Americans of a certain age may remember the murder of students on the Kent State University campus 34 years ago and the anger it once aroused. On May 4, 1970, 0hio National Guardsmen killed four college students and wounded nine others-one of them, Dean Kahler, is still paralyzed. He was, reported the FBI, 95-100 yards from the riflemen when he was wounded. Yet no one was ever found responsible nor have the questions surrounding the calamity ever been stilled.

Antiwar protests in Kent had erupted following President Nixon's TV speech on April 30 that U.S. forces had invaded Cambodia, thus enlarging a war he had once pledged to end. The next day Nixon derided antiwar students everywhere as "bums." Protests on the campus and in the neighboring town of Kent had erupted resulting in some vandalism and property damage. The college ROTC was set ablaze on May 2nd. No one has ever determined who set the fire, though students were falsely blamed. On May 3, 0hio Governor James Rhodes, a Republican conservative running for the Senate (he lost) called antiwar students "worse than brownshirts and the Communist element and also the night riders and vigilantes. They are the worst type people that we harbor in America."

0n May 4th, then, Ohio guardsmen fired their M-1 semiautomatic rifles, a .45 pistol and a shotgun for 13 seconds, killing four students and wounding nine others.

We do know that, according to a government memo dated 0ctober 9, 1973, "undercover federal narcotics agents were present on the Kent State University campus on May 4, 1970." Also an armed federal agent was present on that day though no one was able to prove that his weapon was ever fired. It has never been shown that the agents were tied to the shootings, though there have been allegations of a government conspiracy. But still, rumors were rampant. Students were said to be armed with weapons but none were found. Another tale had it that a student sniper had fired and that too was shown to be a lie. In fact, we do not know why the National Guard -- the Vietnam era's haven for men dodging the draft -- was called in and who ordered the men of Troop G to open fire.

After the shootings began, Glenn Frank (now deceased), a conservative KSU geology professor, courageously sought to persuade Guard officers to stand down and then made a successful plea to students to disband, less they too be shot. In 2000 I spoke with his son, Alan, a former KSU student who estimated he was 50-75 feet from the guardsmen. He was working on his father's papers and believed that his father had become increasingly dubious that justice had been served.

Even so, for most Americans today, there is only historical amnesia.

Two years ago, on the 30th anniversary of this avoidable tragedy, I wrote that without the discovery of a "smoking gun," or a deathbed confession, or the release of all local, state and federal documents and court records (some have complained that not all relevant documents have been released) plus a thorough examination of the papers of then Governor James Rhodes and the Ohio National Guard and the Nixon archives, we may never know the truth. All the same, I remain convinced that a serious historian can help tell us if war in Southeast Asia and the bitterness it caused at home, led directly to a college campus in small-town Ohio alive with antiwar activity.

To this day, the definitive book about that terrible day has not been written. Certainly, some informative works have been published but they have concentrated only on some aspects. What we need is a book that fairly examines all the events. "And yes, there are new materials" to be found, especially in the invaluable and extensive May 4 collection at the Kent State library, says Nancy Birk, its Curator and University Archivist, citing as examples the U.S. Department of Justice and Charles Thomas papers.

Charles A. Thomas worked for twelve years at the National Archives and was selected to study films of the shooting. He concluded that, "none of the available footage showing dead and wounded students following the lethal volley had been used in assembling the compilation film shown at the public hearings" of the Scranton presidential commission in August 1970. In Kent State/May 4, edited by Scott L. Bills (KSU Press) Thomas wrote, "it looked very much as if someone had doctored the evidence to minimize any impression of the Guard's brutality and to plant the spurious notion that the soldiers had been confronted with a raging student mob."

Still, the Scranton Commission's 1970 verdict, "Report of the Presidential Commission on Campus Unrest," which, while liberally casting responsibility on all parties in the days leading to May 4th, decided that "The indiscriminate firing of rifles into a crowd of students and the deaths that followed were unnecessary, unwarranted and inexcusable."

In its summary of the FBI investigation, the Justice Department concluded that "the few moments immediately prior to the firing by the National Guard are shrouded in confusion and highly conflicting statements." But "the claim by the National Guard that their lives were endangered by the students was fabricated subsequent to the event." Yet in spite of more than 1000 pages of FBI reports, eyewitnesses and other investigations, in the end the courts placed the essential burden of guilt on student antiwar demonstrators. After a federal grand jury in 1974 indicted eight guardsmen a federal judged dismissed all charges against the eight men. From the start, a majority of citizens, according to a Gallup poll conducted by phone, took the side of the National Guard, many respondents apparently willing to believe that "radical" students on college campuses threatened the war effort. Finally, in 1975, a civil suit brought by the parents found for the defendants, but an appellate court overturned the verdict. But after so many years defending their dead and wounded sons and daughters the exhausted families chose to settle with 0hio for the very modest amount of $675,000 and a statement signed by Rhodes and the guardsmen saying, "We deeply regret those events and are profoundly saddened by the deaths of four students and the wounding of nine others which resulted."

My hope is that a fair-minded historian can tell us what happened and why and whether justice was truly served.

So is there a historian willing to undertake this necessary study?

Joseph M. Sima - 5/8/2006

KENT STATE/MAY 4, 1970 - THE TRUTH - LIKE IT OR NOT

I was looking for news coverage about the Teamsters strike - and found only the Ohio National Guard was called up according to national broadcasts - I just wanted to double check them. Too many coincidences happened not to have planned this confrontation the way it fell together in such a short period of time in early May, 1970. As you know the Teamsters were supporters of the Republican Party, and Nixon in particular, back in those days. There would be little they wouldn't do to help each other, and of course history shows this during the Nixon presidency. How easy it was for Governor Rhodes to continue to activate the National Guard after the strike was virtually settled on or about April 29th and have the guard and equipment (M-1 rifles, automatic weapons, tear gas, jeeps, armored cars, trucks, and military helicopters available a couple days later. President Nixon's timing of his escalation of war into Cambodia speech on Thursday, April 30th, could not have come at a more dangerous time with May 1st (known also as May Day and Rights of Spring) starting a weekend on America's campuses - The White House planners knew what they were doing, and what the probable reaction was going to be. It was like lighting a stick of dynamite and waiting. Rhodes admittingly in contact with Nixon and the "White House" before, during, and after the Kent State shootings, follows the game plan, sends in the troops, gives a venomous speech on Sunday May 3rd at Kent to excite the "killer instinct" in the National Guard and Campus leaders - declares school will remain open - posts guards with bayonets outside the classrooms and states there will be no meetings or rallies, or congregations of students - but school will remain open for classes --- well it didn't even take an honor student from the Liquid Crystals Institute to see that Rhodes' directives were begging for a confrontation - but his strict orders to break up any congregations of students were absolute and ended in murder and injuries. Now you tell me who has the blood on their hands? One other interesting note - Campus Police officers as quoted in many books indicated to the film crew of WKYC-TV Cleveland, on Saturday May 2nd, that they should stick around as there was going to be a fire that night (ROTC was going to be burned) - if they knew this in advance they either knew who and or how it was going to be done - or they should have properly taken precautions to protect and save it - which was not done. Now you tell me who has the soot on their hands?
Unfortunately the FBI (and Campus Police) chose to ignore, hide, or destroy evidence in the Kent State case - why? What purpose would it serve? Who did it protect from prosecution? Among the earliest authors, only Peter Davies mentioned Terry Norman ( a student/informant-photographer for the Campus Police and FBI). Author William Gordon echoed Davies' information many years later and emphasized the odd and mysterious behavior of an armed student informant for the FBI/Campus Police - who drew his concealed gun where the Guard and students were in active confrontation, and where the shooting ensued. Janet Falbo's letter to President White and Ken Solch's detailed testimony to Barclay McMillen, Special Legal Advisor to Kent State/Prof) - which you have copies -describes in detail Norman's drawing his 38 caliber handgun and engaged with a student. The description of the gun is identical - and most important, both describe the sequence of events and it was well prior to the National Guard shooting. Whether he fired his gun or not is immaterial as any of the National Guardsman seeing this would then have an instinct and motive to pull the trigger thinking students are armed. You see not everyone knew who he was, and even fewer knew he was armed. He was then caught on film approaching (with his gun waving in the air and out of breath from running) - exclaiming: "I had to shoot, I had to shoot - they would have killed me". As he approached he encountered some of the National Guard ( eg.Michael Delaney - Public Relations -Ohio National Guard) and Campus Police and the film crew of WKYC-TV3 including commentator Fred DeBrine. That initial film clip was shown on WKYC-Cleveland on the 11PM news. After I notified the FBI on May 5, 1970, about Norman's illegal activities since 1968 while as an informant at Kent State I also mentioned the film. It was after that conversation with them - the film disappeared. They said they would get back for more information - guess what? What author William Gordon did not realize was that the cameraman after filming an ambulance scene turned his camera back on Norman and recorded the interaction and conversations between he and Campus Police officials with Guardsmen present. This film I have stored with other facts and evidence that was collected in hopes of utilizing it in court to help the victims and their families - if the FBI ever comes clean on the case. That film segment was also mentioned by Charles Thomas, National Archive expert film/sound analyst in his writings and has been reviewed again recently.
What actually happened after the surrender of the gun was the comment by a Kent State State Police officer that:'Oh my God its been fired'...'what do we do now' He later changed his story. Even more unuasual was the initial reports of Guardsmen and officers who heard one or possibly two shots prior to the Guards's lethal volley. They later stated that they were told by the FBI not to say anything to the public or the press, and those comments are documented on tape.The commander's intial report of sniper fire to the press was overruled by guess who?.
In the video that was recently sent to you -- you can hear Norman explaining why he drew the weapon and questions from the officers of the National Guard/Campus Police that the gun was indeed turned in - which evidently was their main concern. (You have to listen closely to pick everything up) - Charles Thomas in his writings which you have hard copies and e-mails - indicated that some of the Norman's scenes on WKYC films were missing and that the rest (which is on your tapes) is out of order, incomplete, and in poor condition ---- compared with what they originally shot and broadcast or made available. Finally, my findings without prejudice and based on facts, testimonies, evidence, photographs, and film - strongly indicates that President Nixon and Governor Rhodes were responsible for putting many individuals in harms way, with the result in death, injury and the destruction of private and public properties. Kent State Police should not have knowingly allowed the ROTC building to be destroyed. Kent State Police erred in allowing the reckless behavior and the unecessary arming of their student informant/photographer. The FBI based on documented, and personally documented evidence---obstructed justice and tampered or destroyed evidence on their long time informant dating back to(1968) - and as a result of keeping this information out of the courts and Scranton Commission---the families of the deceased and
the injured were precluded from obtaining just compensation for injuries. The is no doubt in my mind that there are other Kent State students that faced injuries of differing types ( eg. emotional) subsequent to the shootings and they too (if documented) are also entitled to compensation. Obstruction of justice and the ignoring, tampering, and destroying evidence are felonies and if done by a law enforcement agency of the government can be pursued without the shield of statute of limitations. (USSC). I would address the motivations of The White House, the Governor, the FBI, and the Campus Police - although they are evident, but to do so at this time and in this paper might prejudice the case of the families of the deceased, or the injured former students. It has been brought to my attention that the same facts that I have given to the FBI, members, of Kent State University, and many authors, has fallen on deaf ears for 36 years, so it is time to change quarterbacks for the sake of the victims and history itself. On April 30, 2006, a writer for the Tampa Bay Tribune, Janis Froelich, a 1968 graduate of the Kent State School of Journalism, wrote an in depth investigatory story about Kent State - A New Look and looking back at hidden mystery of the Kent State shooting. It is reprinted here at George Mason's History News Network Site. You can also try the following http://www.tbo.com/life/kentstate.htm

. See the writings of special National Archives analyst Charles Thomas for added detail. (Note: most of the information mentioned is available at the Special May 4th Section of the Kent State Library - Kent, Ohio).

*This article is decicated to the late Barclay McMillen and Charles Thomas, without whose works during their lives could not have made this day possible.
We cannot improve today or effectively plan for tomorrow unless we have the true history of the yesterday. s/ Joseph M. Sima
Email: KSUMay4@aol.com

Joseph M. Sima - 5/7/2006

KENT STATE/MAY 4, 1970 - THE TRUTH - LIKE IT OR NOT

I was looking for news coverage about the Teamster strike - and found only the Ohio National Guard was called up according to national broadcasts - I just wanted to double check them. Too many coincidences happened not to have planned this confrontation the way it fell together in such a short period of time in early May, 1970. As you know the Teamsters were supporters of the Republican Party, and Nixon in particular, back in those days. There would be little they wouldn't do to help each other, and of course history shows this during the Nixon presidency. How easy it was for Rhodes to continue to activate the National Guard after the strike was virtually settled on or about April 29th and have the guard and equipment (M-1 rifles, automatic weapons, tear gas, jeeps, armored cars, trucks, and military helicopters available a couple days later. Nixon's timing of his escalation of war into Cambodia speech on Thursday, April 30th, could not have come at a more dangerous time with May 1st (known also as May Day and Rights of Spring) starting a weekend on America's campuses - The White House planners knew what they were doing, and what the probable reaction was going to be. It was like lighting a stick of dynamite and waiting. Rhodes admittingly in contact with Nixon and the "White House" before, during, and after the Kent State shootings, follows the game plan, sends in the troops, gives a venomous speech on Sunday May 3rd at Kent to excite the "killer instinct" in the National Guard and Campus leaders, declares school will remain open - posts guards with bayonets outside the classrooms and states there will be no meetings or rallies, or congregations of students - but school will remain open for classes - well it didn't even take an honor student from the Liquid Crystals Institute to see that Rhode's directives were begging for a confrontation - but his strict orders to break up any congregations of students were absolute and ended in murder and injuries. Now you tell me who has the blood on their hands? One other interesting note - Campus Police officers as quoted in many books indicated to the film crew of WKYC-TV Cleveland, on Saturday May 2nd, that they should stick around as there was going to be a fire that night (ROTC was going to be burned) - if they knew this in advance they either knew who and or how it was going to be done - or they should have properly taken precautions to protect and save it - which was not done. Now you tell me who has the soot on their hands?
Unfortunately the FBI (and Campus Police) chose to ignore, hide, or destroy evidence in the Kent State case - why? What purpose would it serve? Who did it protect from prosecution?
Among the earliest authors, only Peter Davies mentioned Terry Norman ( a student/informant-photographer for the Campus Police and FBI). Author William Gordon echoed Davies' information many years later and emphasized the odd and mysterious behavior of an armed student informant for the FBI/Campus Police - who drew his concealed gun where the Guard and students were in active confrontation, and where the shooting ensued. Janet Falbo's letter to President White and Ken Solch's detailed testimony to Barclay McMillen, Special Legal Advisor to Kent State/Prof) - which you have copies - describes in detail Norman's drawing his 38 caliber handgun and engaged with a student. The description of the gun is identical - and most important, both describe the sequence of events and it was well prior to the National Guard shooting. Whether he fired his gun or not is immaterial as any of the National Guardsman seeing this would then have an instinct and motive to pull the trigger thinking students are armed. You see not everyone knew who he was, and even fewer knew he was armed. He was then caught on film approaching (with his gun waving in the air and out of breath from running) - exclaiming: "I had to shoot, I had to shoot - they would have killed me". As he approached he encountered some of the National Guard ( eg.Michael Delaney - Public Relations -Ohio National Guard) and Campus Police and the film crew of WKYC-TV3 including commentator Fred DeBrine. What author William Gordon did not realize was that the cameraman after filming an ambulance scene turned his camera back on Norman and recorded the interaction and conversations between he and Campus Police officials with Guardsmen present. That film segment was also mentioned by Charles Thomas, National Archive expert film/sound analyst in his writings and has been reviewed again recently.
What actually happened after the surrender of the gun was the comment by a Kent State State Police officer that the gun had been fired...'what do we do now'
In the video that was recently sent to you you can hear Norman explaining why he drew the weapon and questions from the officers of the National Guard/Campus Police that the gun was indeed turned in - which evidently was their main concern. (You have to listen closely to pick everything up) - Charles Thomas in his writings which you have hard copies and e-mails - indicated that some of the Norman's scenes on WKYC films were missing and that the rest (which is on your tapes) is out of order, incomplete, and in poor condition ---- compared with what they originally shot and broadcast or made available. Finally, my findings without prejudice and based on facts, testimonies, and film - strongly indicates that President Nixon and Governor Rhodes were responsible for putting many individuals in harms way, with the result in death, injury and the destruction of private and public properties. Kent State Police should not have knowingly allowed the ROTC building to be destroyed. Kent State Police erred in allowing the reckless behavior and the unecessary arming of their student informant/photographer. The FBI based on documented, and personally documented evidence---obstructed justice and tampered or destroyed eveidence on their long time informant dating back to(1968) - and as a result of keeping this information out of the courts and Scranton Commission---the families of the deceased and
the injured were precluded from obtaining just compensation for injuries. The is no doubt in my mind that there are other Kent State students that faced injuries of differing types ( eg. emotional) subsequent to the shootings and they too (if documented) are also entitled to compensation. Obstruction of justice and the ignoring, tampering, and destroying evidence are felonies and if done by a law enforcement agency of the government can be pursued without the shield of statute of limitations. (USSC). I would address the motivevations of The White House, the Governor, the FBI, and the Campus Police - although they are evident, to do so at this time and in this paper might prejudice the case of the families of the deceased, or the injured former students. It has been brought to my attention that the same facts that I have given to the FBI, members, of Kent State University, many authors, had fallen on deaf ears. On April 30, 2006, a writer for the Tampa Bay Tribune, Janis Froelich, a 1968 graduate of the Kent State School of Journalism, wrote an in depth investigatory story about Kent State and the hidden mystery of the Kent State shooting. It is reprinted here at George Mason's History News Network Site. You can also try the following http://www.tbo.com/life/kentstate.htm

. See the writings of special National Archives analyst Charles Thomas for added detail. (Note: most of the information mentioned is available at the Special May 4th Section of the Kent State Library - Kent, Ohio). *This article is decicated to the late Barclay McMillen and
Charles Thomas, without whose works during their lives have made this day possible.
We cannot improve today unless we true history of the past. s/ Joseph M. Sima
Email: KSUMAY4@aol.com

Art G Goldstein - 9/17/2005

I know who set the fire as do many others who were students at Kent State that Spring. Frineds of mine, members of the SDS, chose to set fire to the old, wooden barracks used as ROTC space, as a protest to the invasion of Cambodia. Of course it was wrong but it didn't warrant the response from the Govenor nor was it commensurate with the killings and woundings that resulted.

Art G Goldstein - 9/17/2005

Michener wrote a novel, not a rigorous historical treatment of the Kent State Killings. I was there and friends of mine were in the inner sanctum of the SDS, the group of students who began the protest that eventually resulted in the killing of four innocent students and the wounding of nine others. I was there when the National Guard, attempting to return to their safe base of operations, marched past with bayonets held forward to clear the crowds. I was still there when the firing started and I crawled on my belly to safety, ten feet from a young man lying in a pool of blood. I attended all the open sessions of the Scranton Commission on campus and I know of what I speak. The facts are clear: the National Guard opened fire on unarmed students because they were tired of the verbal abuse they had been receiving. The photographs show clearly a small group turning with weapons raised, aiming at the crowd, including the comanding officer of the platoon who was aiming his 45. Following that, the rest of the platoon turned with weapons pointed toward the air or ground, clearly surprised by unexpected fire. They were in no danger and are guilty of murder, plain and simple. I couldn't care less if the courts dismissed the charges against the guardsmen...this would not be the first time a court was incorrect. To compare student protestors to fraternity boys engaged in a stupid prank is one of the more empty-headed comparisons I have ever heard. The President had, without authority, invaded a soverign country. Hundreds of thousands of people, not just college students, across America rose up in protest when this occurred...this was not an idle prank. Claim what you will but do not attempt to alter the facts....firing weapons, unprovoked, into a crowd is murder. Rewriting history to suit your political leaning is only slightly less onerous!

William A Gordon - 5/9/2004

During the aftermath of the shootings there was an assumption that someday a scholar (or scholars) would diligently review the mountains of evidence deliberately preserved for posterity, sift fact from fiction, suggest reasonable answers as to what happened and why, and put facts and events into historical perspective. It is unfair to suggest that no one has already done this, or documented the sustained breakdown of justice in the courts. I already have, and I think you need to (a) develop more reliable sources, and (b) disabuse yourself of the idealistic notion that impartial historians "search for the truth" about historical controversies. In fact, when I watch how the university routinely changes the subject, and its scholars make us forget precisely what we are supposed to remember, I sometimes feel that my single greatest contribution was simply to undo the damage done by Kent State's scholars--and point them in the direction of the debate.

For more information about my study click http://members.aol.com/nrbooks/williamagordon.htm

William A. Gordon
Author, "Four Dead in Ohio: Was There A Conspiracy at Kent State?"
BGordonLA@aol.com

Richard Henry Morgan - 4/30/2004

If nobody knows who set the fire, how can one say that students were "falsely blamed"? Perhaps non sequitur was too harsh -- rather, a too loose construction. It seems to me that students could only be falsely blamed if it could be established that others did indeed do it. Perhaps "blamed without sufficient evidence" would not mix the metaphysical and the epistemological.

Jesse David Lamovsky - 4/29/2004

Those circumstances being, in part…

1.)Lax-to-nonexistent preventative law enforcement on the part of the Kent City Police, the Kent State University Police, and the Portage County Sheriff’s Department, particularly in the case of the “riot” of Friday night, May 1 (actually a relatively small affair, probably non-political, that was dwarfed in scale by what goes on in Columbus after the Ohio State-Michigan game every November), and the burning of the ROTC building on May 2 (the KSU Police sat on their hands and watched as a mob marched across campus, spent a considerable amount of time attempting to set fire to the sheet-metal covered building, than, after setting the blaze, attacked firefighters, chopped up their hoses, and assaulted photographers).

2.)Naked political opportunism by Jim Rhodes in deploying the Guard, as well as by Kent Mayor Lee Roy Satrom in requesting the deployment (Satrom also badly exaggerated the presence and power of SDS on the KSU campus. There was an SDS chapter at Kent State- my mother was a member, in fact- but it was a small one; Kent State was not Berkeley, or even Madison or Ann Arbor, in terms of student radicalism).

3.)Rushing the Guard unit, fatigued, frayed of nerve, and fully armed, directly from a Teamster’s strike in Akron.

4.)Ill-defined, confusing, and poorly disseminated decrees (the 10:00 pm curfew on May 1, and the “unlawful assembly” order on May 4, which was unenforceable, as on school days, the Commons are a shortcut for thousands of Kent State students).

I see Mr. Severence’s point; this does seem to be a case in which nobody thought there would be bloodshed, yet, due to a combination of circumstances, there was bloodshed. Despite Governor Rhodes’s rhetoric, it is difficult believe that the intention was to kill students; just to bring a show of force that would cow the campus radicals and please Rhodes’s conservative and hard-hat constituency (this is not to say that the decision to call in the Guard was hasty, unnecessary, and ultimately disastrous). Many of the students on the Commons that day apparently believed that the Guard’s M-1 rifles were loaded with nothing but blanks. And there is little evidence to suggest that Generals Canterbury and Del Corso, or Major Jones, gave a direct order to fire into the crowd. More likely a group of Guardsmen, hot, tired, and just plain pissed off with the taunting, rock-throwing students, simply decided that they had had enough, and went ahead and fired.

That having been said, I can hardly classify what happened on May 4 as a “tragic accident”. You don’t “accidentally” fire military weapons into a crowd of unarmed people who are hundreds of feet away. And while I would hesitate to apply the label of murder to the killings of Bill Schroeder, Allison Krause, or Sandra Scheuer (manslaughter seems to apply better in these cases), it seems apparent that Jeffrey Miller, who was loudly taunting and flipping off the Guardsmen, and who was shot directly in the face, was, indeed, shot on purpose- murdered, in other words. Dean Kahler, the young man who was paralyzed, may have been shot on purpose as well.

Lawrence S. Wittner - 4/29/2004

It strikes me that Murray Polner's request for animpartial examination of the Kent State killings by an historian is quite reasonable. There has never been a thorough investigation of this disaster, and it is unlikely that the government is going to conduct one. Doubtless, people with minds closed by political blinders think they know all the answers. But the reality is that we don't.

Murray xavier Polner - 4/29/2004

My comments about the criticism re KSU killings in 1970 had two omissions. I believe that B.H. Severance's comments may well be true.All the more reason for a scholarly article or book on the subject.
As for references to Michener's book, my correspondents are once again directed to KSU's May 4th collection to see the pros and cons of his findings.We all have our honest opinions about this difficult subject, which is precisely why I wrote the article. I think the issue is indeed complex and goes beyond the liberal/conservative divide.

Murray xavier Polner - 4/29/2004

The three comments received were far too oversimple and far too smug. It was hardly a stupid accident, as one clained. Nor has it yet been shown to have been a conspiracy. All the more reason for a fair-minded (if that's possible) examination of all the evidence plus any that have never been release (should they exist). I suggest that rather than expressing off the shoulder opinions they might take a look on the web at the KSU Library's magnificent May 4th collection. "What people want," a former KSU grad student told me, is a "simple answer," the sort of answer favored above. A non-sequitur?? Think, as the old IBM slogan went.

Ben H. Severance - 4/29/2004

Mr. Polner, why must you see anything more than a tragic accident here? Tense mood, poor judgment in deploying guardsmen, and a series of perfunctory gunshots. A similar event occurred in Boston in 1770. Incidentally, the radical John Adams defended the Redcoats and exonerated them of willful wrongdoing. Just because the Kent State shootings happened during Vietnam doesn't mean there is some cabal behind it all. You might want to read Emile Zola's "Germinal," for it contains an interesting episode where an uncertain French lieutenant and his nervous platoon confront a group of striking coal miners. The result, a fatal but unintended clash.

Still, a concise scholarly article on Kent State might be nice; but please, no book.

Richard Henry Morgan - 4/29/2004

I think I have a new candidate for the non-sequitur award:

"No one has ever determined who set the fire, though students were falsely blamed."

Thomas W Hagedorn - 4/28/2004

I think Polner wants a different answer than that provided by Michener, who, by the way, was a liberal Democrat. He also is looking for a different conclusion than that reached by the federal criminal justice system. And he wants a different result than that delivered by the people of Ohio, who reelected Jim Rhodes several times as Governor, until he reached geriatric status.

He should have no trouble finding a liberal historian who can selectively find evidence to support his vision. And he need not worry about accidentally selecting a Republican for this mission. The odds of that mistake for almost any department in the country are very low.

Andrew D. Todd - 4/26/2004

James A. Michener wrote a study of the Kent State shootings (_Kent State: What Happened and Why_, 1971) shortly after they occurred, and his conclusion was in effect that the shootings were the inevitable result of the collision of two groups of immature young people, one of them with rifles. Most probably, most of the troops fired spontaneously, that is, more or less by reflex on hearing a loud noise. Far from there being any kind of order to fire, the officer in immediate command, Major Jones, actually reached the level of beating the troops with his swagger stick, in an attempt to make them stop firing.

After the fact, of course, faced with the likelihood of prosecution for murder, the Guardsmen tried to concoct evidence, but given the overwhelming number of witnesses, many with cameras, this was doomed to failure. Michener may not have come to the conclusions that Murray Polner would have liked, but he left very few loose ends.

I take it we all know about the general stupidity of fraternity boys. Academic administrators have been dealing with it since Peter Abelard's time. In peacetime, this stupidity normally channels itself into partisanship of the football team. During the Vietnam era, it went into politics instead. There are certain time-honored formulas. For example, it is advisable to prevent glass bottles from being taken into the stadium.