FBI: Shots fired at NG in Kent State 1970 incident
The Washington Times reports that newly released documents in the May 1970 Kent State shooting of several students by National Guard troops state the the troops may have been provoked by a sniper;
“We did it,” one man exulted, according to the inquiry. “We got the riot started.”
The second man expressed disappointment at being excluded from the riot’s planning. “Wait until tomorrow night,” the leader replied excitedly. “We just got the word. We’re going to burn the ROTC building.”
This was 20 hours before the ROTC headquarters on the Kent State campus, an old wooden frame building, was, in fact, burned to the ground.
Despite the classic media account that the National Guard fired for no real reason, the FBI had evidence to the contrary;
Yet the declassified FBI files show the FBI already had developed credible evidence suggesting that there was indeed a sniper and that one or more shots may have been fired at the guardsmen first.
Rumors of a sniper had circulated for at least a day before the fatal confrontation, the documents show. And a memorandum sent to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover on May 19, 1970, referred to bullet holes found in a tree and a statue — evidence, the report stated, that “indicated that at least two shots had been fired at the National Guard.”
It’s too bad that the FBI didn’t pursue the investigation and nab the shooters or at least narrow it down to a particular group (I have my suspicions).
At a minimum, the FBI documents strongly challenge the received narrative that the rioting in downtown Kent was spontaneous and unplanned, that the burning of the ROTC headquarters was similarly impulsive and that the guardsmen’s fatal shootings were explicable only as unprovoked acts.
Of course, the shootings had the opposite result that any conspirators had imagined since Kent State was the beginning of the end of the anti-war protests. it seems that gunfire had a quenching effect on the gutless hippies who were really only protesting for their own own comfort rather than any grandiose ideal.
Category: Antiwar crowd, Historical, Usual Suspects
Fascinating piece, although I might argue whether Kent State was the beginning of the end of the anti-war protests, but I won’t here.
Broadly, the Vietnam narrative is simply not going to change in any meaningful way in MY lifetime – facts be damned.
[…] Jonn over at TAH found an article that does (in my mind) connect well with the flawed history in the Vietnam […]
Paging Bill Ayers…. any comment boyo?
I was thinking more along the lines of VVAW’s Scott Camil; Part I, Part II
So even if “a sniper” fired one or two shots, that does not begin to justify the NG’s response, firing for 13 seconds into an unarmed crowd. One girl was just walking to class when she was killed, for cryig out loud. If a sniper was shooting at them, they should have located and shot at the sniper, not engaged in undisciplined attack on innocent students. That report, conveniently released 40 years after the fact, doesn’t change much.
Read the article, Joe. The crowd wasn’t “unarmed”. Wait, do I need a bigger spoon to feed you with?
Let me ask you something, Joe: If there were NG troops standing out there with guns and there was a protest in full swing; would you just happen to be walking to class in that general direction, or would you take an alternate route? I’m not defending the actions of the NG, because I wasn’t there to say any different, but neither were you.
Folks, the truth is of little matter… the narrative is set in stone. The nitwit ‘Joe’ is an adequate example.
“The cadet also told the FBI he observed demonstrators carrying baseball bats, golf clubs and improvised weapons, including pieces of steel wire cut into footlong sections, along with radios and other electronic devices “used to monitor the police and Guard wavelengths.”
Hey Joe; does this sound like they were “unarmed”?
Idiot college kid rioters+poorly trained & equipped Guardsmen* +VERY MUDDY chain of command = disaster. The Kent State jackasses should have been tear gassed, butt-stroked & got some bayonet wounds to their hindquarters, not ventilated by .30 cal ball.
*I’m a Guard guy. Fact is, the ’60s and ’70s taught us some hard lessons about riot control & civil disturbances. Some of the stuff my predecessors did back then was wrong & wouldn’t fly today.
Junior AG,
I can agree with what you said. With the two wars going on and deployments becoming a regular part of the National Guard training for events like this has slipped. It is a part of the training cycle, but not enough.
I’ve never heard of the sniper fire, or being armed in other ways. I suspected something was afoot, but had no proof until now. Thanks Jonn.
I’m glad of this post, because Kent State always puzzled me.
Junior AG:
I can also agree, to a point. When my men start taking incoming, a line got crossed and all bets are off.
Ponsdorf:
Concur that it’s set in stone. I’ve had my own dealings with Left leaning folks who aren’t even slightly interested in facts. But, it seems to me that having documented proof of how far these types will go to achieve their goals, is a good thing to have in the event of future incidents.
Snipers usually fire from a distance or from a rooftop. How does one equate this with shooting into a crowd. I wasn’t there, so I can’t know for certain. It seems wrong to me, though. I wasn’t there, because I was in glorious Vietnam doing my duty. Heard about it then, wondered about it then.
When I completed my ROTC training and received my commission in 1969 (different college, in Texas, not Kent State), anti-war TERRORISTS also burned our ROTC building down…never caught them. The Air Force had to bring in representatives from Lauterstein’s in San Antonio to fit us for uniforms so we could report to our first duty station. Mine was Undergraduate Pilot Training at Laughlin AFB in Del Rio, Texas.
I won’t second-guess the NG on an incident about which I don’t have all the facts. I’m sure they felt it was the proper reaction to the situation at hand, and whoever gave tghe order is the only one who can say why he gave it. Most of us would agree that shooting into a crowd is usually an act of desperation or the result of poor planning and bad intel or reaction to an ambush. It should be avoided if possible unless you believe they are harboring a sniper or they are about to charge you or they launch some sort of physical attack on you…and maybe a few other legitimate reasons that don’t come to me on the fly.
The best course of action is never get into that situation, but that point is moot now.
Really? 40 years later and the Washington Times (is that actually a newspaper?) reports on this. Come on Jonn, you can do better than that. “Newly released documents”…that’s too funny.
So you’re saying there are no documents just released by the FBI, ash? C’mon, don’t be shy–tell us what you’re really thinking. You’re just pissed off because the Pravda on the Potomac still thinks knob-gobbling liberals under their desks will keep their circulation from imploding. Agenda-driven media never works out, ash–EVER.
Sparky, our skeptical friend “ash” (aka “dazzled by the facts”) probably gets his/her news from MSLSD and Comedy Central and still believes a 40 year old WHITE TEA Party activist was the REAL Times Square “cash for clunkers” bomber (did you notice the “Obama 2012” bumper sticker on that Pathfinder as they were loading it to haul it away?)
@Jonn (#4), I don’t think that Scott Camil’s history could place him as being at or behind the rioting or sniper fire at Kent State in May of 1970. He didn’t even get out of the Marine Corps until 1969 and he was not against the war during the time he was in Vietnam nor before he was discharged from the Marines. In fact, even after his discharge from the Marines, he went to college at Miami Dade and, as I recall from his story-telling, he absolutely hated the antwar activists at college and used to beat them up. From Miami Dade, he transferred to the University of Florida — this had to have been well past 1970, I’m guessing (i.e., past the time of the Kent State riots and massacre) – and it was while he was a student at the University of Florida that he met Jane Fonda. He’s always been very clear that it was when he met Jane Fonda that his life completely changed. By no means am I saying the guy is not capable of violence; NO question that he is. He will tell you the truth about that flat up; that’s why he tells the story that he was actually serious at the time about wanting to shoot the congressmen who sent him to war. He came back from Vietnam very fucked up (no polite way to say it), which is probably why he was so vulnerable to Jane Fonda’s influence. Scott Camil’s telling of that story in later years about wanting to assassinate the congressmen is not told in an attitude of advocacy; but rather, as I see it, more from a contemplative state of mind in which he steps back away from himself, makes a brutally honest appraisal of his own conscience as a killer, recognizes that there is something wrong there, but also recognizes that he did not see see it as wrong at the time he suggested shooting congressman (i.e., more of a way of admitting how fucked up he was). And I don’t mean to be speaking for him,… Read more »
Debra–it’s also why we don’t use NG/military as law enforcement.
“I don’t think the Ohio NG’s response was at all appropriate” Again, poor training, equipment (no flak jackets, face shields, etc), and if you read the AARs, the chain of command was murky.
“and I hope to never see or hear of anything like that ever again.”
Well, for starters, ammo & ROE has been tightened for civil disturbances and the designated marksman w/ ACOG is a wonderful tool for dealing with snipers. The Kent State hypocrites deserved an ass kicking for screeching “power to the people” whilst burning down blue collar businesses, not .30 cal ball.
Few know that the same Guard Unit had been in Cleveland for weeks dealing with striking Teamsters. Tired and under-trained, most serving to avoid Vietnam like their peers at Kent State. Also, has anyone stopped to think why only 4 dead? Had they actually “fired into the crowd” there would have been so many more casualties. Most fired OVER the crowd which is why students were killed in a parking lot well away from the actual demonstration, while walking to class. I have never judged the acts of the Guard that day like so many said, I wasn’t there. I heard rumors of sniper/s since day one. At the time, I didn’t care. I was home from Vietnam, recovering from my wound, and was glad we were hitting them in Cambodia. I say…riot, burn down a building, your asking for trouble. When it comes…don’t whine.
NHSparky, thanks. I was going to mention that, too, with regard to the Posse Comitatus Act, but skipped over it as my comments were already too long (as usual, but I AM trying)…
1AirCav69, I disagree that such an act should not be judged; in my opinion, it is imperative that it be evaluated and judged. Perhaps not by you, personally, but such an act definitely calls for some oversight and in-policing from somewhere. The free foundations of our government would be in danger otherwise. That said, I can also be sympathetic to what they were facing and I think, besides that they shouldn’t have been there in the first place, they were definitely unprepared.
Debra, I made mention of it in a different context, namely that pointed out elsewhere that the function of a military/reserve/guard is not necessarily compatible with that of a police force, and trying to make them into one is only going to result in destroyed morale and less than effective crime deterrence/prevention. The Posse Commitatus is another issue on top of that. Now, that’s not to say that the NG cannot be used to RESTORE or prevent degredation of public order, just that they’re a stop-gap measure, only when other civilian agencies cannot handle the situation by themselves.
I guess the Posse Comitatus probably doesn’t apply to NG anyway. I have no background with the NG, except for a few times when I was in the MPs and later on one occasion when I was in CID, I was temporarily assigned a partner who I think was a Guardsman an active duty. That was during peacetime and things were nothing like they are today, but it was still the only contact I ever had with NG, in circumstances when they were under authority of the US Army, but that is probably different than when they are under state authority, in which case the Posse Comitatus may not apply. In any event, they still seem like troops to me and I have an almost reflexive response with regard to the Posse Comitatus Act due to what was instilled in me when I served in the Army. The thinking back then was a lot different than what it seems to have evolved to today, where many think it should be done away with. I feel sure that would be an absolutely terrible idea, but when I examine it further, reasons like the ones you cite are more compelling reasons than a legal argument is anyway. Because if it’s just a law, then it can be removed to where there would be no legal prohibition, but that still doesn’t make it a good idea. So the reasons for not using troops, as you explained (I can think of others, too) are more important than a legal argument for upholding a law that could be gone tomorrow anyway (if it’s not already…I haven’t been keeping up on it). I don’t think the situation at Kent State called for it at all. I assume that was the conclusion of many people, since it’s never happened again. On the other hand, federal law enforcement has done enough damage all on their own, too — well, along with a few tanks on loaner from the US Army (another subject, as if I wasn’t already off-topic enough, as usual…) If you don’t mind my saying so,… Read more »
Nah Deb, Sparky’s a Bubblehead thru and thru. 😀
LOL…
National Guard: 4
Kent State: 0
We win!!!
I would remind folks who are stating that the dead were somehow not innocent that one of those killed was actually in ROTC at the time of his death, and condemned the protests before his death.
Debra, I do think another guard unit should have been there other then the unit that just spent weeks fighting Teamsters, but someone had to be there when Federal property is being burned and the local/state police didn’t have the capacity to stop it. I also didn’t say that there should not be offical inquiries into such incidents. My point is that as I can only rely on my own experiences in Vietnam, I can’t judge other’s experiences, i.e. Mai Lai. I wasn’t there. I know the frustrations of being booby trapped and sniped at daily so I don’t judge the actions of the troops. I welcomed the official inquiry and glad that some sort of justice was meaded out, minimal as it was. Heads should have rolled from the Division Commander down the chain and not just a Butter Bar Lt, where it should have stopped.
The incident at Kent State has been analyzed and offical inquiries were made. The results are in a book somewhere I read years ago. I still stand by my point that nothing good happens when people take their right to PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY and begin burning public buildings or private ones. No riot, no burning of building/s, no NG would have been brought in and the local’s could have handled it. As sorry as I have always felt for the innocents killed that day, I blame those that broke the laws to begin with that warranted a larger response. Let the whole thing lie on their heads and souls, if they have any. I am sure the Guardsmen have been seeing that day in their sleep for 40 years now. How about those that caused it?
As a former Kent State “ROTC-nazi” (albeit in 1988- 90, though I still got called a “Baby killer!” and given sh*t often) I’m glad it’s come out that the Guard didn’t just shoot people for the f*ck of it. I’m sorry they didn’t get the punk bitch who shot at ’em and got innocent buystanders and the friendly-fire death instead. Some of the motherf*ckers throwing rocks at the Guard, giving them cause to fear for their lives after pulling convoy security during a wildcat truckers strike where they’d been shot at right before, got away unscathed (bastards).
I agree with you 1AirCav69, except in my opinion on how the violence should have been responded to. Were I the one in charge, the place would have been crawling with undercover cops and the NG not called in at all, except as a last resort. “Minimum amount of force necessary” is what I always believed in (what the Army instilled in me as an MP).
Anonymous (#30), I’m saddened to hear of your being treated in such a disrespectful manner. Surprising that this occurred in 1988-1990. I suspect it must have been because of that particular college and the history. My son-in-law never had any kind of treatment like that at all when he was in ROTC, not that I ever heard of anyway, and I’m pretty sure I would have heard of it if he had. But he went to a college in a city where I think there is a lot of love and respect for the veterans and tolerance for the ROTC even among the antiwar activists (and I should know). So probably it’s a throwback to the past at Kent State. Strange though. Sorry to hear it. I absolutely detest violence by dissenters and I would lock them up in heartbeat, even my friends, if I were still a cop.
Thanks, Debra. KSU stayed that way until 9/11 practically. First the big “To heal Kent State” effort there for years really just kept rehashing things, then all sorts of protestors, etc. ran with it for years after the university wanted to move on. 9/11 ended that (like “gosh, we actually need a military because there’re bad people out there”). In 2003, the usual crowd tried to block Route 59 (like on May 2, 1970) to protest the war in Iraq and got nightstick-and-riotshield whupped by the local cops (whom KSU let stage on campus like the Guard in ’70): Enough. The environment is quite different now than it was. And, although the shooting location is now a National Historic Site, the university is busy rebuiling/remodeling just about everything else so the place is nicer and doesn’t look like it did in ’70 (as it did when I went there).