How Do You "Make" a Terrorist Threat?

Prosecutors have accused Olutosin Oduwole, a student at Southern Illinois University, of planning a Virginia Tech-style massacre on his campus. He has been charged with "attempting to make a terrorist threat," according to today's Washington Post. Police say Oduwole's abandoned car contained a note that demanded $50,000 — to his PayPal account! — to avert a "murderous rampage" at a "highly populated university."

If SIU really was Oduwole's target, he doesn't think too highly of it. According to the Post, the note "suggested the shooting would target a "prestigious" university, but that word was crossed out." (If you want to learn more about Mr. Oduwole, the AP thinks it has found his myspace.com page here).

So yesterday, on his 22nd birthday, Oduwole pleaded not guilty to making a terrorist threat. But how do you "make" a terrorist threat? Is it enough to just have a note in your car? The ATF has noted that Oduwole was legally entitled to the guns he ordered online. His friends ("hundreds" on facebook.com according to the AP) say this is all a big misunderstanding because Oduwole likes violent rap music and guns. What are the laws about planning to make a terrorist threat? Does the first amendment protect threatening writing if you never show it to anyone? And, if Oduwole actually did write the note, what could drive an apparently popular, happy young man — the president of his fraternity, the kid with hundreds of friends — to even consider writing something so stupid?

— Nick Baumann

Comments

I think the key word in your blog is "stupid."

Posted by: Jim Loftus on 07/26/07 at 9:47 AM Respond

The Thought Police are apparently well-funded and hard at work during the reign of King George XLIII.

Posted by: Nomo Jo on 07/26/07 at 11:11 AM Respond

Just the note is enough thx........
LOL Loftus......you read it, what does that make you?
Nomo, XLIII???

Posted by: RTMAN on 07/26/07 at 6:04 PM Respond

And...what were the police doing in his van? All the other points of contention are of miniscule importance in comparison to this.

Posted by: jimsecor on 07/27/07 at 5:46 PM Respond

Would the military, broken or not, turn their guns on "the people" if ordered to? Well, at Tiananmen Sq they did, though it was the branch of the army from Inner Mongolia. Then, they stood off and there was very nearly a civil war--but politics prevailed and then the generals were purged and the entire affair shut up.

Yup. It can happen in the US, where authority rules. If the army "rebelled," they'd have to rule and that's a scary thought to those recruits. Look what they're doing in Iraq and Afghanistan and Guantanamo--to name the big 3 in the news--with the power they've been given?

Look...it was done at Kent State; only 4 were killed and it silenced the protestors--all over. Job finished.

We can only hope the depression (the crash) gets here first.

Posted by: shikejian on 07/27/07 at 6:19 PM Respond

This group has established quite a chessboard of criminal minds, augmented by a quivering mass of reactionary folk. To defeat same requires a wary foe. Informed. Alert, and self sacrificing. I do not not believe that we have enough in our ranks to be successfull against this force. I hope to be wrong.

Posted by: SFreud on 07/27/07 at 6:49 PM Respond

If he "didn't show the note to anyone" how is it that this note is being used to incriminate him? Usually you catch conspirators when the conspiracy catches the attention of people who do not support the actions of the conspirators. How did law enforcement gain this piece of incriminating evidence if it was not being circulate even to a narrow group of sympathizers? Why did they invade his personal space to retrieve such evidence? This story does not add up.

Posted by: JT Barrie on 07/28/07 at 7:41 AM Respond