Posted on 10/13/2005 10:04:33 AM PDT by Pikamax
I saw my first photo of Hinrich today. Looks like a arab-wanabe to me. I'm wondering if he was a potential person like the guy hanging out with Osama somewhere around Pakistan.
Thanks for the ping indcons.....keeping watch.
"Ug, Al Hunt? One of my least favorite WSJ "journalists." That explains a lot."
Miss Marple cracked the code about Al Hunt and the WSJ.
Besides the horrible once a week op eds attacking GW and conservatives, he was in charge of the polls done by the WSJ re politics and so called American feelings.
Last but not least he was in charge of hiring the non business reporters.
They wouldn't want anybody to think that the billions we've poured into the Department of Homeland Security was wasted now, would they? Islamo terrorism will only be real to the WSJ when the bomb goes off outside Peter Kann's front door, not in flyover country.
"Brian Eckert, News 9's managing editor, said the channel doesn't use blogs as sources in reporting and stands by Ms. Pratt's report."
Either he attended the mosque or didn't. I have Ms Pratt's reporting only to rely on..At the very least I consider this bombing influenced by Islam..Trying to buy the fertilizer was just too coincidental.
He may have been depressed but this story is more than of a depressed student who only wanted to harm himself. I believe he wanted to harm others ala Islamofascists bombers.
He chose a roommate, acquaintances who may have influenced his thinking.
The manner he chose to kill himself is unusual if not unique to everyday depressed suicides.
Thank you for the ping Miz. I replied to this editorial quickly on another thread.
The one thing that jumped out at me in this editorial is the mention of the "rebuffing" of Hinrichs at the security gates. I don't believe that's been proven FALSE by anyone. At least I haven't seen it anywhere...
I also keep in mind that the MSM is probably interested in discredited bloggers at this point due to the whole "Rathergate" fiasco...
I agree that this editorial serves to generate more interest in the whole story - not less... Which is definitely a good thing.
Thanks for posting... I'll have to look into that report. (o:
While the editorial page of the WSJ is reasonably conservative, the actual reporting itself is only slightly less Lefty than the rest of the L/MSM.
I head he had a case of spontaneous combustion. Either that or it was a lover's quarrel. Anyway, I'm happy I'm being looked out for, and have moved along because there is nothing to see there.
BUI?
No they only imply that it's false. Saying they examined the security tapes and found no evidence that he tried to get in. What they don't say is that most of the gates didn't have cameras, then, and some of the ones that did had the pointed not at the entrances, but rather at ticket booths and would not have picked up any action at the gate itself.
This alone makes me extremely suspicious. Add to that the idea that the roommate could have not known about all those explosives in his apartment, regardless of passing any lie detector test, and I think the evidence for a deliberate cover-up is strong. Now, the reasons for the apparent cover-up could be good and reasonable, or they could be bad and even ominous.
"While the editorial page of the WSJ is reasonably conservative, the actual reporting itself is only slightly less Lefty than the rest of the L/MSM."
During the last election, some of the BS spewing from the WSJ made the NY Slimes look moderate.
I stopped subscribing to the WSJ when Al Hunt became a whore and pimp for the Clintoons and a character assassin of George Bush. His opeds and some of the articles written by his hand pupptets were as vile as DU opeds.
Thanks for the ping and a big bump.
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.