DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | Campus "Unrest" demonstrations and consequences, 1970-1971 | 1971-11-12 American Report: Review of Religion and American Power Page 23

Transcribe
Translate

Campus "Unrest" demonstrations and consequences, 1970-1971

1971-11-12 American Report: Review of Religion and American Power Page 23

AMERICAN REPORT    19-S

'America's My Lai in Ohio'
(Cont. from p. 18-S)
Canham hopes this can be investigated "to the fullest possible degree." I have yet to hear one valid reason for not doing so immediately.
   To deny the existence of an element in our society whose hatred for student protesters is such they not only approve of the killings, but genuinely wish more had been shot, is to deny reality. To assume that a uniform, whether of the police or the National Guard, cleanses the wearer of his prejudices is to assume they are not human beings. Who can deny, without an investigation, that there might not have been a man in Troop G or Company A who had recently been incensed by the sight of campus disorders at Ohio State and elsewhere on his television screen and perchance expressed his belief that a good shooting would put an end to their nonsense only to suddenly find himself face to face with the object of his anger and an M-1 or .45 pistol in his hand?
   Justice delayed is not only justice denied, it is the undermining of the very system of justice. But beyond that, by what law do we deny the parents of those killed and wounded the right to know exactly what their children did that day, exactly what the F.B.I. investigation found concerning their children that day, especially those who were shot to death when all of them were nowhere near the National Guard to pose any kind of threat at all. The parents, and the American people, have a right to know the answers to all these questions. This is not a police state where people are shot down by the militia and the nation compelled to accept without question the reasons given by those responsible for the shooting.
   Four human lives were not only inexcusably destroyed; they may very well have been deliberately taken by a number of men using their uniform, anonyminity, and subsequent lies to satisfy their personal animosity toward a "class of persons" they had decided were long overdue for punishment. It was, as one Guardsman said, "Time they got it like that." That this might be possible is deeply disturbing to the orderly routine of our lives because it raises the horror and the spectre of another My Lai. In this case, however, the victims are Americans, and the site of the massacre is an American campus. It is too much for the mind to contemplate, let alone accept. We would much prefer to let the dead rest in peace and the reasons why they are dead ages 19 and 20 remain buried with  them. Unfortunately, however, we must also reconcile their deaths with our Constitution and our laws. We would rather forget about Kent State than face up to this challenge. Why? 
   At My Lai this nation squarely faced its responsibility as a democracy in a world torn between two diametrically opposed ideologies. That we did so can only enhance our stature in this conflict and command the respect of nations wavering on the brink between our concept of society and the totalitarian concept of domination and injustice. At Kent State we are faced with the same responsibility in a domestic concept. We are a nation torn between two opposing attitudes on priorities with a great many Americans wavering on the brink of national urgency.
   The tragic deaths at Kent State provide us with the unhappy, but unique, opportunity to demonstrate to our children that the hypocrisy, the lies, the self-preservation at any price, the contemptible facade is not more important than human life when those lives might have been taken diliberately with malice of forethought, as were the lives of those old men, mothers, young women, and children at My Lai. Kent State, whether we like it or not, is America's My Lai in Ohio.
*   *   *
---an interview---

PETER DAVIES

Quest For Justice

{photograph of Peter Davies}

[italics] The following interview with Peter Davies was conducted October 12 in his New York office. Mr. Davies is the author of a 227-page report based on a study of the killing and injuring of students at Kent State University on May 4, 1970. Mr. Davies, a native of London, England, came to America in 1957 and became a U.S. citizen in 1966. [/italics]

by Ron Henderson

[italics] Mr. Davies, you have no ties-family, friendship, or professional-to the students killed and wounded at Kent State University on May 4, 1970. What motivated you to get involved in the Kent State incident?[/italics]
   Well, initially just the shock of what happened. Then the President's response to it which was extremely cold; and then what happened here in New York on May 8 which Mayor Lindsay had declared as a day in mourning for the four. This was the day some student demonstrators appeared downtown, on Wall Street, and they were attacked by hard hats. So the shooting itself, the President's response, and then what happened on May 8, motivated me to get directly involved.

[italics] The President's response actually came through his Press Secretary as I recall. [/italics] 
   That's right, and it was an unbelievable statement. I mean, it was totally lacking in any feeling whatsoever.

[italics] Do you recall his response to the bombing of the Nation's Capitol-the difference? [/italics]
   Very different. In that instance one felt that he was taking about the demise of human beings, while actually, it was just a structure.

[italics]What form did your investigation take and how long did it take you to complete your very comprehensive report? [/italics]
   Well, really it was going on all of the time without me realizing that I was eventually going to write it. Accumulating the material,-the reports as they came out, the conclusions, the findings, and so on, I never really thought about writing a detailed report until after Rev. (John) Adams had entered the picture. He was having a series of meetings at the Justice Department. I had drawn together official reports that I felt could only explain the shooting. To me, everything else didn't explain it. Adams knew this, and he suggested to Kleindienst, Deputy Attorney General, that we had some reason to believe there were other possible causes for the shooting, especially since the Justice Department summary said it didn't know what started the shooting. And so Kleindienst suggested that Adams meet with David Norman, who was head of the Civil Rights Division, and submit what we had found, or what we felt, in some substantial form. That is when the report was written.

[italics] It was indeed an agency for the United Methodist Church which published and distributed the report on a limited basis. How did your association with Mr. Adams and the Board of Christian Social Concerns develop?[italics}

   I first met John last March after he had read the book, [italics]Thirteen Seconds[/italics]. He called Mike Roberts, one of the authors, looking for information, Roberts told him to call Arthur Krause. Art kept saying well Peter's got this, Peter's got that, so finally he contacted me.
(Cont. p. 20-S, Col. 1)

{In box middle, bottom of page: Photograph of veteran holding paper with a picture of the American flag and the words: "THIS IS OUR FLAG PROUD OF IT!  Photo credit: Lawrence Frank

The Voice of Allison
[italics] 
You out there, you patriots
of silence,
what do you know of me?
I who lie in this lonely
place beneath the soil,
cold as the death I died
for no reason nor cause
except your hatred.
If I could come to you whole,
And let you see me,
Touch me, know me.
Would you then weep for me,
you silent patriots?
Do you hear the mournful song 
of a distant bird,
the soft and gentle flutter 
of her wounded wings?
Or are you so made
of stone and steel
no dart of love
could pierce the armor
of your frozen hearts?
The go, go wave your pretty
flags to marching muscles
and leave me with 
those that love me.
Go preach your hate;
but mark me well:
the day will surely come
when I, in others, shall 
arise and bring to all of you
Love and Peace.
--Peter Davies}

Saving...

AMERICAN REPORT 19-S 'America's My Lai in Ohio' (Cont. from p. 18-S) Canham hopes this can be investigated "to the fullest possible degree." I have yet to hear one valid reason for not doing so immediately. To deny the existence of an element in our society whose hatred for student protesters is such they not only approve of the killings, but genuinely wish more had been shot, is to deny reality. To assume that a uniform, whether of the police or the National Guard, cleanses the wearer of his prejudices is to assume they are not human beings. Who can deny, without an investigation, that there might not have been a man in Troop G or Company A who had recently been incensed by the sight of campus disorders at Ohio State and elsewhere on his television screen and perchance expressed his belief that a good shooting would put an end to their nonsense only to suddenly find himself face to face with the object of his anger and an M-1 or .45 pistol in his hand? Justice delayed is not only justice denied, it is the undermining of the very system of justice. But beyond that, by what law do we deny the parents of those killed and wounded the right to know exactly what their children did that day, exactly what the F.B.I. investigation found concerning their children that day, especially those who were shot to death when all of them were nowhere near the National Guard to pose any kind of threat at all. The parents, and the American people, have a right to know the answers to all these questions. This is not a police state where people are shot down by the militia and the nation compelled to accept without question the reasons given by those responsible for the shooting. Four human lives were not only inexcusably destroyed; they may very well have been deliberately taken by a number of men using their uniform, anonyminity, and subsequent lies to satisfy their personal animosity toward a "class of persons" they had decided were long overdue for punishment. It was, as one Guardsman said, "Time they got it like that." That this might be possible is deeply disturbing to the orderly routine of our lives because it raises the horror and the spectre of another My Lai. In this case, however, the victims are Americans, and the site of the massacre is an American campus. It is too much for the mind to contemplate, let alone accept. We would much prefer to let the dead rest in peace and the reasons why they are dead ages 19 and 20 remain buried with them. Unfortunately, however, we must also reconcile their deaths with our Constitution and our laws. We would rather forget about Kent State than face up to this challenge. Why? At My Lai this nation squarely faced its responsibility as a democracy in a world torn between two diametrically opposed ideologies. That we did so can only enhance our stature in this conflict and command the respect of nations wavering on the brink between our concept of society and the totalitarian concept of domination and injustice. At Kent State we are faced with the same responsibility in a domestic concept. We are a nation torn between two opposing attitudes on priorities with a great many Americans wavering on the brink of national urgency. The tragic deaths at Kent State provide us with the unhappy, but unique, opportunity to demonstrate to our children that the hypocrisy, the lies, the self-preservation at any price, the contemptible facade is not more important than human life when those lives might have been taken diliberately with malice of forethought, as were the lives of those old men, mothers, young women, and children at My Lai. Kent State, whether we like it or not, is America's My Lai in Ohio. * * * ---an interview--- PETER DAVIES Quest For Justice {photograph of Peter Davies} [italics] The following interview with Peter Davies was conducted October 12 in his New York office. Mr. Davies is the author of a 227-page report based on a study of the killing and injuring of students at Kent State University on May 4, 1970. Mr. Davies, a native of London, England, came to America in 1957 and became a U.S. citizen in 1966. [/italics] by Ron Henderson [italics] Mr. Davies, you have no ties-family, friendship, or professional-to the students killed and wounded at Kent State University on May 4, 1970. What motivated you to get involved in the Kent State incident?[/italics] Well, initially just the shock of what happened. Then the President's response to it which was extremely cold; and then what happened here in New York on May 8 which Mayor Lindsay had declared as a day in mourning for the four. This was the day some student demonstrators appeared downtown, on Wall Street, and they were attacked by hard hats. So the shooting itself, the President's response, and then what happened on May 8, motivated me to get directly involved. [italics] The President's response actually came through his Press Secretary as I recall. [/italics] That's right, and it was an unbelievable statement. I mean, it was totally lacking in any feeling whatsoever. [italics] Do you recall his response to the bombing of the Nation's Capitol-the difference? [/italics] Very different. In that instance one felt that he was taking about the demise of human beings, while actually, it was just a structure. [italics]What form did your investigation take and how long did it take you to complete your very comprehensive report? [/italics] Well, really it was going on all of the time without me realizing that I was eventually going to write it. Accumulating the material,-the reports as they came out, the conclusions, the findings, and so on, I never really thought about writing a detailed report until after Rev. (John) Adams had entered the picture. He was having a series of meetings at the Justice Department. I had drawn together official reports that I felt could only explain the shooting. To me, everything else didn't explain it. Adams knew this, and he suggested to Kleindienst, Deputy Attorney General, that we had some reason to believe there were other possible causes for the shooting, especially since the Justice Department summary said it didn't know what started the shooting. And so Kleindienst suggested that Adams meet with David Norman, who was head of the Civil Rights Division, and submit what we had found, or what we felt, in some substantial form. That is when the report was written. [italics] It was indeed an agency for the United Methodist Church which published and distributed the report on a limited basis. How did your association with Mr. Adams and the Board of Christian Social Concerns develop?[italics} I first met John last March after he had read the book, [italics]Thirteen Seconds[/italics]. He called Mike Roberts, one of the authors, looking for information, Roberts told him to call Arthur Krause. Art kept saying well Peter's got this, Peter's got that, so finally he contacted me. (Cont. p. 20-S, Col. 1) {In box middle, bottom of page: Photograph of veteran holding paper with a picture of the American flag and the words: "THIS IS OUR FLAG PROUD OF IT! Photo credit: Lawrence Frank The Voice of Allison [italics] You out there, you patriots of silence, what do you know of me? I who lie in this lonely place beneath the soil, cold as the death I died for no reason nor cause except your hatred. If I could come to you whole, And let you see me, Touch me, know me. Would you then weep for me, you silent patriots? Do you hear the mournful song of a distant bird, the soft and gentle flutter of her wounded wings? Or are you so made of stone and steel no dart of love could pierce the armor of your frozen hearts? The go, go wave your pretty flags to marching muscles and leave me with those that love me. Go preach your hate; but mark me well: the day will surely come when I, in others, shall arise and bring to all of you Love and Peace. --Peter Davies}