Orangeburg Massacre?

[Anonymous]

Feb. 12, 2005 - A bill has been filed that would create a commission to investigate the Orangeburg Massacre.

A ceremony Tuesday marked the 37th anniversary of state troopers firing on a group of unarmed black students during a civil rights protest at South Carolina State University, killing three and injuring 27.

Democratic Senator Robert Ford's bill would create a three-member panel to investigate the incident and recommend what compensation should be made to the victims and their families. A similar bill died last year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think the word "Massacre" is a bit extreme, The Little Big Horn, that's a "Massacre". The fall of Troy, that's a "Massacre". Car bombings in Iraq, that's a "Massacre".


When I think of the word "Massacre" I think of people minding their own business and someone opens up on them or when someone under estimates their opponent and gets wiped out.

Murder, Shooting and Hate Crime would be more accurate in this case.

IMHO

[Anonymous]

an accusation of murder would carry criminal charges even today. do we really need this to go to a trial which would be more divisive than the original incident? would it solve any of the underlying probelms which caused this incident.

shooting carries with it the implication of randomness. there was nothing random about this event, it had fomented on campus and the surrounding community for years.

"hate crime" is applying the mores of today to a situation almost forty years old. we can take any situation from the past out of context, and apply our current value judgements. does it make the situation better by applying what we consider to be a more enlightened opinion? no.

would it solve anything for England(or Christians in general) to pay reparations for the Crusades? how would you even calculate the cost? what is the value of human life and when do we as a nation stop beating our modern selves up over the sins of the past? we will never advance until the cult of guilt is placed in its proper context.

an apology is all that is owed in this situation. it was a tragedy, but to apply the term massacre is to cheapen the word for times when it is applicable. think of Sudan, Bosnia, Chechnya...those are and continue to be places where massacre is given its true meaning.

this is just my humble opinion, and you may take it for what it is worth.

[Anonymous]

Why not simply GET OVER IT! These people should quit looking for ways to make people who had nothing to do with their troubles pay them money for sitting on their butt's.

[Anonymous]

I believe a problem in this country revolve around what people think they can get rather than what they can contribute. To start a bill in the Senate, to have a panel to investigate, costs taxpaying time that can be used solving other problems and reforming bad law. Instead we are looking to give people money to make better the loss of life from a bad situation. I am not educated enough on the shooting to argue its circumstances but I can say that I am against any of my tax money going to study whether people should get money for these acts of the past. If it is apparent enough for our government to publicly say it was a bad shooting then I assume it was, but that being said either sufficient probable cause exists for charges or it does not. Either way a simple acknowledgment of heartfelt sorrow at the loss of life during a tumultuous time in our history going out to those families involved as we as a nation learned from our past should suffice rather than monetary reparations that will not bring anyone back.

[Anonymous]

everybody is always looking for the free dollar so that they don't have to work because they are to lazy. well the incident did'nt happen to you and i don't think you should get a red cent. let the people whose lives it did change know that you feel for them and you care for them. don't go try to get someting that doesn't belong to you. you're selfish and to sorry to work.i agree with the one above, why should our tax dollars go to give you money because you're to sorry to get out and get a job. that's sorriness and down right laziness.

[Anonymous]

I did some research into this and the premise goes that 4 years prior the court decided desegregation is what is proper. This one bowling alley years later refuses to listen and the guy is chosen for a demonstration that he is wrong. The first day goes all right and everyone leaves the second get a little crazier and 15 demonstrators go to jail. The next day at SC State they hold another demonstration where they get rowdy and VANDALIZE property and set a big FIRE in the road. The cops are called and put out the fire in the street. Well the demonstrators make another fire in the street and the police come back out. The demonstrators set some grass fires and damage a vacant nearby house where a piece of a banister is removed and used to hit a COP in the head. The demonstrators are actively throwing bottles and rocks at the COPS.---- That part of the story is the same in about every site. (I think it is best that each of you research this topic also)--- Now there are some differences because some say that the cops thought the one cop hit in the head with the banister was shot and so they shot into the crowd for their safety, another says warnings shots were fired into the air and the other cops started shooting into the crowd then out of fear and then another says it was an ambush by the cops.

The nine officers were held in federal court and were let go saying that there actions were not murderous or egregious because under the circumstances they could have thought their lives were in danger. And hence we get to the next topic....

Now lets remember this was 1968 and this was a hard transition for a lot of hardheaded people on both sides. The cops are not trained the same as today and probably did not have the gear the cops do now. Cops today have tazers and mace guns and guns with rubber bullets. Much of the riot gear and training they have today came from the bad lessons learned during the last 60's and early 70's. And lastly.....

For a Charleston Democrat to decide that a tax paid commission is needed to decide compensation for these 30 families is unwarranted. There was a riot of people burning property and attacking cops! That has been undisputed!

[Anonymous]

it wasn't a riot. The STUDENTS were on school property not "in the road". It was a controlled fire on school ground. Same type of barn fire seen at many pep rallies. Remember cops weren't all lawful and abiding back then when it came to race relations. I do agree that money isn't going to make it right, however aknowledgement of not only the event but also of the cover-up afterwards is needed.

[Anonymous]

The problem is I don't hear anyone demanding an apology, just a check. The government has acknowledged this event many times and has admitted/accepted their share of the blame, but no one on the rioting side has accepted any blame or responsibility for creating this situation in the first place.

An apology I would like to see offered, but money never.

[Anonymous]

I know this got little media attention, but Sanford made a statement of apology for the Orangeburg Massacre. He said:

Title: Gov. Sanford Issues Statement on 'Orangeburg Massacre'
Location: Columbia, SC
Date: 02/08/2003
Gov. Sanford Issues Statement on 'Orangeburg Massacre'

STATEMENT APOLOGIZES TO AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY

Governor Mark Sanford today issued the following statement on today's observance of the 35th Anniversary of what has become known as the 'Orangeburg Massacre:' "Mine and Jenny's thoughts and prayers go out to the friends and families of Henry Smith, Samuel Hammond and Delano Middleton on what is a difficult day not just for them but also for our state. While we pause during the celebration of Black History Month to observe the 35th anniversary of this tragedy, I think it's appropriate to tell the African-American community in South Carolina that we don't just regret what happened in Orangeburg 35 years ago – we apologize for it."

Is this apology enough? Who wants more, and why? What is the purpose of a bill? I think South Carolininas need to move forward, not "get over it" but move beyond it. :D

[Anonymous]

it wasn't a riot. The STUDENTS were on school property not "in the road". It was a controlled fire on school ground. Same type of barn fire seen at many pep rallies. Remember cops weren't all lawful and abiding back then when it came to race relations. I do agree that money isn't going to make it right, however aknowledgement of not only the event but also of the cover-up afterwards is needed.

SO WHAT?!?! They started a FIRE. I dont care if it was a "peacefull" demonstration or not...pardon the pun...but...I cant resist..you play with FIRE..and your going to get BURNED!

I have to agree with the earlier post..I consider a "massacre" to be something such as the JonesTown Massacre...or that crazy guy with the big afro that killed 9 of his kids...that were born out of incest! Thats a massacre. This was just a racial clash. I think that we have moved so far away from those days...WHY DO PEOPLE CONSTANTLY FEEL THE NEED TO DRUDGE UP ALL OF THESE THINGS! Get over it!

[Anonymous]

Because they want free money! Just like the move for reparations, show me one person that would receive money from reparations that was a slave and I'll agree to paying. If you can't do it, then shut the hell up.

[Anonymous]

As the social satirist said," I will gladly pay a person who can prove they were my slave a million dollars for every year I kept them in chains."

[synfuld3c13t]

well said "Tired of it" :twisted:

[Anonymous]

IT IS ALL ABOUT MONEY!!!!!!!! .Cry loud enough and the government will give it to you. Ask Jessie Jackson.

[Unregistered]

in the news again

Bump

[swampfox]

How loud do I have to cry, and how long?

I'll get that new bass boat yet!

[swampfox]

You know there was another massacre on the news lately because some new evidence came to light. The one at Kent State University in 1970 where four unarmed war protestors were shot dead by Ohio National Guardsmen. The new evidence was a tape recording of whoever was in charge of the Guardsmen telling the men to ready their weapons, then basically "get set, fire". This was significant because we had always wanted to believe the theory that it was a few guardsmen who just lost their nerve and started shooting. The fact, as we now know, that it was a planned tactic should be shocking to us. The students were unarmed. They had neither fired not displayed weapons. It was one of those moments that makes you rethink everything.

Had the students in Orangeburg fired or displayed weapons? I have never heard that they did. Tell me if I'm wrong. To have American soldiers or police officers fire into a crowd of Americans exercising their constitutional rights is a horror to imagine. But what if the "peaceably assemble(d)" crowd gets out of control but still don't show weapons or give any indication that they might (as happened at both Orangeburg and Kent State), well, hell, don't these guys get any training that would allow them to control such situations when the only apparent danger is property damage? What if a whole building burned down? Is that worth one American life, or any life for that matter?

The incidents that happen these days are different, possibly because, in part, of what happened back then. Now we have peaceable crowds protesting another war, like the one on the road to Bush's ranch in Crawford Texas a couple of years ago, and still somebody tries to kill them. (Once by trying to crash a pickup into them, and others who were stopped by police when they were trying to approach the protesters with weapons.) And these protestors were not even threatening, verbally or otherwise, to destroy PROPERTY! Still we have low-down-in-the-gutter neighbors who want to see them dead because they disagree. We have been masterfully taught through simple techniques over the years to believe that anybody who disagrees is the ENEMY! Real ideas passing around from neighbor to neighbor sometimes seem like a lost cause.

AND, on the other hand, we have large groups of actual criminals (gangs and "militias") who must be handled by law enforcers with weapons because they fire and display weapons readily. Still a tragedy, but unavoidable at the moment when it happens. Maybe earlier, but not then.

If we have really become so dumb that we can't tell wrong from right and are willing to kill as a result, God have mercy on us in the future because we will not stand as a country very far into it.

[better days]

It's easy to reflect on the past and have a totally different view of things. Today we see the guardsmen and state troopers as criminals and the rioters as saints. My sister was a telephones operator in Orangeburg during the years of the race riots and believe me the saftey of my sister was all that mattered to me. The state troopers did their job. Operators were locked inside and were not allowed to leave unless at their own risk. The job of keeping the phones working in those days required real people on the job. To get a more clear picture of the situation a person would have to read the old newspaper accounts of the daily lawlessness and life threatening peril innocent whites faced just to go to work and make a living.

[swampfox]

I don't see the rioters as saints by any stretch of imagination. They were lawless crowds committing criminal acts but I do think that there must have been some way better than firing into the crowd. It's true I wasn't there in Orangeburg and I can't know how I would have seen it if I had been there instead of relying on the historical record. I don't think that I would have shot anybody though.

The shootings at Kent State were, however, on television, and I saw them there. There is a non-fiction book about that event by James Michener that gives valuable insight into what happened. And now we have the tape recording that indicates that the shooting was ordered.

Everybody has lines that they will NOT cross. I think that using firearms to kill people who are not using or displaying firearms is beyond most of our lines. Maybe I'm wrong.

[Unregistered¾]

ORANGEBURG, SC (WIS) - A former Highway Patrol officer on the firing line at the Orangeburg Massacre is speaking for the first time about what he says happened.

While he regrets the deaths and injuries suffered, the former patrolman doesn't blame the troopers that day.

"It's terrible. We didn't want it to happen. I hate that it happened," says former trooper Jim Powers.

Nine patrolmen shot at black protestors on the campus of South Carolina State University that day.

"I wanted to tell this before I died, didn't want these lies to go on forever," says Powers.

For the first time on camera, Powers relives what he says happened on February 8, 1968, that left three students dead and dozens injured.

"Do you defend the actions of the people on that line with you?" asks WIS News 10's Dan Tordjman.

"Absolutely, self-defense," Powers says.

Powers says his fellow officers had no choice but to shoot when students started tearing off pieces of a campus building. Then, Powers says, protestors formed a semi-circle around then-student, Cleveland Sellers.

Powers says, "These students brought with them two-by-fours with nails in them, banister supports with nails in them. He tells them to come at us ... so they all line up with weapons and come at us."

"To charge you?" Dan asks.

"Yes sir."

Powers disputes accounts that the officers simply started shooting. He says a sergeant gave an order to fire, but the patrolmen showed restraint.

Then, as the students neared, the sergeant once again, called out. "He says, 'They're coming at you with deadly weapons. What are you going to do when they get here? Commence fire!' and everybody started shooting."

That is, everybody except Powers. He says the clip fell out of his gun when he tried firing. Moments later, Powers says he pulled out a whistle, trying to get the officers to stop shooting. "I resigned six months later. I didn't go into the Highway Patrol to kill people."

Still, Powers defends the officers on his line. Instead, he's blaming the tragedy on the man he says provoked it, Mr. Sellers. "Mr. Sellers is the one responsible for the deaths. He directed it; he instigated it. It would not have happened if it wasn't for him."

Sellers has said, "There was no evidence then, nor ever, that I committed a crime."

Sellers denied any wrongdoing, speaking at South Carolina State on the anniversary of the Massacre. At the time, Sellers was arrested, jailed and convicted for rioting. He was later pardoned. "I don't want them to hate me. I'd be willing to take a lie-detector test," he said.

Even more vivid for Powers is a memory of carrying Delano Middleton's bullet-ridden body to the side of a road - all the blood, and shell-casings, and what it felt like to be on the side of the officers accused of doing wrong. "Which was the right side? We swore to uphold the law ... and we did."

Moving forward there's a vision most would agree with. Powers says, "That was a terrible time, too much hate. We've got to do better."

Jim Powers says he's been wanting to tell that story for 40 years, and again says he's willing to take a lie-detector test if Cleveland Sellers does.

WIS News 10 tried to reach Sellers several times Friday, but we couldn't.

We should note that several years ago Governor Sanford apologized for the role state law enforcement played that day.

[Unregistered917y3ci78]

Ahh For The Love of Crumbcake !!

[swampfox]

Crumbcake is pretty darn good! With a cold glass o' cow milk? Shooooot!!

[better days]

I think that's a great idea. Sellers should agree to the lie detector test. Let's clear this up so the public has both sides of the story. Nothing is ever mentioned about the rioting or fear the towns people lived in. Only a sanitized version of happy young peace loving kids, holding hands and singing around the bonfire.