of the Center.

      While monuments proliferate for many social movements, and while President Obama memorably mentioned Seneca Falls, Selma and Stonewall in his Inaugural Address, national recognition of what happened at Kent State has evolved only with painful gradualism. President Obama spoke at Kent State last September 26 before 6,600 cheering students, and came away with 2,000 new voter registrations. He won Kent in November by over 80 percent. That mattered in Ohio’s tight election, won by Obama by less that two percentage points. Next to Ohio’s African-American voters, Obama’s strongest Democratic supporters are concentrated in the Kent area of northeastern Ohio. Among the leading longtime Democrats in the Kent area have been Alan Canfora and the activist network still seeking answers.

      Obama said not a word about the Kent State legacy in his September 26 campaign speech. Was this an omission of forgetfulness, or a calculated avoidance of reviving controversies that still lurk among some Ohio voters with Guard connections? What might it take for Obama to include Kent State in a future litany of sites made historic by social movements?

      The Struggle for Recognition

      Tom Hayden and Dean Kahler, who was wounded at the May 4, 1970, Kent State shootings, pictured together on May 4, 2013.

      In the early Seventies, Kent State officials tried and failed to limit the annual commemorations to just five years. Then came a 1977 confrontation and hundreds of arrests when the University actually tried to bulldoze away the hallowed site to build a gym. It took until 1998 to stop cars from driving over the four spots on the campus parking lot where Allison Krause, Jeffrey Miller, Sandra Scheuer, and William Schroader were killed by bullets.

      Eventually, however, KSU began to co-exist and even cooperate with the mission of the dedicated May 4th activists. KSU faculty launched ongoing educational efforts to archive what happened. The university is the nation’s leader in promoting courses on nonviolence, and democracy, peace studies and conflict resolution were established. All 16 deans from every campus pitched in $667,000 of the one million dollar cost of the new Center. Determined lobbying resulted in the site being placed on the National Registry of Historical Sites by 2010. Then came $330,000 from the National Endowment for the Humanities. After six years of debate and planning, the May 4 Visitors Center was finally opened. KSU professors Laura Davis and Carol Barbato and others chronicled much of the history in Democratic Narrative, History, and Memory, published last year by KSU Press. 

      The new Center is a spacious, sunlit and airy, two-room facility on the ground floor of Taylor Hall, overlooking the graceful green slopes of the old Commons, the slopes forming a natural amphitheater in the heart of campus where the 1970 confrontation occurred. The design succeeds in turning what appears to be a pretty but standard college green into an outdoor museum with minimalist signage describing the events of May 4th. The bowl’s rim is lined by 58,220 yellow flowers representing the American deaths in Vietnam, the underlying cause of the May 4th protests. Just to the side of the green is the black parking lot with four marked spaces where the victims died. Flowers, candles, and messages written in chalk create a tender aura over the stark pavement. The deliberate randomness of the shootings is brought home by the distances the bullets traveled – between 260 and 390 feet for the fatalities, as far away as 750 feet for a wounding. If this was a targeted killing, the target was students as an enemy per se. The day before the shootings, Governor James Rhodes called them “the worst type of people in America,” “brownshirts” who should be “eradicated.” Richard Nixon said they were “bums.”

      Rhodes was trailing by eight percent in the final days of a Republican primary when he visited Kent State on May 3, ordered the Guard on campus, and excoriated the student radicals. According to top Nixon aide H.R. Haldeman’s archival notes, the President instructed his hard-line political consultant, Murray Chotiner, to make sure that “Rhodes esp. ride this.”

      Nixon had invaded Cambodia four days earlier, on April 30, and his own world was about to blow up from blowback.

      On May 1, at Yale, I read aloud a call for a national student strike, which was drafted by activists from around the country. Four million students protested or went on strike that month, and semesters came thudding to their end. In those same days, Nixon approved the “Huston Plan,” drawn up by his aide Tom Charles Huston, for a coordinated FBI-CIA crackdown on campus activism through extra-judicial methods – the plan was officially dropped, though implemented in its parts. As Haldeman would write in his memoir, The Ends of Power, the Kent State shootings began “Nixon’s downhill slide toward Watergate” and the administration’s destruction. Congress immediately reacted by finally trying to cut funding for the war. Within weeks, Nixon signed a bill lowering the voting age to 18. By then he already was retreating from his “incursion” into Cambodia, though the war itself would only end in Watergate.

      The events at Kent State would morph into a continuing battle over the control of narrative, always the final stage of social movements. In the beginning Nixon framed his Cambodia action as saving America from becoming a “pitiful helpless giant” surrounded by the mobs burning books and blowing up campuses at home – comparisons he literally used. California’s governor Ronald Reagan was taking the same warlike stance, declaring days before the Cambodian invasion that “if the students want a bloodbath, let’s get it over with. No more appeasement.” 

      That narrative was strengthened in James Michener’s quick bestseller on Kent, where he blamed the disastrous breakdown on an SDS “conspiracy.” The Nixon White House later congratulated Michener. Even one critic of the murders, Phillip Caputo, author of Thirteen Seconds, blamed the Kent students for throwing a “collective, destructive tantrum” and therefore sharing blame for their own deaths. On the other hand, Nixon’s own commission, chaired by Pennsylvania Governorn William Scranton, found the shootings to be “indiscriminate...unnecessary, unwarranted and inexcusable.”

      Truth and/or Reconciliation?

      Those polarized views, and the actual chain of events, have been debated ever since, and became the main challenge facing the May 4 Visitors Center. The Center’s very mandate is potentially a conflicted one; to balance the need for true accounting with its other stated purpose of reconciliation or healing. If the two conflict, what happens to the truth?

      Over the decades, the core demand of the activists and families of the dead and wounded has been to get to the truth of why the shots were fired and whether the commanders gave orders. State officials and the surviving guardsmen have denied all liability, at first casting blame on unnamed “snipers” – a claim Ohio and federal authorities withdrew – then on provocation by rock-throwing, epithet-shouting students, and then finally on a pure over-reaction by paranoid guardsmen, thus turning the 13-second shooting “spree” into another one of history’s “regrettable” tragedies. The evidence from eyewitnesses, photos and films, and numerous investigations, has shredded those official claims, but still fallen short of an irrefutable alternative, until recently.

      In 2007, the dogged Alan Canfora, who now is the director of the Akron Law Library, retrieved an old cassette tape from May 4, 1970, at a Yale University archive. He turned the cassette over to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, and its stunning revelations were printed both there and in the New York Times.

      The cassette buttresses the long-held belief of many that there was an order to fire given to the guardsmen that day. To many ears, the words “right here,” “get set,” “point,” and “fire” are heard from a commanding officer. Later, a top commander was quoted as saying that “an order came down,” without saying from where the order came.

      But the Center did not quite concur with Canfora, or was not able to obtain a consensus from the various experts it consulted. In the end, the Center produced a powerful short documentary that includes the distinct command “Point!” and is followed immediately by 13 seconds in which 67 shots are heard being fired. The Center is unwilling to play for its audience the other sounds on the tape, which is where the matter stands, more conclusive than before but technically still inconclusive. 

      The Center’s leaders, including Carol Barbato and Laura Davis, told me they felt no pressure to dilute their presentation, which is now being seen by visitors multiple times per day. Canfora and Tom Grace, who has advised the Center, believe the institution is sincere but perhaps excessively cautious, leaving open the key question of whether there was command responsibility or just a spontaneous overreaction. In the historic footage, a company of guardsmen never break formation, but instead march a few yards up the hill safely away from a small contingent of jeering and milling students, then wheel, take aim, and fire directly at the crowd who are approximately one hundred yards in front of them. Canfora is certain that the truth will out eventually, and the full order-to-fire acknowledged.

      To that purpose, Canfora and his Kent May 4 Center have retained a top audio expert with advanced equipment to verify whether the shouted commands can be heard beyond dispute.

      Enter Oliver Stone

      As noted earlier, there could be a new problem in the nagging battle over memory, this one introduced by Oliver Stone. A Vietnam veteran and a Republican until the 1980s, and now the filmmaker of Showtime’s “The Untold History of the United States,” Stone spoke emotionally to an intense Kent State audience last Saturday, as if he was previewing a new chapter of his widely-circulating film and book, which now only mentions Kent in one sentence. Stone noted what several others have before, that there was an FBI informant named Terry Norman present on May 4, snapping photos of the scene on Blanket Hill. Activists like Canfora, Grace and many others knew Norman to be a campus police spy attempting to infiltrate local campus meetings, from which he was frequently removed. They learned from later discovery that Norman was concealing a revolver in a shoulder strap that day, and that he waived the weapon in the air as a group of angry students accosted him soon after the massacre. They knew as well that some believed Norman had even fired his weapon, though there were never any witnesses. The Terry Norman conspiracy tale was dismissed by Canfora as well as from the Center’s narrative of the events.

      But Stone took up the claim that the old cassette also included the sound of four other gunshots fired approximately 70 seconds before the Guard began shooting. The allegation about those four gunshots had been dismissed by multiple authorities, including the Obama Justice Department in its review last year.

      Stone asserted his new four-gunshot theory, with his premise that there is “no reason to doubt” that secret agencies routinely employ informants and saboteurs to undermine protest movements, and therefore Terry Norman was one such “shady provocateur.” Norman, according to Stone, fired the four pistol shots in a “botched” attempt to simulate sniper fire, which would have provoked the Guard to shoot while blaming the radical activists.

      Stone’s account is supported by a tiny handful of those involved, but they happen to include the younger sister of Allison Krause, Laurel, and her mother Doris, who are entitled to a certain moral authority in the inquest over history. Laurel, who lives in Mendocino, was not invited to speak at this year’s memorial events. She was there, however, wearing a black t-shirt in front of the stage. She told me that everything and everyone – the May 4 Visitors Center, the Kent May 4 Center, Alan Canfora – were part of a massive cover-up of the evidence of four gunshots before the Guard fired. In her view, later amplified in Stone’s speech, there indeed was sniper fire before the Guard began shooting, which, if true, erases the narrative that the Guard killings were an unprovoked attack on innocent young people. Everything that activists like Canfora and Grace, as well as the Center’s more careful account, would be turned upside down if Stone were correct.

      Said Canfora of the sniper theory, “It’s a red herring.” “Oliver will regret his words” in the time ahead, he said, predicting that more evidence will unfold. Canfora said, “The claim that there were four earlier shots by Terry Norman revives the old claim that the Guard fired because they were coming under sniper fire.”

      Tom Grace adds that he and Canfora “were both in the same general vicinity in the minutes immediately preceding and neither of us, nor any other witnesses of whom I am aware, heard low-velocity shots before the National Guard salvo.” While Grace cannot claim with absolute certainty that there were no other shots fired, he said, “I know of nobody there that day that recalls hearing any.”  

      In light of this dispute, Stone may want to review the evidence once again and decide whether to insert himself into the long debate over Kent State at this important moment with his theory of a botched sniper. It would not be the first time that sniper theories have influenced Stone’s – and America’s – reading of history, from the JFK assassination to the present. Whether his thesis can be proven or not, Stone has the resources, reach and chutzpah to cast doubt on the long struggle for closure of the Kent State investigation, projecting instead a legendary tale that might never be refuted.

      PrintView Printer Friendly Version

      EmailEmail Article to Friend

      Reader Comments (7)

      Great article. When I was in graduate journalism school at Kent State in 2005, I interviewed Alan Canfora about the events leading up to the massacre. He pointed me to some compelling circumstantial evidence to indicate that Nixon had plenty of reason to hold a grudge against Kent State activists and that the shootings were therefore no accident.

      Alan told me not to take his word for it but to look up the incidents he referenced, which I did, and they were exactly as he said. See my article here:

      May 15, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterGreg M. Schwartz

      I hate to say it, because I have respected Oliver professionally, and have been a friend (though probably not on that list now), but Oliver has his head somewhere where his vision is highly restricted when it comes to much of his politics over the past ten years. His injecting himself into this now in this way is just plain stupid. Too much of the story he told in his Showtime series was so easily refuted, it really got to being embarrassing, and overthrew the material he had gotten right.

      May 15, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterT.M. Cleaver

      Like millions of other students who were in colIege on May 4, 1970, I have always felt a very strong connection to what happened at Kent State. For one thing, I actively participated in the student strike that shut down my campus (Ithaca College). The sense of outrage that I felt about the war, was, of course, intensified by the news that four students at Kent State. had been shot to death that week.

      But my connection to the tragedy also had another somewhat strange dimension to it. That's because the shootings happened exactly on my 21st birthday. So every year, when I celebrated my birthday, I was reminded (by news accounts along with my own clear recollections) of what "else" happened on May 4. And then, on May 4, 1996, I became a father for the very first time when my son, Marcelo, was born!

      Yet, despite all of these connections, I had never actually been to the Kent State campus. Anticipating that the annual commemoration would be especially poignant - and large - on the 40th anniversary, i decided I wanted - and really needed - to be there in person.

      Before going, I read many of the books that had been written about what happened on that fateful day. And when I was there, i spoke to many of the eyewitnesses, including several of the students who had been wounded.

      Having said all of the above - in part, I suppose, to establish some level of expertise, I'd like to offer a few thoughts about what Tom has written and reported on.

      Tom wrote that "The deliberate randomness of the shootings is brought home by the distances the bullets traveled – between 260 and 390 feet for the fatalities, as far away as 750 feet for a wounding. If this was a targeted killing, the target was students as an enemy per se."

      But when I was there - and stood on the spot where the Guard opened fire from, an eyewitness to the shootings, pointed out to me how "close" the parking lot was if you were looking through telescopic lenses as the shooters from the Guard were utilizing at the time. This former KSU student told me that it was widely assumed that it was no mere random act that Allison Krause and Jeffrey Miller were two of the four students who were killed. That's because both Allison and Jeff were two of the most visible students who were protesting and shouting insults at the Guard that day. They did so out of understandable outrage that the Guard had invaded and occupied their campus and based on the widespread (and tragically mistaken) belief that the rifles that the Guard had been marching around with were unloaded.

      Based on speaking to a number of eyewitnesses and on my sense of how easy it would have been to pick Jeff and Allison out of the crowd (Jeff, I believe, was in the front of the parking lot and Allison was wearing a bright red dress - and both were, by that time, very familiar faces to the Guardsmen), I am convinced their murders were not at all random - and instead were nothing less than targeted killings!

      I have equally strong feelings about the debate over why the Guard opened fire to begin with.

      The controversy over what the tape may or may not reveal is practically beside the point. Why? Because essentially every eyewitness - including John Kifner - whose account appeared on the front page of the NY Times the very next day, all agree that the main contingent of the Guard (about 28 of them) that first opened fire all did so after they rapidly pivoted around in lock step unison. How and why would a group of armed soldiers all turn around at exactly the same time and open fire in unison unless an order had been given?

      Now when and where was the order given is not clear. Some people are convinced that the order was actually issued a few minutes earlier when a small group of the soldiers (including some of the commanding officers) had gone into a huddle (which was clearly captured on film) on the practice field (for football) which was located on the bottom of the hill the Guard then marched to the top of before firing - perhaps at a pre-determined spot. Others believe an order was given on the top of the hill. Either way, the fact that the main contingent of the Guard all pivoted around at the exact same time just before they started firing is proof positive that some sort of order to fire had been given.

      As for the role of Terry Norman and the theory that Oliver Stone is now propagating: Even if (which I don't believe was the case), Norman had fired 4 shots 70 seconds before the Guard started shooting, how would that be relevant? If the Guard opened fire because they believed they themselves were under fire, why would they have waited 70 seconds to shoot back? This makes less than zero sense.

      The rapid pivot which occurred in unison just before the Guardsmen started shooting - says it all - some sort of order was given. Tape or not tape. Terry Norman or no Terry Norman. This was no act of random shooting. And it was NOT because the Guard felt threatened at the moment they started shooting. The main body of the students were down in the parking lot - too far way to represent any serious threat....AND eyewitness accounts all agree that there essentially NO rocks or bottles that landed anywhere near the Guard in the minutes or seconds before they opened fire.

      So why did they start shooting? My own view is that - according to the way they were thinking at that moment- they were sick of being yelled at by a bunch of middle class protesters - who they had been brainwashed into thinking represented a threat the very fabric of American society. Furthermore, they were completely exhausted from being on duty practically around the clock and from marching around with heavy equipment and having to see and breath while wearing masks. They were dead tired and very pissed off and one or more of their fellow Guardsmen decided to 'let those damn students have it."

      And 43 years later, it is painfully clear they got literally got away with murder - and in the case of Allison Krause and Jeffrey Miller almost certainly deliberate and cold blooded murder. Bill Schroeder and Sandy Scheuer's murders were not quite as deliberate, but when you open fire on a group of unarmed students, what the military might call "collateral damage" really amounts murder nonetheless.

      May 15, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterKen Brociner

      I was an activist and SDS member at the University of Cincinnati in May, 1970. It was my senior year and after the Kent State shootings, we called a strike and occupied two buildings. The University shut down three or four days later. The university was preparing to re-open when the Jackson State shootings occurred, and at a University Senate meeing that I and many other activists attended, the Senate (composed of students, faculty and staff representatives) voted to close for the rest of the school year, with passing grades issued to all students.

      I have a question that I would like to put out there for any activist students at Kent State that May.. First let me give some background. Earlier that school year in October the Weatherman (I don't think they had changed their name to Weather People at that point) faction of SDS had staged the "Days of Rage" in Chicago with their newly adopted slogan, "Bring the war home." After the Days of Rage, according to the two Weathermen who came to Cincinnati to recruit new members and to try to influence the local SDS chapter, the members of the Weathermen had decided to spread out to as many campuses with SDS chapters to attempt to build their numbers. These two regularly attended the Cincinnati SDS meetings. Now my question is to any Kent State activists of 1969-70, did the Weathermen send any representatives to Kent State that fall (1969)? And if so, were they still around tin the spring of 1970? I woul like to correspond with or talk to anyone with knowledge of any Weatherman activities in the Kent area that year. I hope to visit the May 4 Center this summer.

      May 15, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterBob Peter

      Very thorough and nuanced article, Tom. Thanks for writing it. Brought me back to the anger we felt at the Chicago Seed underground paper after the event, and to my declaring opposition to building the gym when, as a "straight reporter," I visited the site. Brought me forward to today: I did not know that a Center had been built. Will try to visit it next time I am in the area. Thanks again.

      May 16, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterAbe Peck

      Excellent piece, Tom. Regardless of how the Norman issue plays out, I appreciate your inclusion of the statements from the governor and Nixon. Those who propagate the demonizing rhetoric are never held accountable when the underlings carry out their understanding of their mission - to suppress or destroy the "enemy," in this case, their fellow young Americans. The same was true in Jackson State, Orangeburg, and elsewhere. We saw some of it in Virginia in the venomous response by state politicos to our successful student strike at U.Va. Tense situations, some injuries, mass arrests from an amassing of what seemed like every state trooper in the state. I just got an email from a student there who wants to do a documentary on activism at U.Va. These efforts at memorializing, searching for accuracy in the history, and especially having young people today reflect on that history are critical. Thanks for all you keep on doing.

      May 16, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterTom Gardner

      Talk about déjà vu Tom, your article about the opening of the Kent State May 4 Visitors Center brought back two vivid memories:

      1) In May 1970, gathering with fellow students in the Student Center at San José State University to determine what action we would take vis-a-vis the killing by the Ohio National Guard of four students and wounding nine at Kent State and again two-weeks later when police killed two people, wounding twelve at Jackson State;

      2) In January 1979, as a staff member of the Military Audit Project in Washington, DC, holding a joint press conference with Charles Thomas, a whistleblowing employee of the National Archives, to support Sen. Lowell P. Weicker, Jr. (R. Conn), in his request for a grand jury to investigate charges that President Richard Nixon, the Justice Department and the National Archives obstructed justice by sabotaging efforts to probe the killings of the four students at Kent State. (Weicker was a close friend a close friend of Arthur Krause father of slain student, Allison Krause,)

      Thomas, a GS-11 employee of the National Archive, had responsibility in 1975 for analyzing films of the Kent State incident. In so doing he discovered that footage shown to the Nixon appointed Commission on Campus Unrest in 1970 had been doctored to remove “footage showing dead and injured students” and “produced the misleading impression that just before they fired, the guardsmen were surrounded by a screaming mob”.

      It was Ohio Governor James Rhodes who ordered the Ohio National Guard onto the Kent State campus after its Reserve Officer Training Corps’ building was burned to the ground on May 1; he did this without consulting Kent State President Robert White who had stated he did not want troops on campus. Certainly we all know that agent provocateurs’ were active on university grounds during the Vietnam War and the Cambodian incursion. Indeed, it is more than idle speculation that the burning down of the ROTC building at Kent State on 1 May that provided justification for National Guard troops being sent to Kent State was done by such an agent.

      In deference to Oliver Stone’s contention that shots fired from the crowd at Kent State may have precipitated the Guard opening fire, I counterclaim that in none of the written or visual reports to which I have been privy, was there any mention of gunshots from the crowd. And in this regard, I wholeheartedly support Alan Canfora’s statement that to pursue this notion only diverts attention from learning who sanctioned National Guard troops being armed with weapons containing live ammunition and fixed bayonets being sent to Kent State and who gave the order to open fire?

      And with regard to whether or not the National Guardsmen felt their lives were in danger, Senator Stephen Young (D-Ohio) in a speech before the US Senate on October 13, 1970, quoted a Justice Department summary of FBI findings that not one of the students killed or injured at Kent State on May 4 had participated in any disorder including that of burning down of the ROTC building. That same Justice Department report also stated that “we have some reason to believe that the claim by the National Guard that their lives were endangered by the students was fabricated subsequent to the event”. Furthermore, a Special Report by the Akron Beacon Journal, May 24, 1979, stated: “No Sniper fired at the national Guard. No investigative agency has yet found any evidence to support such a theory”.

      In his introduction to I.F. Stone’s 1971 book, "Killings at Kent State: How Murder Went Unpunished" , Senator Young asked these as yet unanswered questions:

      “What occurred on the commons of Kent State? What does the attempted concealment of the truth mean...? The material provided in this book proves there was no justification whatever for this murderous action by National Guardsmen who were poorly led, lacking training, but nevertheless carried rifles loaded with live ammunition and fixed bayonets”.

      We may never know why the Ohio National Guard opened fire but we certainly know they did and at the end of the day, it may be just as some of the guardsmen said “I opened fire when others around me did.”
      However, there still remains the underlying need to examine how the Executive Branch obstructed justice in the aftermath of the killings that has left us with so many unanswered questions. This, indeed would be worthy of Oliver Stone using all his resources to investigate and I would urge he begin this by reading Izzy Stone’s book.

      May 16, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterMargie Bernard
      Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.