So, this morning, the NY Times has a very lengthy article about the Jihadi MurderBot.

It was thoroughly researched, with over a dozen people named on the byline of the article.

They interviewed neighbors. They talked with the authorities. They explored MurderBot's background in Afghanistan, working with the CIA, and so forth.

They told us about his family. They told us about the apartment complex he lives in. They told us about the NGO that helped him immigrate. They even told us he was an Amazon Flex driver before he changed careers and became a MurderBot.

Why, they even told us his kids liked to play soccer in the hallway of their apartment complex.

So, they drilled down and made a very deep dive on this guy.

But after reading through the entire thing, it felt like something was missing.

How could that be? The NY Times is the premier legacy news media, tons of Pulitzer Prizes, the "Gray Lady."

The reporter was excruciatingly thorough.

But it still felt like something was missing.

Then it hit me. Oh, yeah.

There was absolutely NOTHING about MurderBot's religious beliefs, practices, background.

Nothing at all. Not as his religious background might be relevant as related to a possible motive for his crimes.

Not even as "background" information to simply tell us more about who this guy is, and who is family is.

Seems to me if they are going to tell us about his kids playing soccer in the hallway, it would be natural to give us some background concerning his religious beliefs and ideology.

But they didn't.


I am therefore forced to fill in the gaps here as best I can.

My conclusion is that the MurderBot is most likely one of the following, until the diligent reporting of the NY Times clarifies to the contrary: Orthodox Jew; Christian Nationalist/fascist; Hindu; Scientologist.