Well, as it turns out, he lied.

But, he was in the Senate, so we could sort of expect that :)

http://www.oudaily.com/vnews/display.../4344a2c30d701

I find that "News9" website really slow, having tried to use it in the past.

Above is a link to the campus newspaper page which, in turn, has some more links to related stories.

On the paper's home page, there are four links to comments by President Boren and the FBI.

Was it Hank?

-Rudey

Who's Hank?

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...postid=1106778

-Rudey

Ah...

Thanks for the clarification.

I thought you might have been making a comment about the O.U. President, who is a former U.S. Senator and might have confused him with Hank Brown, a former U.S. Senator who is President of the University of Colorado.

I haven't read any of "your" Hank's stuff. And probably won't.

October 10, 2005 Previous Post
Is Lack Of Big Media Coverage Of Oklahoma Explosion OK?
Has there been more happening at the University of Oklahoma than hazing and all-nighters? The blogosphere, led by Michelle Malkin, has been chronicling the suspicious explosion at the University of Oklahoma just over a week ago, and wondering why the big media doesn’t appear interested.

According to most reports, Joel Hinrichs III was a young man with a history of depression who used a homemade explosive device to commit suicide just 100 yards or so from the school’s football stadium, which was filled with over 80,000 people at the time. Officials were quick to call the incident a suicide, but rumors and reports of Hinrichs’ attempts to buy large quantities of ammonium nitrate and ties to the Muslim community have raised a lot of questions and the answers thus far are not forthcoming.

The Oklahoma Daily, OU’s independent campus paper, lays blame on the FBI today for the confusion:

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.
Many, Malkin included, have wondered where the MSM is on this story. As the Oklahoma Daily editorial notes, local television has covered it and a quick Google search turns up (sometimes conflicting) reports in local and regional newspapers but no major media outlets appear to have picked up the story yet. We asked CBS News national editor Bill Felling, who told us the network is looking into the story. Let’s hope so, it’s one worth airing, whatever the facts are.

It could also be that a suicidal man who blew himself up is a 3rd or 4th string story behind other national and international new events - Katrina, Rita, Pakistani Earthquake, Iraq, Supreme Court nominations, NOPD investigations, and the NYC Subway scare.

Is it just me, or is that last story really scattered?

First, it asks the question whether "big" media should pay more attention to the story. Then it worries that "rumors" are being reported. Then it takes on the FBI for "commendeering the investigation. Then about mosques. Then it talks about "liars." Then it says the FBI should release more information.

Which point would the story hope to make?

Here's the probable answer as to why the national media hasn't jumped on the story:

Officially, at least at this point, it's a suicide. Generally, media tend to shy away from covering suicides for the sake of the surviving family members involved. If this hadn't happened in such a public place, it might not have been reported at all -- even in local media.

As I said earlier in this thread, we were on campus the night of the bombing. The phrase "suicide bombing" was used. There's a huge difference between a "suicide bombing" and someone committing suicide with a bomb. Had the deceased set off the bomb inside the stadium and taken a bunch of people with him, you can bet the story would get bigger play. As of yet, I've not heard of any hard evidence that he tried to get into the stadium -- only rumors, not hard facts. (Remember that, contrary to what TV tells us, eyewitness accounts are not generally strong evidence because if ten people see an event, you will likely get ten different versions of the story.)

Unless the investigating agencies come up with proof of some kind of conspiracy, not just rumor, inuendo and unproven eyewitness accounts, the national media will continue its lack of coverage.