Posted on 10/11/2005 6:44:58 AM PDT by JustaCowgirl
Yes, it does say so - just check the phrase at the top of this article from this link. However, I dont see it stated in the actual article.
http://nebraska.statepaper.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/10/07/434694f129a59
That would be good, if you could write the author. I would be interested to hear what reply - if any - you receive from the author.
There is no way to know that. Making such a determination so quickly was based on handling the public perception not the safety of the public. JMO
A real case of CYA.
read later
Wow, I just went and read the piece you linked. I had heard jokes and innuendo for a long time about Boren being gay, but it was mostly from OSU people (fans, not administration), and I thought it was just idle trash talk based on nothing but his appearance. Looks like there's a lot more to it than that.
The kicker in this whole thing is that he has so much power in Oklahoma, and Oklahoma is about as conservative a state socially and politically as there is. So, I would assume that the majority of Oklahomans know nothing of this, or dismiss it as idle chatter putting down an honorable politician. It's a testament to his power that he was able to just take the OU Presidency when he wanted it.
Was Edward Gaylord a particular supporter of Boren? I wouldn't think that (his being offered the OU Presidency) would have happened if Gaylord hadn't wanted it. This whole OU situation just keeps getting stranger and stranger.
I think you're right. This opinion piece doesn't seem to have been very carefully researched or written. If I had seen all these errors, I think I would not have posted the article.
I think you're right. This opinion piece doesn't seem to have been very carefully researched or written. If I had seen all these errors, I think I would not have posted the article.
I missed them when I posted it as well. Live and learn I guess. (o:
I didn't know you had posted it. Sorry, I didn't do a good enough search I guess.
No apologies necessary. Better to have more people keeping their eye out for these stories than not enough! (o:
Here's another little tidbit about Boren... The morning of Sept 11, 2001, he was with his good friend, George Tenet and they were talking about terrorism. Shortly after that the first plane hit the WTC. It was the opening paragraph in "Bush at War".
I have written to Mr. Allen via their website form and checked the box marked inaccuracies. I have supplied him with my personal email address, and I wrote a pretty detailed message. I requested sources for the "OU Statement" and the Cheema/Palestinian comment. I will post here any response I receive from this inquiry.
There are an awful lot of tidbits that at least tangentially involve Boren and terrorism-related activities, aren't there? It seems as though some of the lay lines of terrorism intersect in Norman and run through Boren's office.
"It seems as though some of the lay lines of terrorism intersect in Norman and run through Boren's office."
So, Boren had close ties to Tenet, was in Tenet's office discussing terrorism when the first plane struck on 9/11 in fact. Prior to the bombing of the Murrah Building, he resigned the senate rather suddenly and mid-term, to accept the post at OU, a rather unusual step for a senator to take. He has been something of an apologist for Pakistanis and Muslim students at while at OU, but to be fair, he is not unique in that regard. He has, or is rumored to have, a past that would make him, shall we say, controllable. His behavior during the course of this supposed, lone suicide by Joel Henry Hinrichs, III, has only fanned the flames of suspicion.
Why would the head of a state university have the entanglements that Boren has, or seems to have? It's tempting to say that the timing of his sudden resignation is intriguing.
This story about Iraqi Republican Guard, some 2,000 of them, being relocated to Oklahoma after Gulf War I ... that's a Jayna Davis thing, isn't it? When was it, that this relocation was supposed to have occurred, and has there been any rationale put forth as to just why?
Is this "square one" for all the unusual happenings in OK? Between the ending of Gulf War I and the Murrah Building bombing?
Stephen Emerson really laid out the Oklahoma Connection to terrorism in "American Jihad". I read it right after Sept 11 and it gave me chills. I lived in OKC when the Murrah Building was bombed. They never did find the "owner" of the leg with part of camoflauge pants and a military boot.
From "Importing Terrorism" by William Norman Grigg,
The New American, April 7, 2003:
At the end of the first Gulf War in 1991, the first Bush administration began a program, which the Clinton administration continued, to resettle thousands of Iraqi POWs in the United States at taxpayer expense. “According to the State Department, the former prisoners were conscripted into the Iraqi Army against their will and have now been classified by international agencies [meaning the UN] as refugees who face persecution by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s regime if they return home,” reported the August 25, 1993 Washington Post.
When news leaked of the $70 million resettlement effort, a bipartisan group of 75 congressmen sent a letter of protest to the White House. “We find it disturbing that American taxpayers must fund the travel of former Iraqi soldiers (who took up arms against our own soldiers) to the U.S.,” declared the letter. “Ironically, we provide the [Iraqi POWs] with welfare services while asking our own veterans and service personnel to bear the burdens of deficit reduction.”
Alluding to propaganda leaflets used to encourage Iraqi soldiers to surrender, Congressman Clifford Stearns (R-Fla.) wryly commented: “When we dropped those leaflets on the Republican Guard, we did not include a plane ticket to Middle America and welfare entitlement benefits. When those guys realized the war was lost, they changed into civilian clothes and surrendered, and now we’re rolling out the red carpet.”
Hitting up taxpayers to subsidize former Iraqi troops is outrageous. Bilking taxpayers to support potential Iraqi terrorist agents is potentially suicidal — and Saddam’s intention to infiltrate terrorists into this country was well known more than a decade ago. The Washington Post reported on January 28, 1991 that, according to “highly classified U.S. intelligence reports,” Saddam Hussein had “dispatched more than 100 terrorists, both experienced and novice, to try to infiltrate the United States.”
All I know about that is what I have read here on FR. Does anyone have independent verification or further information to validate that this actually happened? 2000 people being relocated to the same place don't just disappear, there would be some people who knew some facts about their fate after they got here. I'd like to see some other verification that this actually happened.
I agree with you, the last 10-12 years seems to have been a time period where there were some strange happenings in the state of Oklahoma, and some strange happenings and coincidences surrounding Norman and Boren. Given the rumors about him, and his need to have a very different public persona than the one rumored, it isn't at all hard to imagine that somebody might have Boren in a pretty tight headlock.
I'm still curious as to why Oklahoma, for the resettlement of these Iraqi Republican Guard members. Fort Sill? They were reportedly not just ordinary Republican Guard, but military intelligence. Or, was it something as simple as the climate and topography being somewhat similar to Iraq?
A correction is needed: The reports of aluminum nitrate don't exist.
It's ammonium nitrate.
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.