A quote from Abe Lincoln over Rich vs Poor--very TRUE--what say you liberals.

[JakeStarkey]

Whatever. Bfgrn is a lefty liar in his lefty lair.

Of course the Far Left is as crazy, Emily, as is the Far Right.

Either the good people America crush both extremes, or one side or the other will lead us to slaughter.

What you fail to realize is that the "far left" has no power in this country. BOTH parties are right of center. It is a dangerous place to be.

Dear JakeS and Bfgrn:
Both the Left and the Right will bias their own media and information sources/networks to keep feeding the same propaganda to their respective followers en masse. The power to either keep exploiting conflicts by conveniently blaming the other group, or to SOLVE problems by promoting and replicating working programs as models, lies in these relationships and "circles of influence". All people have access to power this way. Whether or not we use it, or we defer authority and action to others to tell us what to think and do, reflects in our attitudes that in turn influence the people around us to act or not to act, and/or to depend on other people or groups.

Both Left and Right will complain that the other is controlling the masses through the media. We all have equal power to influence the people, relations and institutions within our circles, through our thoughts, words and actions. Fighting over power -- with fear-based competition and conflict with other groups, and oppressing people by lack of knowledge of how to use their existing resources to effect change "regardless" of what other people do and who holds office -- is part of the game that partisan politics takes advantage of. The best way I know to overcome this gameplaying, which feeds media biat as on both sides of any issue "conveniently polarized" to incite and divide, is to encourage people to find, align and focus on points of agreement and solutions both sides believe are effective approaches to a given problem, INSTEAD of focusing on unresolved faults or issues to discredit and justify rejecting the opposing side.

More of these issues will be corrected, and progress made in govt and social reform, by combining team efforts and resources to achieve common goals, in ways that no one opposes, if people are truly sincere about ending the problems being criticized, and are not just using them as an excuse to blame another group to gain political favor or power.

The real power to change comes from within people, and within groups; not forcing change from the outside which is naturally met with rejection and projected blame trying to force the opposing side to change instead. We know that does not work, but ends in deadlock. As long as we insist on continuing this way in conflict, we invite other people, groups, and especially govt to step in and make decisions for us. However, where we take responsibility BACK on ourselves for solving our own problems, and organize support and resources around things that work, that's where "people are the govt" and have authority to tell govt what to do that represents public interests, not vice versa where we depend on govt to rescue us from whatever "other group" we fear is trying to take over control and influence.

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear Bfgrn and JakeS:

The common factor in these issues of excessive force, "collective punishment" (justifying punishment or harm caused to innocent people for the sake of policing or deterring larger populations), or even pre-emptive strikes by govt and law enforcement is whether the image of unrelenting authority is necessary for security and is justified in one case or another. You can point to "Bush's War" where people still argue to this day if attacking Iraq was justified lawful or Constitutional, and even if it was not fully proper, it is necessary to respect military and govt decisions for social law and order. I don't believe in collective punishment, but I understand and accept why it happens.

It's really different versions of the same dilemma.
The issue of "govt immunity" runs into all kinds of cases of abuses, some going public, while others are swept under the rug; it's really a gamble if you will see justice in this or that case.
For every case you may oppose as wrong, there are others you may forgive as collateral damage; while someone else will argue it was the other way around, from their perspective.

What IF police/govt/military make a mistake and commit injustice.
When is it better not to question authority because anything viewed as rebellion is a threat to law enforcement, integrity and deterrence using force to command respect, etc. And When is it a threat to public integrity and trust to let people get away with injustice?

The common point is to try to PREVENT such catch-22 situations from happening in the first place. No one disagrees that is ideal. But once such a incident happens:
How DO you go about redressing grievances concerning govt abuse or corruption
WITHOUT threatening the social order and respect for authority, where these
charges seen as a threat are met with denial instead to keep the system going

Until we set up a better system for redressing grievances, such as by conflict resolution, (unlike the legal and political system too easily won over by bullying, denial and projection), we will continue to see these cases come up again and again, with people on both sides not trusting the other to tell the truth but assuming each is motivated by political agenda.

I said, "Someone in that crowd fired a handgun prior to the NG volley." Sgt Pryor's statement is problematic and not believed by many. Innocents died because of lefty rioting. Those are the facts, Bfgrn.

You only look silly when you mess with those who are better informed and more literate than you. Be polite, and I will take it easy on you.

Your 'facts' are incorrect, so what does that make you Jake?

The first shots fired at Kent State came from Sgt. Myron Pryor, who turned and began firing at the students with his .45 pistol. None of the protesters had weapons.

The only fatality at Isla Vista was 22-year-old UCSB student Kevin Moran who was shot and killed. Although the police claimed the bullet originated from a sniper in the crowd, a ballistics test determined that it came from policeman's rifle. The incident was deemed an accident, and the officer was later exonerated.

The violence started as a group of students walked back toward Isla Vista after a speech by William Kunstler, police beat 22-year-old student Rich Underwood into submission and arrested him for carrying a bottle of wine they assumed was a Molotov cocktail.

Sorry Jake, you're dealing with someone who is not going to buy your crap. All your chest beating does is expose how insecure your really are. It is an epidemic among conservatives.

All you have to do to refute that first shots fired at Kent State came from Sgt. Myron Pryor is to produce a weapon and ballistics.

I'll be waiting Jake.

 

[Samson]

Dear Bfgrn and JakeS:

The common factor in these issues of excessive force, "collective punishment" (justifying punishment or harm caused to innocent people for the sake of policing or deterring larger populations), or even pre-emptive strikes by govt and law enforcement is whether the image of unrelenting authority is necessary for security and is justified in one case or another. You can point to "Bush's War" where people still argue to this day if attacking Iraq was justified lawful or Constitutional, and even if it was not fully proper, it is necessary to respect military and govt decisions for social law and order. I don't believe in collective punishment, but I understand and accept why it happens.

Obviously you DO "believe in" collective punishment: You mean that YOU wouldn't use collective punishment. How would you know?

They only way you would know is if you have managed the activities of others: I submit that either you've never done it, or everyone has always agreed that you lead and they follow.

 

[Bfgrn]

A liar tells part of the story and let's the rest go. Bfgrn, you are a liar,not uninformed. I will give you the opportunity to put in all of the information.

Go for it.

Sorry, son, your cover is gone, and no one is buying you except the far left. I don't have to refute what has not been proved. That is your problem.

Some little lefty punk had a hand gun, provoked a fire fight with the NG, and the left is innocent.

Not buying your lying story, even all these years later.

Jake, you are misinformed or lying. And worse than that, you are siding with the executioners. But, hey Jake, they were just 'leftists', not real Americans like you. Even though they were unarmed and gunned down in broad daylight, I'm sure we could find some crime they committed that deserved execution... maybe vandalism or some other 'leftist' 'capital' crime?

The 1975 Civil Trial and Captain Ron Snyder

After I wrote the article about Stuart Allen, saying he detected a second and actual order to fire (which no newspaper in the country, including the Daily Kent Stater, covered) I heard from John Mangels, the Plain Dealer's science reporter. Mangels was the author of the three front-page stories that gave rise to the calls for a new investigation. That made him, as far as I am concerned, one of the unsung heroes of May 4. He reminded me that he interviewed Captain Ron Snyder for his initial story on May 9, 2010, and that Snyder (like Captain Martin and Sergeant Matthew McManus) challenged Allen's finding, claiming the preliminary order did not sound like an order someone in the military would give.

That had completely slipped my mind, probably because Ron "Cynanide" Snyder is not a source I ever gave much credence to. That is partially because Snyder was not even among the squad that opened fire that day and thus, was not in a position to know what really happened. His unit was on the other side of Taylor Hall when the shootings broke, and the building completely blocked his view.

Also, I still cannot get out of my head something said about Snyder after he originally told author James Michener, the Akron Beacon Journal, and a state grand jury that he confiscated a gun and brass knuckles off the body of slain student Jeffrey Miller. Snyder subsequently admitted he fabricated this claim because he wanted to make the victims seem dangerous, thereby making the shootings look justifiable. Snyder decided to come clean after the Justice Department started investigating this claim. I saw papers on Judge Frank Battisti's law clerk's desk suggesting the Justice Department seriously considered indicting him for perjury before the original state grand jury.

ref

It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners.
Albert Camus

Hey Jake, the Kent State executions happened on Monday, May 4, 1970. Some 42 years ago. There were numerous investigations, civil trials and a government commission.

ONE person, the Adjutant General of the Ohio National Guard, who was NOT THERE, told reporters that a sniper had fired on the guardsmen, which itself remains a debated allegation. None of the guardsmen, who WERE THERE, on campus corroborate his accusation.

The President's Commission on Campus Unrest avoided probing the question of why the shootings happened. Instead, it harshly criticized both the protesters and the Guardsmen, but it concluded that "the indiscriminate firing of rifles into a crowd of students and the deaths that followed were unnecessary, unwarranted, and inexcusable."

But like I said, they were just 'leftists', not REAL Americans like you Jake. They did not conform, so they must be executed.

Equality, rightly understood as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences; wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.
Barry Goldwater