Click here to Bellaciao V.3.0 !

Archives Bellaciao EN - 2003-2016 Archives : FR | IT | ES

Alarming Prank "Terror" Attack in University of Oklahoma Library

Wednesday 23 August 2006

Michael P. Wright — Norman, Oklahoma, USA —

This information is the product of research I am doing for a book about the corrupt
atmosphere of the University of Oklahoma under the rule of former U.S. Senator David Boren, widely known as the mentor and patron of George Tenet.

I am willing to ask my confidential source to contact journalists and writers who would like to interview him. Email me with this request. Those reporting this information are asked to acknowledge me as the investigator who assembled this evidence.

The evidence indicates that the University of Oklahoma discourages members of
the campus community from reporting information related to security against terrorism, if the information would embarass the OU administration if it reached the public. In the case of my source, an OU alumnus, it appears that he was even punished for acting in a conscientious and responsible fashion.

The confidential source took these two photographs of individuals engaging in a prank "terrorist" attack at the University of Oklahoma library in October 2005. The source recalls that the event happened on a Monday, during late afternoon, two or three weeks after the suicide bomb was exploded on the OU campus during a football game by Joel Hinrichs. At that time, there were high concerns about terrorism on the campus.


An additional factor in the situation is that OU president David Boren was attempting to minimize concerns about terrorism, manage the news, and influence the public to believe that the Hinrichs bombing was merely a "lone suicide" by an "emotionally troubled" student. Boren has shown a deep interest in concealing unpleasant news about OU from the public. In contrast with Boren’s claims, the New York Daily News reported that the New York Police Department not only recognized Hinrichs as a terrorist but was studying his modus operandi (May 7, 2006).


While in the library, the source overheard a cell phone conversation about attacking that facility. Later he observed young men with bulges in their clothing and he wondered if these were weapons. He also saw some of the disruptive males carrying "super-soaker" water guns inside the library. The source was alarmed that they might contain liquid explosive materials. He was also concerned that books could be damaged, even if only water were being used.

The first photo is of an attacker running up the east staircase of the 1929 wing of the main library, on the south side. He is carrying a water gun. This staircase leads to the old reading room.

In the second photo, the attacker with the water gun is south of the main library’s south entrance. Across the street, to the east, is the zoology building, Richards Hall. The nearby bench has a plaque on it dedicating it to Peggy and Walter Helmerich.

My source observed at least six individuals participating in the disruption inside the library. They were all young males. He observed some with water guns and others with bulges in their clothing.


In late afternoon, he was on deck 5 of the 1929 (original) wing of the Bizzell library, by the east windows. Near the wall there is an open space of about six inches. This enables sounds from deck 4 to be heard by listeners on deck 5.

The source heard an individual on deck 4 participating in a cell phone conversation and talking about an attack on the library. At this time, the source did not take it as a serious threat, but decided to keep his eye on the situation. The loud conversation was annoying and disrupting his concentration. At the time he was reading a book entitled Bird by Bird, by Anne Lamont.

About an hour later, he observed three male individuals entering deck 5 with bulges in their clothing. He said the bulges looked like concealed weapons. At that time he decided that whatever was happening — whether it be a simple disturbance or a mass murder attempt — needed to be reported to police.

After observing this scene he used a red phone on deck 5 to make a call to the OU police department. He then went outside of the library to await the police response. He observed an OUPD officer running past him to enter the library.


Describing the library security guards, my source said that they "acted like they were blind and couldn’t see the attackers." He added that they were "oblivious."

OU police did arrive to interview the disruptors. My source does not recall that any arrests were made. He knows of no campus disciplinary proceedings having been brought against them. He was not asked to testify anywhere about what he observed. The police did not interview him and record his observations. On the contrary, he said that the OUPD officers "wished to hide from me whatever had gone on." He did observe that the disruptors identified themselves to officers as members of the OU chapter of Brothers Under Christ. My source says that he does not recall having seen anything in the campus newspaper about this disruption of the library.

Two days after the event, my source was contacted by OUPD officers. They warned him to stop making inquiries about the matter and said that OUPD was investigating it.


In early November, my source was ordered by OUPD to remove himself from the OU campus, which is a public facility, and told that he was not to return for six months. On the document with this order, he was only informed that he was being investigated for "suspicion." He was never told the outcome of this investigation or the nature of the "suspicion."

University of Oklahoma administrators have a history of indulging male students who are members of favored groups. Before the September 2004 death of Sigma Chi pledge Blake Hammontree, OU officials had looked the other way at binge drinking in fraternities. Since the 1980s, members of the Ruf-Nek male cheerleading group have been allowed to paint the scores of the Texas game on a campus street. This is officialized vandalism. Articles are available in the OU student newspaper to document these statements.

Today I have sent emails asking these questions of OU officials:

1. Were any of these disruptors charged with crime? If so, what were the charges and what were the outcomes of the proceedings?

2. Did library CSOs or security guards (white shirts) take any actions against the disruptors? Were any of them ordered to leave the library?

3. Were any of them given citations ordering them to appear before OU disciplinary proceedings? If so, what were the penalties?

I am about 99% sure that the true answer to all these questions is "no."

For more information about the Hinrichs suicide bombing:

For my investigation of Boren, Tenet, and 9/11, start here
and follow the links:

Forum posts

  • It’s great!! Who did this and why!! -Terribly alarmed.


      The numbers 129 as the first three digits of the sender’s IP address indicate that the message originated from a University of Oklahoma terminal. The language "terribly alarmed" suggests sarcasm. Am I being ridiculed with the idea that there was never anything to be alarmed about?

      The person making the comment obviously did not read the post very well. In the headline I demonstrate knowledge that the event was a PRANK — not a real terrorist attack. What’s important is this: the individual who called the police observed the disruption in the opening stages and had no way of knowing that it was just a prank. He also had legitimate concerns about library books being damaged by water guns. Finally, instead of being praised for responsible action, he was PUNISHED by OU and warned by the police not to make any more inquiries about it. OU administrators obviously did not want to be embarassed by this incident, so they concealed it.

      Is it good policy for national security to punish people who report events in progress which a reasonable person would take to be alarming?

      Finally, I observe this question in the comment: "Who did this and why?" The post states that the pranksters identified themselves to police as members of the Brothers Under Christ. I do now know what their motives were. They strike me as foolish young delinquents engaging in some sort of bizarre initiation ritual.

    • I would like to know who took those pictures! Taking pictures inside the Library without permission against Library policy!