KENT, Ohio -- "Well, he got his wish. He wanted to disappear!"
That's what somebody calling themselves thinblueline posted on a Website about James Russell, a former Kent State University student who was shot May 4, 1970 on the campus during Vietnam War protests. Four died and nine, including Russell, survived wounds from Ohio National Guard gunfire. Russell passed away June 23 in Oregon, but was memorialized at KSU this weekend after classes ended Friday evening. He was a witness during several years of legal proceedings that followed the shootings and was an anti-war activist until the end of his life. [Note: The picture above is from Kent State's files, and was taken the day of the shootings.]
Videos of some of Russell's remarks over the years were played at the memorial ceremony and he said in one:
"I discovered the legal system is not the justice system. It's weird, every time I come here I'm back in 1970."
Thinblueline was full of hate in a comment posted on the Web site of the Kent-Ravenna Record Courier, whose reporter Matthew Fredmonsky covered the ceremony for James Russell. Thinblueline said:
"Blood brother my ass. He wouldn't have been injured if he would have obeyed the law and left the campus when ordered."
Another commenter called DoWhatIsRight was equally scornful.
"I am sick and tired of these troublemakers being treated as some big shot. In my opinion, they went looking for trouble and found it. The true facts of this act was in the Portage County Grand Jury's investigation. The one that the Federal government destroyed."
There are plenty of archival law enforcement records available about the shootings, including these 78 pages of Ohio Highway Patrol reports. The reports include interviews of witnesses at Kent State on the day the National Guard opened fire.
Thank you for pointing out these insightful comments.
ReplyDeleteIt is about time people stopped recognizing the KSU students as heroes! It was unfortunate these kids forced the National Guardsmen to shoot. Had they not been carrying on with acts of civil disobedience, this tragedy would not have happened.
It would have been nice if Russell could have used his role to teach kids that it is OK to protest, BUT there is a price to pay when you cross the line.
I wonder how the guardsmen feel about be forced to fire their weapons on kids just about the same age as them.
Hi Ralph --
ReplyDeleteI am glad you responded and appreciate your comment. However, I am an ex-National Guardsman, and I THANK THE LORD that I never had to open fire on American citizens, no matter what the reason.
I suppose the troops shooting protesters in Myanmmar .....
Well, you get the point. Military forces are meant to defend nations, not to defend government policies. There is probably a way to say that better, but as I type this I don't have it. In other words, I just don't feel comfortable with the idea of American soldiers shooting American citizens in America. I don't think that is what we are about as a nation. Maybe you do.
Bill,
ReplyDeleteI agree our troops should not be used against our citizens except in cases of civil disobedience. Sorry but I do not see the parallels with Myanmmar.
I would like to think these Guardsmen also did not want to fire upon the protesters, but must have felt in danger or threatened. Again I believe most were about the same age.
I bet these guardsmen think about what they did everyday. I bet if they could go back they wish it would have turned out better.
I do not believe our soldiers should fire on US citizens, but I also believe had these kids dispersed there may have not been a confrontation.
Bill for me it is pretty easy... When a man with a gun tells you to leave - you leave. It does not matter who is right, there are other avenues to pursue as far as who is right and who was wrong.
Some may believe the protesters were within their rights, but what good is that, 3 are now dead and one was paralyzed.
Did their stand change anything? Did it make a difference? I don't believe so, except to fuel resentment in our country and be used as propaganda by the NVA.
Oh and thank you for serving in our Armed Forces!
King
Bill,
ReplyDeleteI agree our troops should not be used against our citizens except in cases of civil disobedience. Sorry but I do not see the parallels with Myanmmar.
I would like to think these Guardsmen also did not want to fire upon the protesters, but must have felt in danger or threatened. Again I believe most were about the same age.
I bet these guardsmen think about what they did everyday. I bet if they could go back they wish it would have turned out better.
I do not believe our soldiers should fire on US citizens, but I also believe had these kids dispersed there may have not been a confrontation.
Bill for me it is pretty easy... When a man with a gun tells you to leave - you leave. It does not matter who is right, there are other avenues to pursue as far as who is right and who was wrong.
Some may believe the protesters were within their rights, but what good is that, 3 are now dead and one was paralyzed.
Did their stand change anything? Did it make a difference? I don't believe so, except to fuel resentment in our country and be used as propaganda by the NVA.
Oh and thank you for serving in our Armed Forces!
King
Hi Ralph --
ReplyDeleteAgain, I do understand what you are saying. I just have a difficult time agreeing. You know, we started as a revolutionary society, took to the streets and challenged the British Army etc. Boston Massacre, Bunker Hill, you know all that. It did boil down to people in the streets vs. the government of that time. The troops, then and now, are sworn to uphold the gov't. Their oath is not to the people, but to the gov't. Fortunately, we've always had a gov't that we can support, despite slight political differences such as Republican and Democrat -- though they seem big the party differences are really not very huge in the grand scheme of things, or on a global scale. I just am not comfortable with troops being used to confront dissent, or law breaking on a local scale. Cops, yes. Troops only as a last resort -- insurrection or worse. Kent State, I think, was mostly a law enforcement problem. It was not an effort to overthrow the United States, or secede, or start a Civil War. (Very short answer, of course, to a very supercharged issue.) Intelligent people, obviously can disagree,. But that it what I believe.
Bill I must address something first.... Did you imply I was intelligent? Please don't ruin my reputation! Ha Ha!
ReplyDeleteBill - I agree with most of what you say, if not all. I fully agree that the KSU issue was a local police issue and calling in the National Guard may have been an over reaction.
I agree it was not it was not an attempt to overthrow the US and was just a bunch of kids protesting, maybe even a large scale disturbance.
But for me it all goes back to one thing.... If a man with a gun, be it policeman, guardsman or crook tells you to leave - you leave!
I am a strong supporter of guns but when a gun is involved it is not about what's right or wrong, it is about life or death.
I support everyones right to protest and speak out, even pushing the limit at times, but again when they bring guns, right or wrong, it is time to disperse and come again another day.
Regardless, I do respect your opinion.
King
Hi Ralph --
ReplyDeleteWhen the guys with guns show up, it is time to move to another place.
Change of subject: I'm a fan of your blogging. You have a good eye, and a way with words, too.
Bill,
ReplyDeleteThank you for the kind words. I am also a fan of yours and have learned much from reading your blog.