Declaration of Occupy Wall Street

Status
Not open for further replies.
Steinhauer said:
Why don't you post the link - on a deaf website mind you - of the audio recording where Terry Norman's revolver can be heard being fired :roll:
Click to expand...

How do you know a gunshot on an audio recording was coming from Norman's gun? You really are reaching.:laugh2:

I stated that it came from your Wiki link. No need to post it twice. You seem to be the only one having trouble reading.:dunno2: Everyone else sees where I referred back to the original link.
 
On a side note Jillio - here is the olive branch - its up to you to take it or not.

After reading your posts in regards to gun rights - I think I can clearly see why you hold the opinions you do in regards to CCW - since you lived through an ordeal where your fellow classmates were killed needlessly.

I, on the other hand, can understand why the National Guard fired. They were being fired upon and felt their lives were in danger. Maybe you will never understand it, and I hope you never do.

However, your motives are in the right place.
 
jillio said:
How do you know a gunshot on an audio recording was coming from Norman's gun? You really are reaching.:laugh2:

I stated that it came from your Wiki link. No need to post it twice. You seem to be the only one having trouble reading.:dunno2: Everyone else sees where I referred back to the original link.
Click to expand...

The FBI released a report claiming his gun was fired 4 times. That audio recording confirmed 4 gunshots were fired before the national Guard returned fire.
 
Steinhauer said:
The FBI released a report claiming his gun was fired 4 times. That audio recording confirmed 4 gunshots were fired before the national Guard returned fire.
Click to expand...

where's that report?
 
Steinhauer said:
On a side note Jillio - here is the olive branch - its up to you to take it or not.

After reading your posts in regards to gun rights - I think I can clearly see why you hold the opinions you do in regards to CCW - since you lived through an ordeal where your fellow classmates were killed needlessly.

I, on the other hand, can understand why the National Guard fired. They were being fired upon and felt their lives were in danger. Maybe you will never understand it, and I hope you never do.

However, your motives are in the right place.
Click to expand...

The National Guard were NEVER fired upon. You are still making false statements. In fact, it was never stated that the National Guard were fired upon. Norman was accused of firing at demonstrators. You do know the difference between the demonstrators and the National Guard, right?

Your olive branch, therefore was broken. But I will accept the small part that was intact. People were killed needlessly.
 
Steinhauer said:
On a side note Jillio - here is the olive branch - its up to you to take it or not.

After reading your posts in regards to gun rights - I think I can clearly see why you hold the opinions you do in regards to CCW - since you lived through an ordeal where your fellow classmates were killed needlessly.

I, on the other hand, can understand why the National Guard fired. They were being fired upon and felt their lives were in danger. Maybe you will never understand it, and I hope you never do.

However, your motives are in the right place.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering why aren't you citing anything from your wiki link.

After the shooting, Sylvester Del Corso, the Ohio National Guard's top general, released a public statement claiming that Norman had admitted firing four shots at the demonstrators in self-defense. He later backed off from that statement.
Click to expand...

The FBI squelched that speculation by announcing that Norman's gun had never been fired.
Click to expand...

The FBI squelched that speculation by announcing that Norman's gun had never been fired.
Click to expand...

After the accusations had been made, John Dunphy of the Akron Beacon Journal wrote several articles that seemed to exonerate Norman. Dunphy interviewed a new witness, Tom Masterson, who admitted he was the student who had attacked Norman. Masterson also supported Norman's claim that he had only drawn his gun after the shootings and in self-defense.
Click to expand...
 
Kent State tape indicates altercation and pistol fire preceded National Guard shootings (audio) | cleveland.com


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/04/new-light-shed-on-kent-state-killings/?page=2


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.
Click to expand...


It also turned out that the FBI had its own informant and agent-provocateur roaming the crowd, a part-time Kent State student named Terry Norman, who had a camera. Mr. Norman also was armed with a snub-nosed revolver that FBI ballistics tests, first declassified in 1977, concluded had indeed been discharged on that day.
Click to expand...

still searching for the declassified files .....
 
Steinhauer said:
Why don't you post the link - on a deaf website mind you - of the audio recording where Terry Norman's revolver can be heard being fired :roll:
Click to expand...

I see this....

In 2010, forty years after the events of May 4, forensic expert Stuart Allen, using advanced technology, studied an audiotape of the shootings and concluded that the guardsman were indeed given orders to prepare to fire. Allen continued to study the tape and came up with another surprising finding: that someone had indeed fired four shots some 70 seconds prior to the National Guardsmen opening fire. The evidence appears to implicate Norman as the shooter.[1]
Click to expand...

70 seconds... that's 1 minute and 10 seconds long. Plenty of time for Guardsmen to check on each other to see if they were shot or not. I'm sorry but it's not a justifiable defense to shoot back 70 seconds later after they were "supposedly" shot at. Don't you think if somebody shot 4x, the crowd would just panic and disperse away?

They can easily retreat back to safety but no.... they were still standing. There was absolutely no need to fire dozens of military-grade rifles at a crowd of unarmed college students. They're not in Vietnam War.

wow... 70 seconds later.... and the massacre began.... wow..... if I were a Guardsman, I would be the only one not shooting at them. I would be repeatedly yelling - HOLD YOUR FIRE!!!!

They were shooting for 13 seconds. That's a very long time and that's also enough time for them to process in their head after seeing dozen of unarmed students falling to ground. This is a pure bloodthirsty massacre without any regard for their lives.
 
Stieny, I think you would do yourself a service if you were to exit from this thread before you embarrass yourself even further.
 
Jiro said:
I see this....



70 seconds... that's 1 minute and 10 seconds long. Plenty of time for Guardsmen to check on each other to see if they were shot or not. I'm sorry but it's not a justifiable defense to shoot back 70 seconds later after they were "supposedly" shot at. Don't you think if somebody shot 4x, the crowd would just panic and disperse away?

They can easily retreat back to safety but no.... they were still standing. There was absolutely no need to fire dozens of military-grade rifles at a crowd of unarmed college students. They're not in Vietnam War.

wow... 70 seconds later.... and the massacre began.... wow..... if I were a Guardsman, I would be the only one not shooting at them. I would be repeatedly yelling - HOLD YOUR FIRE!!!!

They were shooting for 13 seconds. That's a very long time and that's also enough time for them to process in their head after seeing dozen of unarmed students falling to ground. This is a pure bloodthirsty massacre without any regard for their lives.
Click to expand...

Yep. And if they thought it was a sniper (as was reported, supposedly) why would they fire into the students just standing there. Shouldn't they have scoped out possible places that a sniper would shooting from? After all, a sniper doesn't stand in the middle of a crowd of students and fire.:roll:
 
jillio said:
Yep. And if they thought it was a sniper (as was reported, supposedly) why would they fire into the students just standing there. Shouldn't they have scoped out possible places that a sniper would shooting from? After all, a sniper doesn't stand in the middle of a crowd of students and fire.:roll:
Click to expand...

No, a sniper wouldn't stand in the middle of students and fire, but an agent provacateur would.

According to the Washington Times report - the FBI claims there was an actual sniper there.
 
deafskeptic said:
Stieny, I think you would do yourself a service if you were to exit from this thread before you embarrass yourself even further.
Click to expand...

I am not embarrassed as badly as you wish me to be. You can exit anytime you like.
 
Steinhauer said:
No, a sniper wouldn't stand in the middle of students and fire, but an agent provacateur would.

According to the Washington Times report - the FBI claims there was an actual sniper there.
Click to expand...

OMG! Now you are trying to take complete fiction and introduce it as speculation?:laugh2:

Just admit you are wrong about Kent State, and all will be forgiven. You just got in over your head.

Where was the sniper? How do they know a sniper was there is one has never been identifed and no shells from a sniper's gun were ever found? No one has ever proven that any shots were fired except the ones coming from the National Guard.

So, what, are you thinking that maybe Norman was the fictional sniper? Trust me, Steiny, men much smarter than you already tried to find every way in the world to mitigate the respsonsibility that falls directly on the Guardsmen. They finally gave up. You should too.
 
deafskeptic said:
Stieny, I think you would do yourself a service if you were to exit from this thread before you embarrass yourself even further.
Click to expand...

it's just as bad as saying Holocaust was a hoax
 
Steinhauer said:
No, a sniper wouldn't stand in the middle of students and fire, but an agent provacateur would.

According to the Washington Times report - the FBI claims there was an actual sniper there.
Click to expand...

ok..... so which one is it? sniper? or Terry?
 
Jiro said:
I see this....



70 seconds... that's 1 minute and 10 seconds long. Plenty of time for Guardsmen to check on each other to see if they were shot or not. I'm sorry but it's not a justifiable defense to shoot back 70 seconds later after they were "supposedly" shot at. Don't you think if somebody shot 4x, the crowd would just panic and disperse away?

They can easily retreat back to safety but no.... they were still standing. There was absolutely no need to fire dozens of military-grade rifles at a crowd of unarmed college students. They're not in Vietnam War.

wow... 70 seconds later.... and the massacre began.... wow..... if I were a Guardsman, I would be the only one not shooting at them. I would be repeatedly yelling - HOLD YOUR FIRE!!!!

They were shooting for 13 seconds. That's a very long time and that's also enough time for them to process in their head after seeing dozen of unarmed students falling to ground. This is a pure bloodthirsty massacre without any regard for their lives.
Click to expand...

I was told by someone "who was there" that absolutely NO SHOTS were fired before the National Guard opened fire.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top