News Conference Held About Bombs At Mosque

News Conference Held About Bombs At Mosque
Reported by: Jenell Walton
Web produced by: Liz Foreman
Photographed by: 9News
First Posted: 12/21/2005 9:34:55 AM
Last updated: 12/21/2005 1:15:34 PM

http://www.wcpo.com/news/2005/local/12/21/mosque.html

Local religious, political and law enforcement leaders held a press conference Wednesday morning concerning Tuesday night's pipe bombing at a Clifton mosque.

The FBI says the incident has not been classified as a hate crime, but it will be looked at as such.

"No group has claimed responsibility for this act," said Stanley Borgia of the FBI, adding that law enforcement will not stop until the suspect or suspects are identified and brought to justice.
...

"One of the explosions blasted a hole through the ceiling and the roof of the porch and then struck the soffit then blew out the glass," Cincinnati Police Chief Tom Streicher said.

"If people had been there...there was the potential for people to be injured. Or the way the glass was shattered, it could have resulted in death," he added.



Peace

...or Bolton?

Are they going to count this as one or are they going to define terrorism as only when someone of the Islamic faith attacks Christians?

were in the mosque, not the mosque Being bombed.
Though it deserves it, I'm not going to hold
my breath for this to be investigated as a "terror"
related incident.

if it were a church instead? I do.

First, they need to establish why the bomb was there. Then, they can make a determination. More than likely, it was a hate crime. There is the remote possibility it was a murder plot against one of the members of the Mosque for reasons other than religion. My opinion is that the target was the Mosque, and is, therefore, a hate crime.

is that Arab vs. Wasp?

I said nothing about terrorism.

and the reason why I replied to your post was because you seem to be clear as to what constitutes a 'hate-crime', and I was adding another 'label' to the mix. I find it very interesting in these times, how words are used and defined...especially in regards to the application of law.

I have no issue with it being called a terrorist attack/event. Hate crimes are terrorist attacks by nature. However, I think the term "terrorist attack" depends on the size of the "event," but that may not always be true. I just don't know. The attacks in Atlanta, during the Olympics, are a good example. The attack at the concert grounds were called a terrorist attack, but the attack on the lesbian bar was called a hate crime. The only difference was someone was killed at the concert.

Here's the thing...To my mind, the first question following anything involving the word 'bomb'...is terrorist threat. This story is interesting in the lack of the word 'terrorist', but the injection of the word 'hate-crime'. So in my mind the analogy of hate-crime=wasp=a couple of years vs. terrorist=Arab=torture/life scentence/death. I apologize if I offended you...that wasn't my intent.

NOW I see what you are saying! I wasn't at all offended, I just wasn't understanding what your point was. It is much more clear what you are saying. I can agree that the wording is curious. We see that with a variety of topics and issues, where if it is one group involved or affected, then the terminology of the report can be different, sometimes radically different.

I appreciate you making your point clearer for me (unless, I again missed it, and just think "I got it!" LOL). :hi:

:toast: it's everywhere...and it's infuriating...like the 'criminalization of politics', or the 'looters' in New Orleans vs. the 'finders'. And it is not just words..it's what they imply in terms of criminal charges.:scared:

I know that federal hate crime laws can increase a jail sentence or punishment. Is there something similar for an act of terrorism? I looked around and nothing jumped out immediately (but it wasn't a very through search). I know someone can be charged with terrorism, but I don't think it changes sentencing laws.

Language is very important, but the real issue now should be finding those who did this.

than the redundancy should be obvious. If eco groups are being labled as terrorists, if pacifistic quakers are spied on for threats of a terroristic nature than this sure as shit is a terrorist attack.

ALso there is no way this was to murder someone. Pipe bombs are not known for accuracy and the size of these ones would not have in any way shape or form taken out the whole Mosque. Therefore why would anyone use these particular pipe bombs to murder someone? Either they'd blow the whole building to get the person they wanted or used some other means of assassination.

In the end I am inclined to believe that this was a small group of late teens inspired by the hate for Muslims in this country brought on by the neoconning of America. This group if it exists probably does have some sort of "play" ideology and any way you cut it the current conatative understanding of "Terrorist" certainly fits the bill here.

A hate crime is getting your ass beat and your walls defaced. Maybe at the worst losing your home to fire. Bombs though... c'mon. Im not going to say I agree that that is as it should be, but it is that way.

Terrorism, Hate crime...who fucking cares?! It was an evil thing and serves no rational purpose.

As for it being used for murder, that was speculation on my part, perhaps that was not clear. Pipe bombs have been used numerous times, the world over, to successfully assassinate people.

If you think framing language is so unimportant than I guess we are done.

...the focus should be on finding those responsible. It is a form of domestic terrorism. However, when the synagogue in OKC was fire-bombed, in the several articles I found, from mainstream sources, not once was it called an act of terrorism. The same goes for articles about church bombings. So, perhaps, if it is a house of worship, it is not seen as a terrorist attack? :shrug:

Then perhaps the why will become clear. Hate?, Terror? maybe even revenge? Until we know who the blame rests on it's only speculation.

But normally I'd see an attack against any place of worship as one of terror against those who worship there.

But we don't know motives yet.