Days have passed since the massacre at Fort Hood where 13 people lost their lives and 30 others were wounded. The Army has issued warnings about jumping to conclusions and has advised all to back off and allow them to do their own investigation. However, typically, politicians were beginning to weigh in on the topic over the weekend.
Senator Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, was perhaps the most direct and vocal. He flat out called the attack terrorism. He is quoted in the NY Daily News:
Sen. Joe Lieberman called the Fort Hood massacre an act of “Islamist extremism” – even as top Army brass warned Sunday against guessing at a motive, fearing backlash against Muslim soldiers.
“There are very, very strong warning signs here that Dr. Hasan had become an Islamist extremist and, therefore, that this was a terrorist act,” Lieberman (I-Conn) told Fox News on Sunday.
“If the reports that we’re receiving of various statements he made, acts he took are valid, he had turned to Islamist extremism.”
Experts in law enforcement and in the mental health field sift through the clues left after the massacre. They seem less willing to commit to definitive answers. People have begun to compare this rampage to the horrible massacre of students at Virginia Tech in spring of 2007.
Many people are beginning to form their own conclusions. What constitutes terrorism? Do we need government permission to call an act terrorism? Certainly when a gunman attacks people who are just sitting ducks, that is terrorism, regardless of motivation. Who dropped the ball? Didn’t the Army have strong warnings that this killer was unstable, was a bad apple, or whatever we want to call it. Why wasn’t he removed from where he could harm others? Should he have been discharged? Does that not send a bad message to others about fulfilling commitment? After all, much was invested in Major Hasan’s medical training.
Americans will be grappling with these and many other questions as more and more clues are uncovered from this horrible massacre.
I don’t want to sound like an Obama basher … I did vote for him … I do hope he’ll eventually turn into a centrist and govern effectively … BUT …
His asinine comment about “draw no conclusions” and “wait until all the facts are in” is pretty stupid. We know what happened. he seems more interested in covering aspects of it up than in speaking to what happened. Which is asinine, swimming against the tide.
The fact is that in our haste to embrace diversity we allowed a guy who was making anti-American statements to serve as a Major and were prepared to ship him overseas.
Now deal with it, Obama. I don;t think that bashing FOX News is what America needs on this issue, or any other issue.
Is it terrorism? I’d say not really. Because the idiot had no connection to any other group, or any communication, that would enable them to exploit it for “terror”. Is a single suicide bomber a terrorist? I’d say, not so much.
Neverthless Obama and Casey seem to be entering cover-up mode, and Lieberman is appalled enough to invoke the t-word.
My hands are in the air. I haven’t bashed FN over this….yet. I heard the ‘back off’ directive from some army beaurocrat, not President Obama. I guess I didn’t listen to my president. How can anyone not draw conclusions.
I felt President Bush bent over backwards to be politically correct after 9-11, at least in what he said and the statements he made. I hope PC isn’t what is motivating the army or the president.
I think a lone suicide bomber is a terrorist. Was Timothy McVeigh a terrorist? Was John Allen Mohammad a terrorist? Was Cho the Tech Killer a terrorist?
Maybe it is the definition of terrorist that is the stumbling block here.
Is ‘terrorism’ defined by number killed or by number of killers? Where does motivation fit into the equation?
I think Lieberman goes to the T-word fairly quickly, but that is his right, I suppose.
“I hope PC isn’t what is motivating the army or the president.”
Well, rather obviously, it has motivated both and compromised safety of our soldiers. “Don’t ask, don’t tell” was expanded out to anti-American and pro-suicide bomber beliefs. There needs to be a change and a “rooting out”, not that I expect many soldiers to be rooted. Anyone who feels that “Muslims should kill soldiers” and so forth should be not discharged, but assigned to a duty that doesn’t involve weapons. Peeling potatoes or whatever that might entail these days. Or dishonorably discharged, depending on circumstances.
I doubt that it will extend to many soldiers at all. But we owe it to our military not to force them to serve with someone like this. Or be treated by them.
I’m sure there are many fine soldiers who are Muslim. And I would think they would agree that their faith should not be an excuse for going crazy.
Obama’s reaction was comical.
There’s no “there” there with Obama. At least not yet.
I watched that HBO documentary on his election … you can see the reverance with which he is viewed by many of his supporters, and by the left wing in general. Every word he says, every stupid joke (the man is not very funny) seen as eloquent and charming.
But all the guy’s done is made speeches. The only success he’s ever really had is in campaigning and becoming President.
Increasingly I see him as I saw Bush, as inexperienced and irrational and as a bad President. Just as Bush lead his party down irrational roads doomed to failure, so does Obama. Two pied pipers coasting on personal charm.
We need to reduce health care costs! But even if we can’t, let’s expand care. Hey, let’s hurry up and do this, before the CBO puts out another report on eventual costs. Act now! Vote for health care reform!
For this to be a terrorist act, instead of a man going “postal,” one has to determine the reason for choosing his target. With his history of supporting fundamental and jihadist Islam, Hasan has clearly chosen sides. While he may have attempted to contact terrorist organizations, he acted alone. He chose sides because he was torn between allegiances. When confronted with the fact that the only way out of the military was probably a Bad Conduct discharge, and that he was going to lose his comfy job because he was deploying to fight against his fellow radical muslims, it was important that he pick sides. He did not have the MORAL courage to quit his comfort and fulfill his oath. He enjoyed being a psychiatrist and a Dishonorable discharge would have had a negative impact on that. His deeply held beliefs also forced him to realize that he was living a lie and when he finally made a decision to follow his heart. He had opportunities to leave the Army. He was a 12 year veteran. He didn’t not have to continue his career past any initial obligations.
And so he attacked the one department that he could easily attack and stop deployment activities. His purpose was to affect military readiness. He acted as an enemy combatant and as a traitor. And he should be executed.
“I felt President Bush bent over backwards to be politically correct after 9-11”
He was, and much of that was good. However, it did cause him to soft-pedal on why we are fighting. A “war on Islamo-fascism” has been mislabeled a “war on terrorism”. It lead to lots of confusion.
Cargo,
Where are you obtaining your “facts” ? As far as I can tell, we know very little about him and his motive. Before I subscribe radical muslim beliefs to his heinous act, I will wait for the investigation to conclude.
“A challenge for investigators is sorting out a potential thicket of psychological, ideological or religious motivations behind Hasan’s alleged actions. Hasan’s possible contact with extremists such as Aulaqi would complicate matters, suggesting that U.S. authorities may have missed chances to prevent the cleric from instigating this incident and others. But if it turns out that Hasan acted in the throes of an emotional breakdown, his questionable ties could be misinterpreted in ways that damage U.S. outreach to the Muslim world or provoke an overreaction that divides Americans. ”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/08/AR2009110818405_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2009110818477
Rick, I didn’t realize there was an HBO film on the election of Obama. I would probably be happier not seeing it, from your description.
Cargo, are you new here? If so, welcome.
Yes, where are you getting your info? It seemed to me like there were a lot of loose ends still.
We should wait for the forensic report that will determine who shot whom. It has been reported by some who were near the scene that the cops actually shot some of the victims.
We simply can’t trust our government. Just because they tell us that someone is tied to terrorists, doesn’t mean that they are.
This guy sure looks guilty as Hell. However, we have seen instances where others have been set-up by government officials or their collaborators, with false charges. Recall that our government imprisoned some innocent men at GITMO based on the false charges by CIA pawns who simply wanted to collect rewards.
All of the thirst for vengeance aside, if we really want terrorism to stop, withdraw from Iraq, and Afghanistan. Had we spent the money that Bush pissed away on those two undeclared, illegal, “wars” on energy independence, we would not have the need to fight for access to oil on the other side of the world.
Rick, I think Obama is a centrist for the America that elected him. The problem is the other America is highly motivated to find things to panic about, and to spread that panic to those of us who are more even-keeled.
This attack would only be a terrorist attack, in the judgment of law enforcement and national security, if there was communication with terrorist cells and coordination with terrorist networks.
This takes time to establish.
The fact that this Major who lost his mind is a Muslim does not in itself make it a terrorist attack. Only a panic-addicted politician would jump to that conclusion, someone like Joseph Lieberman.
If the man’s religion makes this terrorism, then I suppose all the white supremacist shootings from earlier in the year make it Republican terrorism. Right Rick?
The guy was crazy, AND the guy was acting in keeping with his personal religious beliefs.
There are many countries in the middle east where his beliefs are considered normal. Normal to them, crazy to us.
What’s to investigate? What’s to interpret? He was crazy. He was Muslim. Not all crazy people do these things, nor all Muslims. But if a guy who is Muslim, who has started to see the world in an anti-American light, goes nuts then there’s a good chance he’ll yell out “Allu Akhbar” like this guy did, and waste his feeble life trying to get his 72 virgins.
What more do we need to know?
What’s to investigate about any crime, right Rick? As long as you are conditioned to panic about “terrorism,” all you need to establish is the ethnicity and the religion of the attacker.
I suppose Virginia Tech was Korean terrorism?
Was the premeditated murder of the Flores family in Arizona on May 30, 2009 anti-immigrant lobby terrorism?
We are at war with Islamist jihadists. While my evidence is anecdotal, ie, from the internet, witnesses state that he shouted “Allhu Akbar” before opening fire. He did attack a center directly responsible for deployment, therefore, damaging the war effort. There is documentation of his speeches and comments supporting suicide bombers. He was “caught redhanded” so the only investigation needed is to find out if there are other terrorist connections and if he acted alone. He picked his side, shot his fellow soldiers and civilians, committed murder and treason. Hang him.
It is critical to US security to determine if Hasan is linked to jihadist terrorism. It doesn’t make anyone killed more dead or alive but it sure could protect future lives to determine if this massacre was a part of a larger plan.
I think Cargo makes an important point: We are at war with Islamist Jihadists.
We also need to remember that we are not at war with Islam.
Was killing Dr. Tiller terrorism? The jerk who did that, Rhoder? just confessed to killing Dr. Tiller. That to me is terrorism. So was the clown who went into the Holocaust museum.
I assume by default that killers are mentally ill. What sane person kills as a way of solving problems?
I can understand an anonymous fictional blog poster, but what would cause a US Senator to jump to conclusions and run to his psychological panic room, no matter how comfortable or familiar, while using his position of leadership to ask ordinary Americans to do the same?
I am sickened by the lack of leadership coming from Sen. Lieberman. Leaders need to have the courage to stay calm and not panic. Lieberman does the opposite time and time again.
Did we panic when Timothy McVeigh and his right wing extremist buddies committed a terrorist act? Did we investigate his religious beliefs? These people hitting the panic button prematurely are not dealing with a full deck, probably suffering from PTSD like our former Vice President.
Witness Too you are arguing with a ghost – I didn’t say this was “terrorism”.
Lieberman smells cover-up, and I applaud him for not letting our government cover anything up.
Actually, yeah, McVeigh was investigated that way too. Except that it turns out that McVeigh was a big fan of the Unabomber, had similar views, and they corresponded in prison.
Actually people were pretty sure that the Oklahoma bombing was jihadist terrorism for a few days. They found out there were wrong but there were a few days where all finger pointing was towards Mecca.
Lieberman is a hawk in this regard. I don’t blame him for looking, I blame him for perhaps being too vocal and for getting people stirred up prematurely. Maybe he needs to walk softly and carry a big stick for a change.
He is the chairman of the homeland security committee. We have the right person, just maybe the wrong timing.
“I blame him for perhaps being too vocal and for getting people stirred up prematurely. ”
To me, it’s obvious why he said what he said. It was because Obama’s remarks were so bizarre. The message here is “Hey, we’re going to talk about what happened here, and we’re not going to pretend it’s not worthy of addressing”.
The guy was clearly depressed, suicidal and kooky, and his interpretation of Islam was clearly also a factor. We know that he acted alone. “Don’t jump to conclusions” the President says?
A real leader would have had more to say than that. Like Bush, Obama is not one. I have a feeling that if Obama had been President on 9/11, he might have stayed up in the air incommunicado even longer than Bush did – which was pure cowardice.
When dealing with the gang problem in this country, law enforcement will often tell you that there are two principal issues: (1) the actual gang members themselves; and (2) the “wanna-be’s.” It often turns out that the “wanna-be’s”can be a huge problem for you because they commit crimes not so much for profit but also to “make their bones”, so to speak, and earn full membership in the gang. I am told, in fact, that, in Loudoun County at this moment, the “wanna-be’s” are often a bigger problem than the gangs themselves.
There are now some news reports that the CIA may have previously identified Hasan as someone who was trying through electronic means to make contact with al-Qaeda. Whether the CIA had gotten far enough in its investigation to link this Hasan with Major Hasan and alert Army authorities is being questioned, although I suspect not, since the Army seems to have been caught with their pants way down on this one. I certainly think that, had they fully identified and tracked Major Hasan, the CIA would not have failed to alert the Army or at least the higher levels in the DNI or DIA. That’s something which Lieberman is going to have to explore. If there was a failure here, it is imperative that we correct that situation asap.
We are also seeing the reports on Hasan’s prior attendance at that mosque in Fairfax when it was under the leadership of an imam who was (and is) most certainly a supporter of violent jihad. There are also reports that Army medical officers with whom Major Hasan served at Walter Reed were startled by his apparent turn toward radical Islam garnered from comments he made to them. Somehow afraid to be accused of discrimination against Muslims, these officers reportedly failed to make a formal report on this to Army internal security authorities.
Unless and until further information can establish a definitive link between Major Hassan and al-Qaeda or someone involved in a major way in jihad, I would hazard a guess that he is a “wanna-be” who decided that he had to make his bones on his own, even if it meant martyrdom for his cause. Does this carry the authenticity of being a “terrorist”? I would say so. Motive is the key here, whether you are a member of a group or a “wanna-be.” There are now reports that the same former Fairfax imam, now operating out of Yemen, is broadcasting congratulations to Major Hasan for his actions in support of jihad. This, however, should not be taken as a definitive sign that Hasan was a member of a group. I still think he is a “wanna-be.”
Numbers have nothing to do with any of this. 9/11 was a major attack with multiple planners and a group of action agents. I have seen terrorist groups where the numbers for the entire group were almost as small as the number of terrorists who had an active operational role in 9/11 and where a common tactic was to send out a lone gunman on a Vespa who would drive up to the car of an American or other target caught in traffic and put a bullet through the head of the intended victim. And sometimes a lone gunman would drive up to a cop directing traffic and gun him down where he stood in the intersection.
A lone attacker or not, an actual member of a terrorist group or a “wanna-be”, I view the Fort Hood incident as an act of terrorism because of motive. Some will certainly cry “mental breakdown”! Perhaps, but don’t you think that anyone who chooses to kill innocent men, women, and children in the name of a poitical, religious, or cultural cause is a mental case, regardless of whether they are a loner or a member of a terrorist movement? Motive. The key task of counterterrorism authorities will be to decide if the killer acted alone or whether there is a connection elsewhere. Many of their post-incident action decisions will depend on that conclusion — apart from the universal need to ramp up internal procedures to prevent what happened specifically with Major Hasan in his Army career.
Rick, I wouldn’t call what Bush did a form of cowardice. There is a certain point when the Secret Service becomes a very powerful entity in the security decision-making process. If they fear that a protectee may be in acute danger, they will step in and start directing like dictators — which is one of the reasons they are as good as they are. At that point in time, no one knew the extent of the 9/11 attacks; and, if I know the Secret Service, they were not about to take any chances. Obama would have gotten the same treatment as Bush, with the switch of power of movement back to the President only when reports indicated the coast was clear. I wasn’t there, so I don’t know for sure. But I can surmise.
Admittedly, this can have some fluidity depending on the President; but a smart one will listen to the USSS. I once played the role of “assassin” in the refresher training of the highest level of a foreign protective service. I “killed” their protectee because the guys hesitated just long enough in their on-the-spot dictation of his movements to allow me to get to him. In effect, I and my “partner in crime” snookered a whole team of intense and highly trained pros into hestitating long enough to turn hesitation into a fatal mistake.
Preliminary info regarding Hasan’s connection to terrorists is contained in this ABC News article. (See link below.) This is so frustrating on so many levels. Why did the CIA and FBI not inform the Army? Although the title of the article indicates the Army was informed, in the text of the article it reads that it is “unclear if intelligence agencies informed the Army…”
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/fort-hood-shooter-contact-al-qaeda-terrorists-officials/Story?id=9030873&page=1
Quite possibly the Army was informed. If you watch Chief of Staff casey speak, you would have the impression that he cares more about diversity and a welcoming climate for Muslims than he does the security of our fighting forces. In fact if you parse his words from his television appearances, that’s exactly what he said.
On reflection, I believe that this story isn’t going to go away, it’ll be a flashpoint for a while on the issues where tolerance and diversity sometimes go past the limits of common sense.
And the way Obama and Casey handled this initially was terrible and guaranteed to pull us apart rather than bring us together. Maybe Obama can figure that out and recover as he more or less did with his Gates-Crowley fiasco.
Quite frankly Obama and Casey did not, have not paid proper respect to the dead.
Again, we can have a sense of security on this issue, and have a military that welcomes Muslims.
But jumping out of your shoes to pretend the guy wasn’t implementing jihad is not a way to accomplish that.
“Don’t jump to conclusions?”
Indeed, having a military that welcomes Muslims shouldn’t mean turning a blind eye on someone who has radical views such as Hasan did and who seemed to start expressing them somewhat openly. Seems like there was more than enough signs that should have raised some eyebrows and prompted some kind of review.
It is beginning to sound more and more suspicious. His former Iman out of Falls Church is congratulating Hasan all over the place. Hasan has also lawyered up.
We will be slow to learn the lessons that the Israelis have learned long ago. They know if it looks like a terrorist, talks like a terrorist, smells like a terrorist, and prays five times a day like a terrorist, it’s more than likely a terrorist, and they treat them as such. Western countries like the US and Great Britain wouldn’t want to inconvenience terrorists by “being mean or unfair” to them. I hope we figure it out before too many die.
I am not sure I want to have to view things as an Israeli has to view things. I don’t know the answer. Thats for sure.
It does sound like someone dropped the ball. CIA? Army? No Such Agency?
When the military cares more about being PC than protecting us, then I fear we have lost the last glimmer of rule by common sense. The reason why the military didn’t bring pressure on this person is simply because he was Muslim not because they wouldn’t have been justified to do so, and that is where the problem lies. In short it appears that the military is more afraid of minority public opinion than the cave dwellers in Afganistan.
Frankly, this is exactly what I hoped would not happen, on this board or elsewhere. I seem to remember a number of contributors here, prompted by their news and propaganda sources, feigning outrage at the very thought of the Department of Homeland Security taking steps to guard against such an attack coming from a soldier or former soldier.
I tried then to understand the aim of this nonsense, other than ginning up outrage for the sake of outrage. I concluded the aim was to support a theory of victimization among white conservatives. This narrative, it seems, is so precious to those on the far right that an investigation into white supremacists or neo-nazis is somehow a slight against their own belief system, a connection I never really wanted nor necessarily saw, but they insisted upon it.
Now that something tragic has happened, we are seeing people leap to conclusions while investigations are still under way. We are seeing people denigrate entire religions and entire minority classes. And we are seeing people point fingers at DHS, the military, the CIA, and the FBI for not doing enough to protect against the very sort of attack so many feigned outrage over trying to prevent six months ago.
Incredible.
And the bottom line is, it was Muslim extremists who drove planes into the WTC. It was Muslim extremists who blew up the WTC during the Clinton years. It was Muslim extremists who blew a hole in the side of the USS Cole, killing our servicemen. It was Muslim extremists who blew up the Marine barracks back in the 80s.
Obviously when people are gunned down a military base and reports indicate there was some prior knowledge about the shooter, it stands to reason people are going to ask questions and demand answers. People of all races were killed or wounded.
If anyone is at fault, Last Best, I am at fault for posing the question. I posted the question, without apology to anyone.
“And we are seeing people point fingers at DHS, the military, the CIA, and the FBI for not doing enough to protect against the very sort of attack so many feigned outrage over trying to prevent six months ago.”
I thought the DHS report dealt with “right-wing extremism.” It’s now clear that Hasan has communicated with Al Qaeda, and that there may have been some religious motivation. Is this the “right-wing extremism” liberals were so scared of six months ago? I’m not getting the connection.
I’m with you on this one, Moon-howler. And I say that as someone who has been from time to time on the other end of the “finger pointing.” Actually, I’ve found more restraint in this thread than I expected in this particular case.
Finger pointing can be very unpleasant when you happen to be on the wrong end of that digit. People are concerned. And they have reason to be. Something went wrong here, and we lost 13 good sons and daughters because of it. The day that Americans stop asking and probing and demanding answers will be the day when we become a nation of sheep, sitting quietly in our pens, waiting for the powers that be to provide the official “gospel.” . Believe you me, finger pointing has another effect on the one being pointed at: it makes you examine and re-examine real quick what you are doing and how you are doing it. It isn’t all a bad thing by any means, even though it sometimes stings, if the end result is a fair and equitable judgement rather than a witch hunt. Got to have a thick skin in the security business. If the criticism is fair and reasoned, it is valuable for the future. Those who get paid by the People have an obligation to answer up when the People inquire. Wouldn’t want it to have any other way. It’s the bedrock of our system.
Those who keep us safe must be kept safe. This incident has been a horrible break down in something and we aren’t sure what yet.
Emma, I would rather not think of this incident as a right or left incident. It is American. We owe it to our troops to never have this happen again. Once again, they were sitting ducks. Isn’t religious zealotry right wing extremism? I don’t think the wings matter.
There is also this thought: When Muslims stop harming our people, then perhaps we can not be so quick to judge Muslims. What goes around is going to come around. It is human nature.
Fair question in my book M-H as long as we’re not attacking each other over it.
Meanwhile the Dallas Cowboys are in first place. Think I’ll organize a tea party to protest.
Justin, I think everyone behaved admirably.
I think this is a tough subject to deal with also. Political idealogy wrapped in an extreme form of someone’s religion violates American thinking on so many levels. It might just be one of those things that Americans will have difficulty dissecting.
In the past, our enemies had political boundaries. Our sworn enemies now are without borders. It makes it tough. How do you know your enemy when conventional identifiers are no longer valid?
Perhaps this question should become a thread.
I just thank God that LBH has no responsibility for our security! (praying I’m correct)
“Rick, I wouldn’t call what Bush did a form of cowardice.”
I don’t begrudge him looking a little confused at first while in a school with little kids. I don’t begrudge him for getting in an airplane and flying up high. I DO begrudge him staying up there for 10? hours, not touching down at some base somewhere and saying SOMETHING while on TV a confused nation sat and watched replays of the act over and over and over and over. Just some words, anything. If you’re a leader, at least acknowledge that you’re there. (I believe he was scared and ashamed because he knew how badly they’d handled Obama, and worried about huge political fallout).
So, our children sat and watched replays all day.
Them when Bush finally did talk, he looked more than slightly “shook”. I’d say “scurred”.
“he knew how badly they’d handled Obama,”
Oh goodness! Sorry, I meant Bin Laden.
Reports are the FBI was aware of 10 instances of communications between Major Hasan and Aulaqi, but decided not to take any action. Supposedly the FBI is going to now conduct an internal review to see to reexamine why they made that decision. Does sound like the FBI may have slipped up on this one. I would guess they monitored the content of these communications and made the decision based on what was said.
I do not see the connection between this and “right wing extremism” either. This is monitoring connections with overseas terrorist groups – particularly Al Qaeda. How that is related to right wing extremism escapes me.
I’ve been thinking. This was NOT an act of terrorism. Terrorism is an act against civilian targets to cause fear and disorder to promote a political result.
From the dictionary:1. the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious
While terroristic acts are used in the course of war, I do not think that this is the case here.
THIS was an act of war by a traitor. This also can be considered a crime because treason is a crime and murder is a crime. Yes, you can murder during war. Shooting your own side is murder. So, I change my opinion. This was not terrorism but treason.