As would we all. Which is the title of the thread.
According to this source he had a Pakistani roommate and lived near a Mosque:
Media softpedaling: “It took local media to learn that authorities found bomb-making material in Hinrichs’ apartment. And as far as we can tell, there’s been no mention on network news of Hinrichs’ attempt to buy ammonium nitrate a few days before his death.” IBD: http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&artnum=1&issue=20051007
“There’s also at least one report, unconfirmed and doubted by O.U.'s Muslim Student Association president, that Hinrichs, whose Pakistani roommate attended a local mosque, had converted to Islam. Meanwhile, local TV is claiming that Hinrichs was a frequent visitor at the same Islamic mosque that Zacarias Moussaoui, known as the 20th 9-11 hijacker, attended in 2000.”
It appears that the NYT has devoted only 131 words to the story (but maybe I searched poorly):
I did see a WAPO link though:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/07/AR2005100700023.html
So much for the facts. Now for some opinions.
We’ve confirmed #1 and #6 (props to Andros for pulling together the list). There is some evidence for #3.
Should the FBI be investigating this? Oh yes, IMHO. Intensively (though with proper discretion).
Should the media be giving the story a lot of airplay, given that this could be a straightforward suicide case? Well it’s a judgment call, but I say no. To state the obvious, most Mosque attenders have no intention of committing despicable acts. The evidence for international involvement to this date is laughable, and drumming up hysteria would be irresponsible.
Nationally speaking, I’d relegate the story to page 15.
Thanks, Measure for Measure.
So, there’s not much hard fact to support the conspiracy/terrorism hypothesis. Of course, the fact that the media aren’t reporting only goes to show that there really is evidence and they’re just covering it up.
I’m not certain of that latter, actually. At least, if we assume that the major media outlets have deliberately failed to investigate the story, what is their motivation for doing so?
Tell that to the “shoe bomber.”
Let me set aside “coverup” in favor of “soft-peddling”.
The NYT has devoted 1 paragraph to the story, as far as I can tell. Why?
My Answer: This is the New York Times we’re talking about. They pride themselves in evading and soft-peddling sensationalism.
Furthermore, I suspect that at this stage a lot of editors feel squeemish about tarring Mosque attenders with the acts of a depressed college student, pending additional information. Playing this story up could make them look like jackasses down the road.
Or not. (IMHO, the real question is whether the FBI will devote sufficient resources to this low probability- high payoff lead.)
I suppose that it could be a coverup, if lots of media reports would complicate an imminent bust. But I doubt it: getting the media to delay a story for even 24-48 hours is fairly hard.
I know the mosque in question; it’s in the middle of cheap housing, including off-campus student apartments. In fact, I lived in two different apartments that could be considered “near” the mosque. There are probably 1000 people who live within a mile radius; if you’ve ever attended the Medieval Fair, it’s in the park on the north side of the street from that mosque. Ever celebrated St. Patrick’s Day at O’Connell’s, you’ve been within two blocks of it (and, coincidentally, less than 50 feet from the apartment I used to live in. We HATED St Pat’s.)
I don’t think “living near a Mosque” is any more suspicious for a college student in Norman than having cockroaches or eating ramen.
Corrvin
They do what on the which now? Can you show anything specific which led you to that belief, or is it more of a gestalt thing?
I would agree that there are a lot of students near the Mosque in Norman and the geographic proximity of the apartment and the mosque are inconsequential. However, I would like to know if the kid converted or not and if so, whether he actively attended the Mosque. If so, was he put up to this by anyone?
It seems the explosives he used was triacetone triperoxide
(aka, mother of satan) which is also favored by Palestinian bombers. Now that doesn’t mean much, but could someone whip up the stuff and detonators and the like with only a few days notice without help? It seems like he was planning on going with fertilizer up until a few days before. I’m sure the FBI is doing their job though.
What I’d really like to know is if the bomb employed shrapnel like bearings or nails. If it did, that really shoots down Boren’s theory of an old fashioned troubled student suicide. Well, it at least makes it a damn irresponsible suicide. If I still lived in Norman I’d go down there myself and see if there was anything to dig out of any trees in the shrapnel department. And I’d go have a beer at O’Connell’s
Other that rumors, I’ve seen nothing credible to indicate that Hinrichs ever went to the Mosque. Just as I’ve seen nothing credible saying that there were “weapons” in his apartment. And his Pakistani roommate was released shortly after questioning.
And there’s still a lack of evidence that he tried to enter the stadium.
It’s a gestalt thing. Meaning, my substantiation is vague and those who are not long-time or avid readers of the NYT should take these remarks with a grain of salt.
Ok, I recall a Sunday paper discussion by their ombudsman on their treatment of the latest shmooze story (eg OJ). A lot of this boils down to column inches and front page placement, elements which are less relevant in an internet context.
In the more distant past, I also seem to recall the mumblings of Rosenthal, when he discussed the treatment of another shmooze story.
There is also my general impression that the Times is a Serious Paper, while the AP wires are (for example) superficial. Oh, and the Times doesn’t have the standard comics (too bad, IMHO), Dear Abby or horoscopes.
Then there is the “Circle the wagons” stance that the Times adopts in matters of national security, which can be glimpsed in their treatment of GWBush’s odd visible bulges during the (first?) debate with Kerry. When the White House trotted out a hapless tailor who bemoaned the terrible-terrible job he had done on W’s suit, the Times reported this with their typical journalistic skepticism on hold. I approve, BTW.
More controversially, some have claimed that the Times has a tendancy to hoe to the State Department line, especially when it comes to non-major foreign policy issues. On this point I’m more agnostic, however.
A couple of new things:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2005/10/10/publiceye/entry931118.shtml
The “liberal” rag, The Wall Street Journal says there’s nothing there.
And another link , from yesterday Suicide Message.
Answers most of my questions except one. How obvious was his obsession with artillery shells and explosives. His foreign roommate now has an FBI file with his name on it and that’s unfortunate.
What’s more, there aren’t hundreds of suicides or murders every by all methods combined.
I am reminded of the story of the teenager who swiped a Cessna and put it into the side of an office tower in Tampa.
archives.cnn.com/2002/US/01/05/tampa.crash
One expected a nationwide media sensation but the story pretty much died immediately, morphing into an obscure lawsuit over how a certain acne medication causes depression (so says the mom’s lawyers).
We can’t expect flashy graphics and foreboding theme music every time someone whacks themselves, especially if no innocent bystanders get caught up in the act. Even if you are a semi-semi-famous person (i.e. Charles Rocket, Spalding Gray etc.) it’s a two day story at best.