48 Years Ago Today, US Troops Massacred Students in Ohio, Covered It Up and Got Away With It

By Matt Agorist

On May 4, 1970, members of the Ohio National Guard descended on the campus of Kent State University in Ohio to quash and antiwar protest. During the protest, soldiers opened fire on an unarmed group of students—firing 67 rounds in 13 seconds—killing four and injuring nine others. To this date, not a single person has been held accountable and the government still refuses to admit that it participated in the murder of its own citizens.

As the Free Thought Project reported in 2016, Kent State is the one school shooting that the US government wants you to forget.

It has been 48 years since that day and there has yet to be a credible and impartial investigation into the massacre. Also, no group or individual has faced a single consequence for opening fire on innocent students and killing them. Although eight of the National Guardsmen who opened fire that day were indicted by a grand jury, all of their charges were eventually dismissed.

The families of the victims were given $15,000, a statement of regret, and essentially told to get on with their lives.

For decades after the killings, the US government did their best to cover up the shooting. As an in depth explanation from CounterPunch points out,

the US government took complete control of the narrative in the press and ensuing lawsuits. Over the next ten years, authorities claimed there had not been a command-to-fire at Kent State, that the ONG had been under attack, and that their gunfire had been prompted by the “sound of sniper fire.” Instead of investigating Kent State, the American leadership obstructed justice, obscured accountability, tampered with evidence, and buried the truth. The result of these efforts has been a very complicated government cover-up that has remained intact for more than forty years.

Not until 2010, after undeniable forensic evidence was dug up by independent and private researchers did the real truth of that day begin to surface.

Aurel Krause and Emily Kunstler founded the Kent State Truth Tribunal (KSTT), which helped to expose the sheer lies fed to the American public about what really happened that fateful day.

In spite of this overwhelming and indisputable evidence, in 2012, the US government, once again, refused to reopen the case. However, the truth still came out.

A crucial piece of the conspiracy was apparently uncovered in 2010 that played a pivotal role in exposing the crimes of the US government. Audio recordings were analyzed and subsequently found to record the Guardsmen being given orders to murder the protesters.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported on this revelation in 2010:

“Guard!” says a male voice on the recording, which two forensic audio experts enhanced and evaluated at the request of The Plain Dealer. Several seconds pass. Then, “All right, prepare to fire!”

“Get down!” someone shouts urgently, presumably in the crowd. Finally, “Guard! . . . ” followed two seconds later by a long, booming volley of gunshots. The entire spoken sequence lasts 17 seconds.

According to the reports, the review was done by Stuart Allen and Tom Owen, two nationally respected forensic audio experts with decades of experience working with government and law enforcement agencies and private clients to decipher recorded information.

Despite the troops’ claims of protesters throwing rocks at them, the shots were fired from 60 feet away. What’s more, as Allen and Owen point out, there is no audio indicating that the troops who opened fire were getting hit with rocks.

There is undeniable evidence, however, that the US government killed innocent civilians for protesting war and yet still, no one was held accountable and the government refuses to acknowledge it.

As Krause explains,

Kent State remains a glaring example of government impunity, it sends a message that protestors can be killed by the state for expressing their political beliefs. This lack of accountability and hostility towards peaceful expression flies in the face not only of our Constitution, but also our international human rights commitments.

Indeed, the idea that one’s government can kill them for peaceful protest is chilling, which is why the establishment wants you to forget about it.

Below is a video of what oppression looks like. Americans would do well to remember this did not take place in some tyrannical other country, but right in their own backyard.

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project, where this article first appearedFollow @MattAgorist on Twitter, Steemit, and now on Facebook.

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

15 Comments on "48 Years Ago Today, US Troops Massacred Students in Ohio, Covered It Up and Got Away With It"

  1. I know this – wickliffe Ohio
    My friend had brother – the guard was on top. Go see for yourself- they shot down. Go see

    • William Burke | May 5, 2018 at 2:42 pm | Reply

      This is gibberish. Want to learn how to communicate your ideas to others? Learn how to write English. Presumably it’s your native tongue. It deserves better.

  2. “48 Years Ago Today, US Troops Massacred Students in Ohio, Covered It Up and Got Away With It”

    Apparently they did not cover it too deeply nor did they get away with it. Seems everyone and their brother keeps reporting about the incident in the *news* cycles, even after 48 years. Had it been properly sequestered and they properly ‘gotten away with it’, no one one would know anything at all of it. It would not be an incident annually seeing reports written up, videos replayed.

    As it does keep getting rehashed, seems the media by and large is attempting to possibly rile the public into an insurrection against the government? The media used to incite riots? No, no such thing could ever happen. The media also never lies to the public in/on behalf of the government neither. What then if the media does get the public up in arms? Well, the government does have a standing army to strike back against the people. Doubt that at your own peril, all the government desires is an ‘excuse’, any excuse.

    Sad seeing the media underestimating the intellect of much of the public.

    • The US fascist, police state did not just arise instantaneously. It has been gestating for many decades!

      • Indeed so. Rather aware of that too. Been seeing it happen despite my young forty six years. I vote for Andy Griffith if I’d vote at all, he was an Officer of the Peace and not an Officer of the Policy or Police Officer. Policy enforcers ought to be aware that policy can be changed instantly, Law and keeping the peace cannot be. Also police ought to examine that role according to the words used to describe it, enforcers of policy. The Law does not require force to be upheld, people generally recognize it as cosmic and the right thing to do.

  3. James Rhodes is roasting in Hell!

  4. BugsBunnyPatriot | May 5, 2018 at 12:02 pm | Reply

    Covered Up? Crosby Stills and Nash did a song about it.

  5. Pacifist “strategy”:

    1. Just sit there.
    a. lay on tracks
    b. chain yourself to tree
    c. stand in front of tank

    2. Accuse tyrants of initiating force.

    3. Accuse tyrants of not initiating force.

    I don’t have all the answers, just don’t feel that provoking people to harm me is an effective way to get my point across. I mean, 50yrs later, good idea or bad idea? Better, worse, or the same, in what way?

    • From my point of experience it seems the same. I think what is lacking though is a realization that this ‘other’ requires the ‘us’ “provoking people to harm” me or us. They do not require any provocation, it merely serves as a handy ‘excuse/justification’ to extend as rationale for ‘business as usual’. “Look, they made us use force to get them to consent. They provoked us by looking at us cross eyed. ‘We all know, …’ insurgents, or terrorists, radicalized people look at others cross eyed.”

      • Have you seen “Fight Club”, when Edward Norton beats himself up.

        We know that the strategy is to take pics of your bruises. Then, what happened.

        How has Kent State improved your day-to-day existence.

        I’m not judging your motivations, per se. I’m saying this didn’t work out as intended, has it?

        Your strategy, against an armed, violent foe, was to defeat yourself, and blame him for being too hard on you.

        Excuse the childish examples. I am just trying to be affable, here. Let’s go with a martial arts movie or Godzilla. How does that work.

        • Genghis Khan, Hannibal, or a head hunter… Conan the Barbarian.

          They seem themselves as warriors. You laying down and accepting conquest does not pervert their concept of martial valor.

          You have not amassed superior force.

          So, how were they outsmarted.

        • My point if you did sincerely miss it was that to rise up against the government would incite more force from the government. There was no accusations, merely stating what I understood as obvious fact and thought many others did as well. I was only suggesting the ceasing of consenting to government abuse.

          This can be facilitated in a number of ways. We can barter and not use Federal Reserve Notes, use local currency which is Legal & Lawful. We can not vote out of not having confidence in a system that is corrupted to its core. No need exists for violence being our last resort, if we withhold consent the government dries up and fades away like so many tumbleweeds. It is through our power the government exists and through our power it can be ended.

          They have left out in the open to two larger keys to stopping the system, quit using their ‘money’ and quit voting to give consent. they need us doing these things to exist. This is simple and basic contractual bindings. We brought the government to being by a contract. Well, I see the government no longer ‘represents’ me as it was obliged by contract to do, fine, I’m not obliged any longer to give the government my consent.

          You may want to add these into context.

          “Any person capable of angering you becomes your master; he can
          anger you only when you permit yourself to be disturbed by him.” ―

          I’m not angry or disturbed. I merely see the way clear and thought the article title was hilarious due to the obvious there’s ‘news’ every year about Kent State. Yeah, some ‘cover up’ huh?

          “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.” ― Eleanor

          There I am, withdrawing consent from the government. Government had not exactly made me feel inferior. It did make me feel less than proud of my country, one I at one point signed up to defend. Well government will no longer make me feel anything. I’m taking my consent away.

        • No I’ve not seen that movie nor read the book it was based upon. ‘My strategy’ is to use peaceful and lawful means to end things against pharisees & parasites of humanity. I was illustrating what ‘could happen’ should the People lose sight by blinding emotion and take direct violent action to assail the government. ‘My strategy’ would involve defiantly and clearly stating, “I do not consent,” and walking away from the ‘government’s “game”‘ if you will.

          Commercial law which is also know as Law of the Sea is all based upon contractual transactions. If you grant consent then you need to accept whatever the contract entails. This is made apparent with search and seizure laws. Police cannot search your person or home without writ of warrant based upon good faith probable cause, and you need to consent. You can defer or not consent until a lawyer is present to act on your behalf .

          I don’t need a lawyer, or maybe I do. My point though is I don’t consent to a government rotten and corrupted to the core. This is why I do not vote, a lack of confidence in the ‘system’ leads this decision, it is my act of not consenting.

          I apologize. I know what it is to be victimized. It is something I prefer to not be, survived enough of it for my concern. Your assertion of that being what I’m doing is unwarranted. Again, I was only illustrating an example. I don’t see how Kent state benefited anyone save for the pharisees & parasites.

    • TruthChick | May 8, 2018 at 6:35 am | Reply

      Nice slave/statist mentality. To UNEQUIVOCALLY vilify these egregious actions is THE ONLY moral stance. Anything else is mealy-mouthed, Beta-Male attempt to condone this egregious murder of INNOCENTS.

      Its akin to those who suggest that gal SHOULDN’T have walked alone or flirted with that guy who ended up raping her because….good idea bad idea to walkalone, flirt I dont know….her NO didnt get the point across

      This is ALWAYS the attempt of the morally lazy. weakminded Moral Relativists to deflect the responsibility REQUIRED of those who commit egregious atrocities…why you posit? BECAUSE they are statists who Worship the state above all and the lives of their fellow human ARE disposable IS they have the audacity to question the RIGHT of others to rule over them OR to have the nerve to murder asians over-seas….the Slave Citizenry ARE the gatekeepers who keep their fellow humans down by VICTIM SHAMING them. It’s the ULTIMATE in bullying from afar and without accountability.

      It’s the creed of puzzies….just sayin’ a truth.

      • I think that you’re dealing with physically-dangerous praetors, in the realm of subjectivity.

        What was an objective goal, when was it completed, in terms of a time and date. How and when have you accomplished a discrete change, in concrete reality.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.