Posted on 10/10/2005 1:27:09 PM PDT by LibertyRocks
One week and two days after the FBI began investigating the Joel Hinrichs case, the feds seemingly have stopped releasing information about what they have learned.
It’s time the FBI opened its files and provided The Daily, other media and the greater public with some of the answers it undoubtedly has, for more than one reason.
First, the public wants to know. Second, and almost more importantly, the longer this silence continues, the more students, faculty and the nation become “certain” in their “knowledge” of what has happened.
But that “knowledge” is based mostly on conjecture and hearsay, and while responsible media can attempt to stave off this unfortunate trend, they will ultimately lose that battle if the FBI fails to realize it has an obligation to speak because only they truly “know” what they have discovered.
Remember, the FBI has commandeered this investigation. In doing so and by not telling anyone anything, they are only allowing the events of Oct. 2 to be misinterpreted over and over by people who are firm in believing something that is false and terribly dangerous.
For example, unsubstantiated claims that Hinrichs had been frequenting the Norman mosque have managed to seep onto television news broadcasts even though everyone we have contacted at the mosque says Hinrichs was never seen there.
So who is lying? Inherently, people should perceive the unfounded news broadcasts as the liars, but that doesn’t always happen. And even if only one person sees and believes such a report there or online, word of mouth can transmit that “truth” to hundreds or thousands within a matter of days.
Which is why it is undeniably the duty of the FBI to break its unctuous vow of silence and talk to somebody. The longer the feds delay in doing so, the more they become equally responsible for misinformed social reactions as the hacks who started these rumors in the first place.
Beyond sick, because we are dealing with an event that could have cost many lives. And the consequences of this cover-up go beyond this one single event. This cover-up is just the latest chapter in a continuing sweeping under the rug of what's been going on in Norman/OKC for the past fifteen years. To cover up last week's attempted bombing not only denies what has occured in the past, it also leaves the door wide open for more events to occur in the future. It is to deny, repeatedly, the existence of a cancer and to allow it to continue to grow, consequences be damned.
Who is served by permitting this to be so? Who profits from this? Certainly not the public, which is left in the dark and at the mercy of forces intending to do great harm. Those who are required by duty to inform and protect the public seem to have chosen to betray that public instead, and to work hand-in-hand with the enemy. They have made it their mission, it seems, to shut our eyes to the danger, and to make it an offense to wish to survive. Are we sheep to be led to the slaughter, merely to satisfy someone's agenda? If this is what they believe, they are quite wrong.
I can't believe how naive I am....or was...
My son (OSU grad) first saw the original post about this. We immediately thought suicide bomber. Then I read your first posts that night....and have been following all the reports. Never did I think that the "despondent suicidal student" story would pass the smell test. I was certain that the MSM would jump all over it. Boy, was I dumb. :-(
Is the govt. afraid of some religeous war if we know the truth? If not, what is it? I'm sure you're asking the same questions....and deserve some answers! You and thousands of others were very close to being victims of this. And me and mine could be next. Just ticks me off! grrrrrrrr
But how far is he willing to go? How far are all the spinners willing to go? When one of these attacks finally succeeds as planned, the whole house of cards they've built up will collapse. What will they do then? What will they do when people are dead, the culprits are obvious, and Al Qaeda itself claims responsibility? Will they try to force the genie back into the bottle?
Your "blind hog" comment reminded me of something I wanted to point out in Hinrichs father's comments that has me puzzled. From watching the interview on MSNBC the other day it appears to me that his father is an incredibly intelligent individual - well-read and well-spoken. He is very succinct when choosing what he says.
One of his first interviews (when he was still somewhat emotional) included a question about his son being a possible terrorist. His comment in reply was; his son would be associated with Islamic terrorists "when pigs fly". Rather odd to me that he chose this comment instead of something more eloquent.
Perhaps I'm reading more into it, and perhaps I need a tin-foil hat for this post, but seeing as he was told right before this by the FBI to keep mum about certain things he might have given a clue even then. Even if his dad was sure he was associated with Muslims he couldn't come out and say that obviously... Perhaps the "pigs fly" comment was a reference to 9/11 and the Norman connection with Moussoui?
I tend to believe that the soda can in Penn Station was a false alarm... but what's to stop a terrorist from leaving behind a soda can filled with TATP? A soda can that will probably explode if someone comes along and moves it in any way?
So who is lying? Inherently, people should perceive the unfounded news broadcasts as the liars, but that doesn’t always happen. And even if only one person sees and believes such a report there or online, word of mouth can transmit that “truth” to hundreds or thousands within a matter of days."
In other words, reputable news organizations that have reported news these guys don't like are to be disbelieved and branded as liars in deference to people whose interests are at stake if THEY'RE lying. The last sentence tells me this editorial was written by someone who has much different priorities than freedom of the press. ("Here's your editorial. Sign it and publish it.")
Also check out the use of the words "lying" and "liars". This editorial was not written by a journalist. This editorial was written by someone who's almost hysterically denying something.
It's from the oudaily.com -- the college newspaper which might explain the spin.
Yes indeed. This isn't your typical editorial, which is why I described it as someone throwing down the gauntlet. It's quite in-your-face, pugnacious, and desperate at the same time. Someone is shouting, "Stop digging into this! Back off! Leave it alone!" It seems to be both a threat and a plea.
When I read it again, I envisioned someone sitting atop a pressure cooker whose lid is just about to blow off.
It's hard for me to have confidence in the FBI. When they were in charge of the Unabomber investigation, they were reluctant for years to release any information, believing it would be best to keep everything a secret. It was only the publication of the "manifesto" that made Ted Kaczynski's brother suspicious, and gave the FBI their big break.
Despite the reassuring statments from the O.U. president, the explosion on Saturday is suspicious on face-value. Lots of college students commit suicide, but they do so by hanging, jumping, overdose, or occasionally with firearms. And they often leave suicide notes, or similar pre-suicide threats. I wonder if we could find even one previous instance where a student killed himself by strapping on a large home-made explosive charge.
The O.U. explosion was on a Saturday, during a sold-out football game, about 100 yds from the stadium. The most reasonable conclusion is that the bomber intended to enter the stadium. Perhaps he had already approached the stadium, but was deterred by the searches at the entry gates. He may have walked to the bench to consider his next move, such as reconfiguring his bomb to foil a search, or waiting until the game was over and the crowds were exiting.
Whatever happened, we were lucky the bomb cooked off while Hinrichs was on that bench.
I believe the O.U. president's statements about as much as I believe that WWII Kamikaze attacks were conducted by depressed Japanese pilots who just wanted to kill themselves.
IED's seem to be popping up all over the place, near or on campuses. 'Tis the season for depressed students to all suddenly off themselves by explosion, I guess.
Effectively nothing. Someone rigged up a pressurized coke bottle with a couple of firecrackers, was the report I saw. A big noisemaker. Probably by some bored kids in the dorms.
So of course it was described as a "terrorist event".
He did try to enter the stadium, three times, according to witnesses. But those reports are being contradicted by Boren and the FBI.
In my view, he went to the bench to transfer the bomb from the backpack to under his clothes. And during that transfer, he accidentally set off the bomb. If he hadn't blown himself up, he would have gotten into the stadium, because they wouldn't have patted him down.
okc is just a drop in the bucket.
Let's talk about all of Klintoons escapades like selling his soul to the chineese.
Oklahoma. Randy Weaver and family, Waco,Long Island plane "fuel tank and wiring problems"? give us a little credit.
Not to mention the little problem they had what with framing an innocent to do the time so a murderer can be protected cause he was their snitch?
Suffice it to say I can go on and on and on but let's just say I wouldn't trust the f,b,i. to investigate a basic b & e
The Georgia Tech incident was hardly a "prank", IMHO. 3 devices found and only one exploded thank God. If all 3 had gone off, it might have been much worse.
Even so, the janitor was injured - burns to his hands and was taken to the hospital. Again, there were 3 devices found. With all the reports coming in about these things all over the country (Georgia, LA, OU, East Chicago, NYC etc...) it's kind of hard not to see a pattern here.
I think it's right for the FBI and other agencies to take these things seriously especially in light of the recent threat aired by Al Qaeda using a college-aged American student.
You can choose to disagree though, but I think it's important not to take these incidents lightly. When someone pulls a "prank" like this (if it was a prank) in a public place they need to be seriously reprimanded. It's one thing to experiment where you know no-one would be injured it's another to do so in a public place.
Well ya don't think they're gonna tell ya if he was do ya!??!?!
Has the Islamic Center, mosque and Jihad terrorist training club released their tapes????
Sorry didn't see you had asked until now. Saw another person who had asked the same thing. (o: You can find links and such about the Georgia Tech incident in post #16.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.