Fort Hood shooting suspect's ties to mosque investigated

The FBI and Army are looking into whether Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had an association with militants at the Virginia mosque where two 9/11 hijackers

prayed, a source says.

By Josh Meyer

November 9, 2009

Reporting from Washington

The FBI and the Army on Sunday were investigating whether the military psychiatrist suspected in the Ft. Hood shooting rampage had an association with militants at a mosque in Virginia or in cyberspace.

A senior federal law enforcement official said there was no immediate evidence of such a link, nor of any direct connection between the suspected gunman, Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, 39, and terrorist groups or individuals, either in person or online. Hasan is accused of opening fire at a readiness center in Ft. Hood, Texas, on Thursday, killing 13 and wounding dozens. He reportedly had been depressed about his upcoming deployment to Afghanistan.

But authorities are still scouring "voluminous" hard drives, multiple e-mail accounts and website trails "to see what's out there, and to see what it all means," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing. "There's a lot of work being done."

The official said investigators were looking into Hasan's association with the Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Va., in early 2001, about the same time that a radical Islamist prayer leader and two of the Sept. 11 hijackers were there.

The mosque is one of the biggest in the United States, and the official cautioned that thousands of people go there for prayer services and other events. The funeral of Hasan's mother was held there on May 31, 2001, the Associated Press reported.

Authorities were focusing aggressively on whether Hasan more recently had been following the fiery online sermons and blog postings of that imam, Anwar al Awlaki, the official said.

Awlaki, a U.S. citizen, left the United States in 2002 and is believed to be in Yemen. He is actively supporting the Islamist jihad, or holy war against the West, through his website.

Early this morning, after Awlaki's name was publicly linked to Hasan's, a posting on Awlaki's site was titled “Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing.”

In it, a writer claiming to be Awlaki described Hasan as a hero and "a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people."

"Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the U.S. army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal," the writer said.

There was no way to confirm immediately whether the posting was actually from Awlaki.

(cont.)

The London Telegraph first reported the potential link between Hasan and the mosque.

In recent days, authorities poring over Hasan's computer, Internet records and multiple e-mail accounts have found evidence that he visited other radical Islamist websites with some frequency, according to several officials familiar with the investigation.

"Obviously, people who visit these websites can be influenced by or affected by them, by the influence of the clerics, as opposed to being directed by them," said the senior federal law enforcement official. "It goes back to his state of mind."

Some counter-terrorism officials and experts said that although Hasan's connections to Awlaki, if any, are unclear, the imam has had a major effect on aspiring violent extremists around the world.

"Awlaki is one of the principal jihadi luminaries for would-be homegrown terrorists," said Evan Kohlmann, a terrorism consultant for the U.S. and other governments. "His fluency with English, his unabashed advocacy of jihad and mujahideen organizations, and his Web-savvy approach are a powerful combination."

Kohlmann said Awlaki's lecture on "Constants on the Path of Jihad" -- based on a similarly named document written by the founder of Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia -- is the "virtual bible for lone-wolf Muslim extremists."

FBI agents and military investigators continued to work methodically to retrace Hasan's steps in an effort to determine what might have set him off and who, if anyone, might have known about his alleged plans.

There was no indication from a thorough search of his computer and other seized evidence that the suspect had any conspirators, federal law enforcement officials said, but they were not willing to rule that out.

Those officials said that Hasan's apparent interest in websites focusing on radical Islamist ideology came at a time when he had grown increasingly -- and publicly -- unhappy with the U.S. war effort and his possible deployment.

"There is nothing that we have found thus far linking him to a terrorist group, but we have intelligence that he made postings in chat rooms," said Scott Stewart, vice president of tactical intelligence for Stratfor, a Texas-based private firm that gathers intelligence for corporations and divisions of the U.S. and foreign governments. He said the group got its information from open-source intelligence on the Internet and elsewhere, and from authorities of various agencies involved in the investigation into Hasan.

"Everything that I'm seeing so far is that he was a lone wolf. It does seem that there was a religious element to this, but there could have been some other workplace violence issues too, since it seems he was a loner who had few friends," Stewart said. "But it's hard to separate sometimes, especially with a lone-wolf actor, where the mental disturbance ends and the religious convictions and political beliefs start."

Meanwhile, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), said he wanted to launch a congressional investigation into the shooting.

"If Hasan was showing signs, saying to people that he had become an Islamist extremist, the U.S. Army has to have zero tolerance," Lieberman said on "Fox News Sunday." "He should have been gone."

But Army Chief of Staff George W. Casey Jr. urged caution and said it was too early to arrive at conclusions about the suspect's motives. Casey warned on ABC's "This Week" that focusing on Hasan's ties to Islam could "heighten the backlash" against enlisted Muslims.

Hasan's relatives have said that he was taunted for his faith. They have also said that he was a good doctor and, if he was the shooter, must have snapped.

Part I of this Topic is at:

http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=22384&pst=1348760&saved=1

By ANGELA K. BROWN (AP)

FORT HOOD, Texas — Pvt. Joseph Foster took a bullet in the leg during the Fort Hood shooting rampage. He pauses when he's asked about the mayhem, then credits a stout heritage with bringing him through the ordeal and leaving him eager for his scheduled January deployment to Afghanistan.

"I'm Irish. It hit the bone and bounced out," Foster, of Ogden, Utah, said Sunday of the bullet that tore into his left hip. His wife is uneasy about the deployment, but the 21-year-old Foster is resolute. "I'm a soldier. It's my job."

Across Fort Hood, signs point to a post on the mend after Thursday's shooting spree that killed 13 and wounded another 29. Accused gunman Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, shot in the torso by civilian police to end the rampage, was in critical but stable condition and breathing on his own at an Army hospital in San Antonio.

Authorities continue to refer to Hasan, 39, as the only suspect in the shootings but they won't say when charges would be filed and have said they have not determined a motive.

Sixteen victims remained hospitalized with gunshot wounds, and seven were in intensive care.

Even as the community took time to mourn the victims at worship services on and off the post Sunday, Fort Hood spokesman Col. John Rossi said the country's largest military installation was moving forward with the business of soldiering. The processing center where Hasan allegedly opened fire remains a crime scene, but the activities that went on there were relocated, with the goal of soon reopening the center.

"There's a lot of routine activity still happening. You'll hear cannon fire and artillery fire," Rossi said. "Soldiers in units are still trying to execute the missions we have been tasked with."

President Barack Obama will attend a memorial service Tuesday honoring victims of the attack, amid growing suggestions that Hasan's superior officers may have missed signs that he was embracing an increasingly extremist view of Islamic ideology.

Sen. Joe Lieberman said Sunday he would begin an investigation into what the Army should have known about Hasan. A day earlier, classmates who participated in a 2007-2008 master's program at a military college said they complained to faculty about what they considered to be Hasan's anti-American views, which included his giving a presentation that justified suicide bombing and telling classmates that Islamic law trumped the U.S. Constitution.

"If Hasan was showing signs, saying to people that he had become an Islamist extremist, the U.S. Army has to have zero tolerance," Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut, said on "Fox News Sunday." "He should have been gone."

Army Chief of Staff George Casey warned Sunday against reaching conclusions about the suspected shooter's motives until investigators have fully explored the attack. "I think the speculation (on Hasan's Islamic roots) could potentially heighten backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers," he said on ABC's "This Week."

Sgt. 1st Class Frank Minnie was in the processing center Monday and Wednesday, getting some health tests and immunizations in preparation for his deployment. The mass shooting happened Thursday, but Minnie said Fort Hood soldiers have the attitude that "the mission still goes on."

"Everybody's going to grieve a little bit. It hurts a lot because it's one of your battle buddies, and someone lost a mom, dad, brother or sister," said Minnie, 37, who served in Iraq in 2006. "But it doesn't change my perspective of going to war. I've got a job to do."

Officials: U.S. Aware of Hasan Efforts to Contact al Qaeda


Army Major in Fort Hood Massacre Used 'Electronic Means' to Connect with Terrorists


By RICHARD ESPOSITO, MATTHEW COLE and BRIAN ROSS

Nov. 9, 2009 —

U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Army Major Nidal Hasan was attempting to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda, two American officials briefed on classified material in the case told ABC News.

It is not known whether the intelligence agencies informed the Army that one of its officers was seeking to connect with suspected al Qaeda figures, the officials said.

One senior lawmaker said the CIA had, so far, refused to brief the intelligence committees on what, if any, knowledge they had about Hasan's efforts.

CIA director Leon Panetta and the Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, have been asked by Congress "to preserve" all documents and intelligence files that relate to Hasan, according to the lawmaker.

On Sunday, Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) called for an investigation into whether the Army missed signs as to whether Hasan was an Islamic extremist.

"If Hasan was showing signs, saying to people that he had become an Islamist extremist, the U.S. Army has to have a zero tolerance," Lieberman told Fox News Sunday.

Investigators want to know if Hasan maintained contact with a radical mosque leader from Virginia, Anwar al Awlaki, who now lives in Yemen and runs a web site that promotes jihad around the world against the U.S.

In a blog posting early Monday titled "Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing," Awlaki calls Hassan a "hero" and a "man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people."

According to his site, Awlaki served as an imam in Denver, San Diego and Falls Church, Virginia.

The Associated Press reported Sunday that Major Hasan attended the Falls Church mosque when Awlaki was there.

The Telegraph of London reported that Awlaki had made contact with two of the 9/11 hijackers when he was in San Diego.

He denied any knowledge of the hijacking plot and was never charged with any crime. After an intensive investigation by the FBI, Awlaki moved to Yemen.

People who knew or worked with Hasan say he seemed to have gradually become more radical in his disapproval of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.



A fellow Army doctor who studied with Hasan, Val Finell, told ABC News, "We would frequently say he was a Muslim first and an American second. And that came out in just about everything he did at the University.

Finell said he and other Army doctors complained to superiors about Hasan's statements.

"And we questioned how somebody could take an oath of office&be an officer in the military and swear allegiance to the constitution and to defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic and have that type of conflict," Finell told ABC News.

Comment:

Why didn't the US Army stop this terrorist-supporter before he acted to kill and wound so many people?

It is becoming clear, they knew he was a terrorist-sympathizer and a terrorist-supporter.  Why didn't they act before this horrid crime was committed?

The US people deserve answers and the people responsible for doing nothing - with the knowledge they had of Hasan - should have to answer for their possible culpibility in this atrocity.

It all sounds very weird to me. And scary too. If the USA is expecting the army to protect them from terrorism and they can't even see it when it is right in front of their noses?????????? Well, makes you wonder.

Why didn't the US Army stop this terrorist-supporter before he acted to kill and wound so many people? ~Knate

That's an excellent question, Knate.   It's a familiar question people have been asking for 8 years.

Point well-made, Katii.

From an AP article:

After he arrived at Fort Hood, Hasan was conflicted about what to tell fellow Muslim soldiers about the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, alarming an Islamic community leader from whom he sought counsel. "I told him, `There's something wrong with you,'" Osman Danquah, co-founder of the Islamic Community of Greater Killeen, told The Associated Press on Saturday. "I didn't get the feeling he was talking for himself, but something just didn't seem right."

Danquah assumed the military's chain of command knew about Hasan's doubts, which had been known for more than a year to classmates in a graduate military medical program. His fellow students complained to the faculty about Hasan's "anti-American propaganda," but said a fear of appearing discriminatory against a Muslim student kept officers from filing a formal written complaint.

If someone in the military is talking like this, I don't care if he's Muslim or not, he should be investigated immediately.

Dear Dan,

I agree with you; completely.  Immediately investigated.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/fort_hood_xjP9yGrJN7gl7zdsJ31vnJ

The much-heralded political correctness of the Army brought this about.

Fort Hood's 9/11

by Ralph Peters-New York Post

On Thursday afternoon, a radicalized Muslim US Army officer shouting "Allahu Akbar!" committed the worst act of terror on American soil since 9/11. And no one wants to call it an act of terror or associate it with Islam.

What cowards we are. Political correctness killed those patriotic Americans at Ft. Hood as surely as the Islamist gunman did. And the media treat it like a case of non-denominational shoplifting.

This was a terrorist act. When an extremist plans and executes a murderous plot against our unarmed soldiers to protest our efforts to counter Islamist fanatics, it’s an act of terror. Period.

When the terrorist posts anti-American hate-speech on the Web; apparently praises suicide bombers and uses his own name; loudly criticizes US policies; argues (as a psychiatrist, no less) with his military patients over the worth of their sacrifices; refuses, in the name of Islam, to be photographed with female colleagues; lists his nationality as "Palestinian" in a Muslim spouse-matching program, and parades around central Texas in a fundamentalist playsuit — well, it only seems fair to call this terrorist an "Islamist terrorist."

But the president won’t. Despite his promise to get to all the facts. Because there’s no such thing as "Islamist terrorism" in ObamaWorld.

And the Army won’t. Because its senior leaders are so sick with political correctness that pandering to America-haters is safer than calling terrorism "terrorism."

And the media won’t. Because they have more interest in the shooter than in our troops — despite their crocodile tears.

Maj. Nadal Malik Hasan planned this terrorist attack and executed it in cold blood. The resulting massacre was the first tragedy. The second was that he wasn’t killed on the spot.

Hasan survived. Now the rest of us will have to foot his massive medical bills. Activist lawyers will get involved, claiming "harassment" drove him temporarily insane. There’ll be no end of trial delays. At best, taxpayer dollars will fund his prison lifestyle for decades to come, since our politically correct Army leadership wouldn’t dare pursue or carry out the death penalty.

Maj. Hasan will be a hero to Islamist terrorists abroad and their sympathizers here. While US Muslim organizations decry his acts publicly, Hasan will be praised privately. And he’ll have the last laugh.

But Hasan isn’t the sole guilty party. The US Army’s unforgivable political correctness is also to blame for the casualties at Ft. Hood.

Given the myriad warning signs, it’s appalling that no action was taken against a man apparently known to praise suicide bombers and openly damn US policy. But no officer in his chain of command, either at Walter Reed Army Medical Center or at Ft. Hood, had the guts to take meaningful action against a dysfunctional soldier and an incompetent doctor.

Had Hasan been a Lutheran or a Methodist, he would’ve been gone with the simoon. But officers fear charges of discrimination when faced with misconduct among protected minorities.

Now 12 soldiers and a security guard lie dead. 31 soldiers were wounded, 28 of them seriously. If heads don’t roll in this maggot’s chain of command, the Army will have shamed itself beyond moral redemption.

There’s another important issue, too. How could the Army allow an obviously incompetent and dysfunctional psychiatrist to treat our troubled soldiers returning from war? An Islamist whacko is counseled for arguing with veterans who’ve been assigned to his care? And he’s not removed from duty? What planet does the Army live on?

For the first time since I joined the Army in 1976, I’m ashamed of its dereliction of duty. The chain of command protected a budding terrorist who was waving one red flag after another. Because it was safer for careers than doing something about him.

Get ready for the apologias. We’ve already heard from the terrorist’s family that "he’s a good American." In their world, maybe he is.

But when do we, the American public, knock off the PC nonsense?

A disgruntled Muslim soldier murdered his officers way back in 2003, in Kuwait, on the eve of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Recently? An American mullah shoots it out with the feds in Detroit. A Muslim fanatic attacks an Arkansas recruiting station. A Muslim media owner, after playing the peace card, beheads his wife. A Muslim father runs over his daughter because she’s becoming too Westernized.

Muslim terrorist wannabes are busted again and again. And we’re assured that "Islam’s a religion of peace."

I guarantee you that the Obama administration’s non-response to the Ft. Hood attack will mock the memory of our dead.

Islamist terror strike

Some Muslims are terrorists. Shall we kill all Muslims?

If some Jews are terrorists, do we kill all Jews? All Irish? All Catholics? All Mexicans? All Liberals? All non-white people? All people who beleive in tolerance and understanding rather than "shoot first and ask no questions"?

Where does the cycle of hatred end?

That's one of Rupert Murdoch's papers, isn't it?

What an @$$hole that Ralph Peters is! Inflaming hatred even more than necessary comes naturally to warmongers, I suppose.

Dear Dale,

You said...

Dale, you are either a d__khead or unable to understand....some doesn't mean all...the cycle of hatred? Ask the terrorists where it ends.

Ralph Peters is an a$$hole?  How so?  He speaks truth and wisdom, analyzing the causes of the policies that gave us the Ft Hood murders by an avowed Muslim terrorist.  Don't like the truth? That's okay.  But it's still the truth.

You have a severely skewed set of values to ask if say that if some Muslims are terrorists we should kill all Muslims...or all Jews...or all Irish...etc.

Robert, just because you filter something through your bigotry and it comes out looking like "truth" to you, doesn't make it truth, objectively speaking. Otherwise, blacks would indeed be inferior to whites, women would be inferior to men, Christianianity would be the best religion in the world, (or Islam would be, if you asked a radical Muslim), Creationism would be science, and the Earth would be flat.

Delusions borne of extremist ideology do not interest me. I'm only interested in facts. Which neither you nor Ralph Peters presented. So get over it!

Peters presented the reasons why a guy who would have been expelled from the Army were he not a Musilim was able to kill a bunch of patriotic Americans.

Dear Robert and dear Dale...

I am going to ask you both again:  PLEASE do not start with the usual exchange of personally-demeaning statements aabout each other.  I am asking you to both just deal with opinions on issues - and please stop getting personal!

Every time this goes on between you two - and others! - it descends into the Dale and Robert Show - and everyone else gets pushed out as you two (and others!) carry on your personal bickering and snide comments about each other.

Once one starts, the other has to respond, and off it goes again.  It really sucks and it really is unnecessary.

So, please, will you please just take that part of your conversation out and just ARGUE and bicker over your opinions - and NOT your personalities.

Thank you!

These kinds of acts of vengeance will never end until and unless the American people stop swallowing the immoral pretense behind this "war on terror" and demand of their government to put an end to it's actions that inspire them. 

People, Americans, must stop supporting and advocating a military response except in answer to an attack on our country by another country and not because some multi-national corporations' bottom lines  are threatened by some foreign government's unwillingness to be exploited is when that 'hope' Obama sold will be possible. 

When our government ceases it's military adventures to "protect America's interests," which is profits (for multi-national big-business) is when that 'hope' Obama sold to so many Americans to soothe their exasperated and displeasured lives will be possible. 

Until that happens we can only look forward to more and more people seeking vengeance for themselves against Americans.  What kind of future is that for ourselves and the generations to follow to look forward to? 

You cannot currently send a star to Knate because you have done so within the last week.

Listen to Knate, Dale.  Be more civil and constructive.  If you have a counter to the truth I'd like to see it.

Dear Robert,

From what I have been reading, it seems the Army knew about Hasan's anti-American opinions.  If that is so, he should have been removed from the Army - not placed in a sensitive position where he could do what he did.

...

Dear Dale,

To blame Islam or all Muslims for this act is bigotry.  That does not excuse any Muslims who do support terrorism or this act - but this act should bring NO guilt upon the hundreds and hundreds of millions of peaceful, peace-loving Muslims who are not involved in this atrocity.

Dear Robert,

I am not blaming Dale...and I am not blaming you.  I am asking you both to please stop bringing your personalities into the discussion.  It weakens your posts, your arguments and it is aroyal pain in the ass for all the rest of us.

I don't want you to censor your opinions!  You don't have to like each other - just please post without the personal snide remarks.  I do not think that is too much to ask.

Thank you..

American interests can be defined in a number of ways.  If our economy runs on oil and a nation decides to deny us of that oil, it is in our national interest to secure the supply.

When nations use terrorists as proxies to attack us, they must bear the responsibility for the consequences that are applied to them.

I'll even bribe you both.

Would you like some Green Stars?

See, Dale?  We are friends, really.  We just have differing opinions.

Thanks for the offer, but the checks i get weekly from Cheney and Rove are still more bankable.  They are all drawn on Canadian banks.

Peters presented the reasons why a guy who would have been expelled from the Army were he not a Musilim was able to kill a bunch of patriotic Americans.

Was Timothy McViegh a Muslim? He served in the Army too, and even fought in the Persian Gulf War, and still killed his fellow Americans in a terrorist attack. So Peters is an opportunistic idiot.

Actually, Robert, I am not totally unsympathetic to that point of view. I, at least, understand its logic.   However, I see no connection between Hasan and any nation, if we're talking about his acts of mass murder.

As for American interests, I would think of military action as being the last, last, last thing to be considered.  I am not convinced that has been the case in any of our current military ventures.

American interests can be defined in a number of ways.  If our economy runs on oil and a nation decides to deny us of that oil, it is in our national interest to secure the supply. ~Robert

Unfuckingbelievable, Robert.

If that is not an "extremist" view of reality there isn't one.

Was this what they were waiting for? 'Evidence' to Convict?

He could have been sent 'Home' prior to any of this happening, it still would have been 'Politically Correct' and our Soldiers would still be alive, and unwounded.

Not admitting that another 'Terrorist Act' ocurred on our soil does not make it any less true.  They should have stopped this before it went so far!

I don't think that anyone mentioned Hasan as being connected to any nation.  

It's pretty obvious that military action in the case of Iraq followed 12 years of attempts to gain Saddam's compliance with the terms of the Gulf War truce, constant attempts to shoot down coalition aircraft in the no-fly zones and evading the sanctions through oil deals with everyone from the French to the son of the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Anan.  As to Afghanistan, the Taliban opted out of any consideration for other than military response when they provided al Kidah with a base of operations.  Sort of like Laos and Cambodia in 1970.

If you really believe in that extremist bit of 'wisdom' you posted above, Robert, then you will have to agree with the following:

*Country X's* interests can be defined in a number of ways.  If their economy runs on *fill in the blank* and a nation decides to deny them of that *fill in the blank* it is in their national interest to secure the supply by the same means America goes about securing it's 'supply.'

Dear Electra,

My first questions, since hearing that the Army may have known, are the same questions you have.

It will take some time to verify if those reports are true, but if they are true - and the Army knew - there are questions that had better be answered for this.

Sorry Katii, but that's a fact.  Let's see what happens when our oil supply is interrupted or stopped.  It's a matter of public policy. That's where your anger should be applied.  I'm just the messenger.

The Army knew.  Hasan gave a speech to other doctors in which he said that non-believers should be decapitated and hot oil poured down their throats.  As Peters pointed out, had Hasan been a Lutheran advocating nthat, he would have been cashiered.  As he was a Muslim it was a politically correct hands-off ignoring of the facts until last Thursday's shooting rampage.

It would seem that this man did this based on his religious beliefs.  His beliefs...not what the religion itself speaks for.  I think there may be some truth to the army tippy-toeing around so as not to discriminate against anyone.  If this is the case, does being sensitive to someone rather than come off as appearing to be profiling someone seem to be the smart move.  13 dead....I think that answer says something. 

Let me see...Hasan is in contact with al Kidah...conspiracy perhaps?  Terrorist perhaps?  His murdering soldiers as an outgrowth of his belief in Islam makes it a terrorist attack.

Terrorist:  somebody who uses violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, to intimidate others, often for political purposes

Agreed, Suzanne.

Sorry Katii, but that's a fact.  Let's see what happens when our oil supply is interrupted or stopped.  It's a matter of public policy. That's where your anger should be applied.  I'm just the messenger. ~Robert

No, it's not a matter of "public policy" - it's a matter of corporate and government policy.  Big difference there.

Do you support and advocate the corporate and government policy that says we can take military action against a country because they own the rights to their own resources and choose not to 'play' by American corporate and government policy rules?  If you do, do you also support and advocate for any other nation to behave the same way to protect "their intersts." 

Well, do you support the idea that other countries can cripple our economy, run us into debt and demean our standard of living through bogus claims of equality of outcome, environmental policy and bad science?

It's not as matter of whether or not I support any policy of the government, it's a matter of whether there is such a policy and whether the government will enforce it.

FORT HOOD, Texas — Pvt. Joseph Foster took a bullet in the leg during the Fort Hood shooting rampage. He pauses when he's asked about the mayhem, then credits a stout heritage with bringing him through the ordeal and leaving him eager for his scheduled January deployment to Afghanistan.

"I'm Irish. It hit the bone and bounced out," Foster, of Ogden, Utah, said Sunday of the bullet that tore into his left hip. His wife is uneasy about the deployment, but the 21-year-old Foster is resolute. "I'm a soldier. It's my job."

Across Fort Hood, signs point to a post on the mend after the shooting spree Thursday that killed 13 and wounded 29. Accused gunman Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, shot in the torso by civilian police to end the rampage, was in stable condition and able to talk Monday at an Army hospital in San Antonio.

Authorities continue to refer to Hasan, 39, as the only suspect in the shootings but they won't say when charges would be filed and have said they have not determined a motive.

Sixteen victims remained hospitalized with gunshot wounds, and seven were in intensive care.

Even as the community took time to mourn the victims at worship services on and off the post Sunday, Fort Hood spokesman Col. John Rossi said the country's largest military installation was moving forward with the business of soldiering. The processing center where Hasan allegedly opened fire remains a crime scene, but the activities that went on there were relocated, with the goal of soon reopening the center.

"There's a lot of routine activity still happening. You'll hear cannon fire and artillery fire," Rossi said. "Soldiers in units are still trying to execute the missions we have been tasked with."

President Barack Obama will attend a memorial service Tuesday honoring victims of the attack, amid growing suggestions that Hasan's superior officers may have missed signs that he was embracing an increasingly extremist view of Islamic ideology.

Sen. Joe Lieberman said Sunday he wants Congress to determine whether the shootings constitute a terrorist attack and whether warning signs were missed. A day earlier, classmates who participated in a 2007-2008 master's program at a military college told The Associated Press that they complained to faculty during the program about what they considered to be Hasan's anti-American views, which included his giving a presentation that justified suicide bombing and telling classmates that Islamic law trumped the U.S. Constitution.

"If Hasan was showing signs, saying to people that he had become an Islamist extremist, the U.S. Army has to have zero tolerance," Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut, said on "Fox News Sunday." ''He should have been gone."

The personal Web site for a radical American imam living in Yemen who had contact with two 9/11 hijackers praised Hasan as a hero.

The posting Monday on the Web site for Anwar al Awlaki, who was a spiritual leader at two mosques where three 9/11 hijackers worshipped, said American Muslims who condemned the attacks on the Texas military base last week are hypocrites who have committed treason against their religion. Two U.S. intelligence officials told The Associated Press the Web site was Al Awlaki's. They spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence collection.

Army Chief of Staff George Casey warned Sunday against reaching conclusions about the suspected shooter's motives until investigators have fully explored the attack. "I think the speculation (on Hasan's Islamic roots) could potentially heighten backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers," he said on ABC's "This Week."

Sgt. 1st Class Frank Minnie was in the processing center Monday and Wednesday, getting some health tests and immunizations in preparation for his deployment. The mass shooting happened Thursday, but Minnie said Fort Hood soldiers have the attitude that "the mission still goes on."

"Everybody's going to grieve a little bit. It hurts a lot because it's one of your battle buddies, and someone lost a mom, dad, brother or sister," said Minnie, 37, who served in Iraq in 2006. "But it doesn't change my perspective of going to war. I've got a job to do."

___

Associated Press writers Allen Breed and Jeff Carlton in Fort Hood and Pamela Hess, Devlin Barrett, Richard Lardner and Jessica Gresko in Washington contributed to this report.

by Michael Gaddy

The facts as presented by the Army and the media reference the shooting at Fort Hood just don’t compute. While I routinely dismiss any "facts" disseminated by the Army and the state’s propaganda wing, sometimes referred to as the mainstream media (MSM), there are some glaring inconsistencies in what has been reported about this tragedy.

First is the report the perpetrator was dead and then hours later the revelation that he was still alive. Exactly how long does it take to determine if a person is dead or alive? Could it be no one knew whom the shooter or shooters were and a story had to be concocted for public consumption? What happened to the two other "suspects" that were detained? What did they do to qualify as suspects and more importantly, what information surfaced that led to their release? One of the suspects reportedly stated he "was with the shooter."

Second is the number of victims from a single shooter. Let us not forget this shooting did not occur at the mall, it occurred on a military installation where the victims had been trained in military tactics and some were combat veterans. We are to believe they did nothing to stop a single shooter and he was allowed to reload several times and continue shooting and the only thing that stopped him was the arrival of a police officer after the gunman had gunned down over 40 people?

And how so very convenient for the state, a perpetrator who was both anti-war and a Muslim; just doesn’t get any better than that. Could this be an example of following the philosophy of Rahm Emanuel on dealing with a crisis?

Third was the shutting down of communications in and around Ft. Hood for hours. While the Army and the media will explain this in various scenarios, it also provided the Army with a chance to create whatever story it was they wanted to provide the public on the terrible tragedy. Of course we all know the Army would never distort or lie about the facts involving the deaths of innocents. Well, there is that My Lai thing. People on the ground have told me cell phone towers were jammed to prevent unauthorized dissemination of information after the shooting. Again, the Army would not want any information contrary to the company line emerging from this disaster.

All too convenient for the Army was the rapid release of negative information related to the alleged shooter. It was said he received a negative evaluation report and that he had caused "red flags" to be raised some months ago concerning emails. Do we know anything this detailed about the "suspects" who were released? The caveat was added that it was unclear as to whether the suspect was the author of those emails. So, months ago, alarms were raised about emails the suspect might have sent, yet, in all those months the Army has been unable to determine who wrote them. Yeah, right. If red flags were in fact raised months ago, why did the Army do nothing? Going back to the 9/11 paradigm, we see the same evidence exhibited: the state had prior warnings but did not act on them. This proves unequivocally the government is either incompetent or complicit in both events. Yet, the state would have us all unarmed and depending on them for protection.

President Obama pledged, "to get answers to every single question about this event" but he also promised an end to signing statements, a transparent government, no more torture of detainees, and many more lies.

There has been speculation on the Internet that the shooting could have been a revolt against the Army from soldiers faced with stop-loss and multiple combat tours to Iraq and Afghanistan. While there is no evidence to support this theory, there is also no evidence to support the official Army version of events. Suicides among military personnel and veterans are at alarming levels, yet the Department of Defense does more to hide these facts than it does to deal with them.

The last thing the state can let happen is an awakening by its enforcement arm (military and LE) that they are nothing but tools of oppression and in fact, slaves to the monster they serve. While the military is trained and encouraged to kill and bomb in the name of the state, they are forbidden the means of protection for themselves and their loved ones once they are outside the killing zones designated by the state.

All is not normal inside the military community. This is not just seen in our military, instruments of oppression in other countries are revolting as well.

While it is doubtful we will ever learn the truth of exactly what happened at Fort Hood, we know with a degree of certainty the truth will never be revealed by the Army or the media. Could this have been a false flag event to divert the attention of the American public from the debates and planned demonstrations against the health care fiasco? Could it have simply been another MK Ultra event to further demonize the anti-war element in this country and to lay another crime at the feet of the current villain du jour: Muslims? Could there be a connection between this alleged shooter and his fellow Virginia Tech shooter Seung Hui Cho, other than an oblique reference to Cho having a Muslim influence?

One must always ask this question when faced with a story that is issued and controlled by the State: Cui Bono? Wonderful, is it not, the state is empowered with the unique ability to investigate its own lies and the power of the media and academia to demonize any who would question its veracity, and the support of Boobus, whose livelihood depends on the state’s power to redistribute the wealth of the nation from producers to parasites.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/gaddy/gaddy72.1.html

Well, do you support the idea that other countries can cripple our economy, run us into debt and demean our standard of living through bogus claims of equality of outcome, environmental policy and bad science?It's not as matter of whether or not I support any policy of the government, it's a matter of whether there is such a policy and whether the government will enforce it. ~Robert

That is a lot of words but they don't answer my question.  Would you answer my question? 

I'll answer yours...
 

No, I do not support any nation being allowed to run us into debt or demean our standard of living through bogus claims of equality of outcome, environmental policy and bad science, but I do believe in all nations working to protect the environment.  However, I believe in a sovereign country's right to it's own oil and to sell - or not - it's oil to other countries if they choose to/not to.  If they choose not to then it is incumbent upon the country dependent upon that oil another country refuses to sell to them to immediately begin to greatly reduce their dependence upon oil in favor of something else, then circumventing any economic or lifestyle hardship.  Like Repubicans love to espouse so often, I believe in being self-sufficient. 

I do not like or enjoy myself - or my country - being dependent upon someone else or some other country.  I think that is a recipe for being held hostage for the very things you posed in your question.

Do you support and advocate the corporate and government policy that says we can take military action against a country because they own the rights to their own resources and choose not to 'play' by American corporate and government policy rules?  If you do, do you also support and advocate for any other nation to behave the same way to protect "their intersts." 

Well, we can always develop alternative energy sources to wean us off foreign oil and thus gain true economic independence. Then it won't matter if other nations deny us their oil. We will be free of their influence, just as they will be free of ours.

We also need to limit our trade with China and other nations and stop all the damned outsourcing of manufacturing goods.

It's not a matter of whether or not I support any policy of the government, it's a matter of whether there is such a policy and whether the government will enforce it.

Actually yes it does matter, Robert, if you support any policy of your  representative government.  It matters if any American supports any policy of their representative government.  Of course it matters.

It's only when it doesn't matter to the people what their representative government's policies are that allows their government to do whatever it wants to - because it "doesn't matter" to the people what their representative government does. 

But, all that and anything else you would offer that doesn't answer my question, do you support and advocate the corporate and government policy that says we can take military action against a country because they own the rights to their own resources and choose not to 'play' by American corporate and government policy rules?  If you do, do you also support and advocate for any other nation to behave the same way to protect "their intersts" ?

BELTON, Texas, Nov. 9, 2009—

A retired Army colonel and former military judge at Fort Hood has been hired to represent the officer accused of going on a shooting spree and killing 13 people last week at the Texas military base.

John P. Galligan told ABC News today that he has been retained by the family of Major Nidal Malik Hasan and has traveled from his office in Belton, Texas, to San Antonio where Hasan is being treated at the Brooke Army Medical Center.

Galligan said he was aware that Hasan, who was shot several times, was conscious and talking with hospital staff. He said he intends to make sure that his client's rights are protected. He declined to discuss his client's motives or what his line of defense would be.

Galligan has been in private law practice since retiring from the Army; his cases now include court martials and military discharges.

No charges have been filed yet against Hasan, and investigators won't say when they will be filed. Prosecutors have also said they have yet to be able to determine a motive for the lethal rampage, although family and acquaintances say Hasan was increasingly religious and had turned against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In addition, Hasan was distressed by the stories told by injured soldiers where he previously worked as a psychiatrist at Walter Reed Hospital, and had recently received word that he was going to be deployed to Afghanistan.

The commander of Fort Hood, Lt. Gen. Robert Cone, announced plans for Tuesday's memorial service to honor the 12 soldiers and one civilian who were killed in last week's carnage. President Obama will attend the service.

The president told ABC News' Jake Tapper that investigators are reviewing Hasan's actions.

"We are going to complete this investigation and we are going to take whatever steps are necessary to make sure that something like this doesn't happen again," Obama said.

"I think the questions that we're asking now and we don't have yet complete answers to is, is this an individual who's acting in this way or is it some larger set of actors? You know, what are the motivations? Those are all questions that I think we have to ask ourselves," the president said.

Families of 11 of the 13 people killed will be at the traditional memorial service that will include remarks by Obama and Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey. It will end with a roll call of the shooting victims and a 21-gun salute, Cone said.

The toll of wounded rose today to 43. Fort Hood officials said some of the casualties didn't report their injuries until later.

Fifteen victims remained hospitalized with gunshot wounds, and eight were in intensive care.

WASHINGTON — Intelligence agencies intercepted communications last year and this year between Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who is accused of shooting to death 13 people at Fort Hood, Tex., and a radical cleric in Yemen known for his incendiary anti-American teachings.

But federal authorities dropped an inquiry into the matter after deciding that the messages warranted no further action, government officials said on Monday.

One must always ask this question when faced with a story that is issued and controlled by the State: Cui Bono? Wonderful, is it not, the state is empowered with the unique ability to investigate its own lies and the power of the media and academia to demonize any who would question its veracity, and the support of Boobus, whose livelihood depends on the state’s power to redistribute the wealth of the nation from producers to parasites. ~David

Unfortunate, but too true.

But federal authorities dropped an inquiry into the matter after deciding that the messages warranted no further action, government officials said on Monday.  ~Knate

Am I the only one who'd love to know what those messages were that  government  decided warranted no further action?

No, you're not the only one, Katii.

There are two of us.

No charges have been filed yet against Hasan, and investigators won't say when they will be filed.

The charges should have been filed ALREADY!!!

"The facts as presented by the Army and the media reference the shooting at Fort Hood just don’t compute."

David,

I thought that too at first but I'm starting to believe that it happened as presented. There would have to be too many unconnected people to support a conspiracy by the Army; they'd never be able to pull it off without someone spilling their guts.

Early on I was convinced this guy was a Muslim extremist jihadist but I figured he was acting on his own. Now ABC news reports that the CIA knew he was trying to contact a radical imam in Yemen. Now this is looking international.

I'm with you, Dan.

There is no Conspiracy.  It happened the way people are saying it happened. 

You called it, Dan, before the media revealed the facts about his sympathies.

Oh, if there is a 'conspiracy' to be had to use this tragedy to prop-up the now fast-dying support for the 'war on terror' you can bet your ass there is one.  Absofukinglutely.

That so-called argument has been used before and it is an argument without any substance. To have a Conspiracy one has to prove there is a Conspiracy.  Not the other way around.  No one has to prove there wasn't a Conspiracy.

Just because people don't trust the government doesn't prove everything is some kind of mass Conspiracy.  And just because anyone "believes" there was a Conspiracy is also not proof of anything.

There are hundreds of witnesses that Hasan was shooting people.  Many of them were wounded, seeing him shoot bullets into their own bodies.   Nobody made this up.

Thanks Knate!

I agree that profiling is not good, but this does not fall into that category at all.  From what I've read No one cared that he was Muslim. They were concerned about his Ant-American sentiments. His actions! Why were they not this concerned about Political Correctness before, when they were sending innocent people to Prison?

A terrorist act is not strictly based in one Religion, Group, or Sect. Remember the Oklahoma bombing? Wouldn't you call that an 'Act of Terror?' These were Americans that did that.

It appears to me that everything this guy did "Warranted further Action."

Edited cause my fingers can't spell when they are angry.

Dear Electra,

I agree: "A terrorist is not strictly based in one Religion, Group or Sect."

I think it was his behavior and his statements that should have mattered.  It wouldn't matter to me if he was Lutheran or Taoist; whether he was Zoroastrian or an agnostic.  I think, like you do, Electra, his statements and his behavior should've warranted further action.

His behaviour and the fact that he was trying to communicate with that radical imam in Yemen should have been enough. Another possibility for no action is that the CIA was trying to learn more about a possible terrorist ring by letting him stay in the army. Obviously a bad idea in hindsight if that was the case.

Comment:

This morning I have been hearing "bleeding-hearts" whining about how "the victim," the misunderstood Major Nidal Malik Hasan cannot receive a fair trial.  Oh really? It seems their idea of a fair trial is one in which the guilty go free.

Well, my idea of a fair trial is when the guilty get convicted.  IMO, Hasan is guilty and he should be convicted.  I also feel, the US taxpayer shouldn't be spending money "protecting" this mass-murderer's so-called legal rights. Dispense with him quickly.  That is what is fair.  That is my opinion.

It's pretty obvious this man is guilty.  How much fairer would people want it?  Oh, that's right we forced him in to this.  I suppose we are all guilty.  Just makes me sick to my stomach. 

The paper yesterday showed the pictures of the dead.  Boy does that hit home.  You should have seen the 19 year old, just a baby or the woman soldier who was pregnant or any of the others.  Very sad.

If there was a ever a need for the death penalty, this is a good person to use it on.  Put him out of his misery and ours.

Dear Suzanne,

Once again, you and I are on the same page about this and about Nidal Malik Hasan.

I am honored to agree with you.

Thanks and I too am honored.

Dr. Phil and the Fort Hood Killer His terrorist motive is obvious to everyone but the press and the Army brass

It can by now come as no surprise that the Fort Hood massacre yielded an instant flow of exculpatory media meditations on the stresses that must have weighed on the killer who mowed down 13 Americans and wounded 29 others. Still, the intense drive to wrap this clear case in a fog of mystery is eminently worthy of notice.

The tide of pronouncements and ruminations pointing to every cause for this event other than the one obvious to everyone in the rational world continues apace. Commentators, reporters, psychologists and, indeed, army spokesmen continue to warn portentously, "We don't yet know the motive for the shootings."

What a puzzle this piece of vacuity must be to audiences hearing it, some, no doubt, with outrage. To those not terrorized by fear of offending Muslim sensitivities, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan's motive was instantly clear: It was an act of terrorism by a man with a record of expressing virulent, anti-American, pro-jihadist sentiments. All were conspicuous signs of danger his Army superiors chose to ignore.

What is hard to ignore, now, is the growing derangement on all matters involving terrorism and Muslim sensitivities. Its chief symptoms: a palpitating fear of discomfiting facts and a willingness to discard those facts and embrace the richest possible variety of ludicrous theories as to the motives behind an act of Islamic terrorism. All this we have seen before but never in such naked form. The days following the Fort Hood rampage have told us more than we want to know, perhaps, about the depth and reach of this epidemic.

One of the first outbreaks of these fevers, the night of the shootings, featured television's star psychologist, Dr. Phil, who was outraged when fellow panelist and former JAG officer Tom Kenniff observed that he had been listening to a lot of psychobabble and evasions about Maj. Hasan's motives.

A shocked Dr. Phil, appalled that the guest had publicly mentioned Maj. Hasan's Islamic identity, went on to present what was, in essence, the case for Maj. Hasan as victim. Victim of deployment, of the Army, of the stresses of a new kind of terrible war unlike any other we have known. Unlike, can he have meant, the kind endured by those lucky Americans who fought and died at Iwo Jima, say, or the Ardennes?

The quality and thrust of this argument was best captured by the impassioned Dr. Phil, who asked us to consider, "how far out of touch with reality do you have to be to kill your fellow Americans . . . this is not a well act." And how far out of touch with reality is such a question, one asks in return—not only of Dr. Phil, but of the legions of commentators like him immersed in the labyrinths of motive hunting even as the details of Maj. Hasan's proclivities became ever clearer and more ominous.

To kill your fellow Americans—as many as possible, unarmed and in the most helpless of circumstances, while shouting "Allahu Akbar" (God is great), requires, of course, only murderous hatred—the sort of mindset that regularly eludes the Dr. Phils of our world as the motive for mass murder of this kind.

As the meditations on Maj. Hasan's motives rolled on, "fear of deployment" has served as a major theme—one announced as fact in the headline for the New York Times's front-page story: "Told of War Horror, Gunman Feared Deployment."

The authority for this intelligence? The perpetrator's cousin.

No story could have better suited that newspaper's ongoing preoccupation with the theme of madness in our fighting men, and the deadly horrors of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, than this story of a victim of war pressures gone berserk. The one fly in the ointment—Maj. Hasan had of course seen no war, and no combat.

Still, with a bit of stretching, adherents of Maj. Hasan-as-war-victim theme found a substitute of sorts—namely the fears allegedly provoked in him by his exposure, as an army psychiatris

The thesis then: Maj. Hasan's mental stress, provoked by the suffering of Americans who had been in combat, caused him to go out and butcher as many of these soldiers as he could.

Let's try putting that one before a jury.

By Sunday morning, Gen. George Casey Jr., Army chief of staff, confronted questions put to him by ABC's George Stephanopolous—among them the matter of the complaints about Maj. Hasan's anti-American tirades that were made by fellow students in military classes, as well as other danger signs ignored by officials when they were reported, apparently for fear of offense to a Muslim member of the military.

These were speculations, Gen. Casey repeatedly cautioned. We need to be very careful, he explained, "We are a very diverse army." Mr. Stephanopolous then helpfully summarized matters: This case then was either a case of premeditated terror—or the man just snapped.

The general was not about to address such questions. He was there to recite the required pieties, and describe the military priorities . . . which are, it appears, a concern above all for the sensitivities of a diverse army, a concern so great as to render even the mention of salient facts out of order, as "speculation.'"

"This terrible event," Gen. Casey noted, "would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty."

To hear this, and numerous other such pronouncements of recent days, was to be reminded of all those witnesses to the suspicious behavior of the 9/11 hijackers who held their tongues for fear of being charged with discrimination. It has taken Maj. Hasan, and the fantastic efforts to explain away his act of bloody hatred, to bring home how much less capable we are of recognizing the dangers confronting us than we were even before September 11.

By DOROTHY RABINOWITZ

Dear Robert,

You said...

The thesis then: Maj. Hasan's mental stress, provoked by the suffering of Americans who had been in combat, caused him to go out and butcher as many of these soldiers as he could.

Please show me, by quoting, who here in this group said that.  You can't?  of course you can't because no one here said that.

Hi Knate,

It appears to me that he is going by what was said in the Article, not the group.  I believe that he is trying to show how erroneous the News Reports are, as well as the excuses made by the Army and others.

Dear Electra,

Fair enough.  Then we agree - I agree with you and with Robert - that the excuses being put forth for the actions of this mass murderer are unacceptable.

Thank you, Electra.

And Hasan made fun of he soldiers he was counseling.

Yes, I have heard the reports of how disappointed his colleagues were with him on his previous assignments before he was sent to Ft Hood.

Many wanted him fired and drummed out of the service for his actions, words and behavior. There was even a report on that on NPR!

 But what we do know is that he was not a very warm, caring doctor – even by military standards – and people noticed that early on. They noticed that he seemed more concerned with his religion than his schooling and treatment of soldiers. They noticed that he used  medical lecture slot to preach the Quran. And yet he continued at the medical school, worked at the hospital, moved on like low-achieving students who are socially promoted because the grade they are leaving just wants them out of their hair.

http://tucsoncitizen.com/godblogging/2009/11/06/religion-gone-bad/

The warning signs, it seems to me, were everywhere - and the sirens going off should have been heard and heeded years ago - before this atrocity.

Why was he allowed to continue in the service?  Why?

Because he is a Muslim.

Oh, gawd...here we go.

Yup...all other factors being equal, his being a Muslim is the reason that political correctness trumped common sense (as you yourself pointed out) and he wasn't discharged from the Army.

That so-called argument has been used before and it is an argument without any substance ... Nobody made this up. ~Knate

Knate, was that post in response to mine above it?

I don't even remember anymore, Katii.

I'll just delete it.

  Hi Knate

Because he is a Muslim. Yup...all other factors being equal, his being a Muslim is the reason that political correctness trumped common sense (as you yourself pointed out) and he wasn't discharged from the Army.

That is entirely an unfounded assumption on Robert's part. What if the shooter had been Mormon, an atheist or a rabid right-winger? Would he have made the same claim? Possibly, and it would have been just as rediculous.

I agree, Dale.

It is not that he was a Muslim.  It is that he made the choice to kill.  he could've done so, as you point out, if he was a Mormon or an atheist or, even, a rabid Right-Winger.

Trying to make Islam or Muslims the scapegoats, IMO, is way off target.

Blaming political correctness for the shootings is just an expression that civil rights for all is meaningless to some people, so they lie by claiming that minorities somehow got "special treatment". It the same rancid bogusity that anti-gay bigots use to justify equal rights to homosexuals, by calling their being granted the right to marriage special treatment.

Agreed again, Dale:

There is one person to blame for this atrocity and his name is Nidal Malik Hasan.  Not political correctness; not Islam; not the fact that he has a Middle eastern-sounding name.

I do agree, however, there are questions that need to be answered as to why Major Hasan wasn't removed from the service - but the responsibility for the atrocity still lies with the perpetrator of the atrocity: Nidal Malik Hasan.

Dale, I think it's fair to point out that there are no Mormons, atheists or rabid right-wingers that have, at least to my knowledge, declared war on the west by claiming responsibility for the 9/11 attacks or regularly have crazy leaders of their respective groups commending them for their 'good works' of mass-killing of innocent people.

No, it's not true that all of Islam - in fact the vast majority of Islam - does  not condone, support or carry out terrorist acts, the vast majority of Islam flatly denounces terrorism.  But the fact is that Islam does have crazy leaders and followers who support, claim responsibility for, condone and applaud, and carry out terrorist attacks on the West.  It is because of that fact that people and authorities would be remiss in not pay attention and act when 'red flags' are raised by a Muslim.

Trying to make Islam or Muslims the scapegoats, IMO, is way off target. ~Knate

Agreed.

Dear Katii,

I agree: There are crazies and insane extremists within the vast and varied and complex Muslim communities of over one billion people.

There are also, as I know you agree, some insane crazies in the West who think it okay to just go invade and occupy other nations at will, even when those nations or societies are not necessarily any danger whatsoever to us.

Just my opinion.

I think it's fair to point out that there are no Mormons, atheists or rabid right-wingers that have, at least to my knowledge, declared war on the west

Well, there are Mormon fundamentalists in Utah and Texas who could easily flip into terrorism. Communists, who are anti-capitalist and therefore against American economic interest, are also atheists. And of course, there is the Ku Klux Klan and the neo-Nazis. We are obsessed with Muslim terrorists now, but a century from now it could be some other group that is our greatest threat to peace and freedom. In all groups, there is the potential for hate and violence.

Remember Timothy McVeigh? He was one of our own too, and NOT Muslim!

I just wanted to express how sad this day is for those at Ft Hood.  I didn't catch it all but the roll call and gun salute and taps.  Very emotional.  I hope these people may pick up the pieces of their lives and be able to move on and be happy again.   Just don't know what words to say.

I watched the President and first lady and they too appeared to be struck with deep emotion.

May those men and women rest in peace and know they are loved and appreciated.

As officials continue to investigate the alleged Fort Hood killer, it is looking increasingly likely that the Army missed several red flags in Major Nidal Malik Hasan's behavior.

Many observers say it wouldn't be surprising if such signals had been missed, given that Hasan was a psychiatrist whom the Army desperately needed to help tend to the mental wounds of two wars.

But at the same time, some members of the military are quietly discussing the more troubling possibility that the Army looked the other way precisely because Hasan was Muslim.

Army officials strongly deny any suggestion that Hasan's religion resulted in his being given special treatment. But one officer who attended the Pentagon's medical school with Hasan disagrees.

"He was very vocal about being a Muslim first and holding Shari'a law above the Constitution," this officer recalls.

When fellow students asked, "How can you be an officer and hold to the Constitution?," the officer says, Hasan would "get visibly upset - sweaty and nervous - and had no good answers."

This medical doctor would speak only anonymously because his commanders have ordered him not to talk about Hasan, he says.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091110/us_time/08599193733400

This just keeps looking worse and worse.........

It seems Hasan was in contact for a period of several months with a very radical mullah, and yes the military knew about it.  Since I have seen this information I now label Hasan a terrorist.  I had already labeled his actions as terrorism.

I am going to offer a quote from Foreign Policy Nov. Dec 09: God is Dead by: Karen Armstrong.  It is being presented as information to think about while formating opinions upon this subject.

". . .This aggression does not represent the faith of the majority, however.  In recent Gallup polling conducted in 35 muslim countries, only 7 percent of those questioned thought that the September 11 attacks were justified.  Their reasons were entirely political."

     "Fundementalism is not conservative.  Rather, it is highly innovative--even heretical--because it always develops in response to a percieved crisis.  In their anxiety, some fundamentalists distort the tradition they are trying to defend.  The Pakistani ideologue Abu Ala Maududi (1903-1979) was the first major Muslim thinker to make jihad, signifying "holy war" instead of the traditional meaning for "struggle" or "striving" for self-betterment, a central Islamic duty."

For the record the article deals with the struggle over secularism and fundamentalism, should anyone wish to explore it further.

However, the Gallop poll helps to show that not all muslims are the enemy.  I doubt anyone here is under that perception.  My son, absent from my life for many years just returned from Iraq.  I saw him for this first time in 11 years shortly before he left over a year ago.  He was all hellbent to go an kill Hajii.  I tried to explain to him that many people over there just want to be able to live their life, feed their families and live in peace.  Now he understands this more. 

I (insert name), having been appointed a (insert rank) in the U.S. Army under the conditions indicated in this document, do accept such appointment and do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter, so help me God.

Well, there are Mormon fundamentalists in Utah and Texas who could easily flip into terrorism. Communists, who are anti-capitalist and therefore against American economic interest, are also atheists. And of course, there is the Ku Klux Klan and the neo-Nazis. ~Dale

Dale, there are all kinds of 'fundamentalists' in all states of the Union -but would/could doesn't apply here.

Who are all these "people" that are talking "to whom" about Hasan?  Any names?  Any that have been interviewed 'on the record' for a paper or TV news?   We're reading all these articles about all these 'people' who noticed all these worrisome oddities about Hasan and the red flags but who exactly is feeding this information to the media?

I think it is safe to say at this point that the reason he was not dealt with before he started his shooting rampage was the underlying lying threat of looking  intolerant or being a bigoted person.

If people were wrong about this Hasan character and the accusations were unfounded then imagine that story.

It is clearly an example of political correctness gone awry.

So I guess it all depends on how the media would like to run with a story like this.

Would it be:

"Concerned Americans identify possible terrorist threat on Army Post"

Or would it be:

"Muslim Army officer targeted because of religious intolerance"

Because you know they would have invoked the Free Speech argument to immediately label anyone reporting him as an intolerant bigot.

...

Hiya Buck,

When it comes to the news media, I try not to believe everything I hear - and I try to use some skepticism about some reports - but there are so many first-hand reports about Nidal Malik Hasan and the "problems" he was causing and the things he said, that I find it impossioble not to come to the same conclusion that many people are arriving at:

The red flags were there, the sirens were going off, the warning signs were clear - and it seems no one was listening or taking responsibility.

It reminds me of what happened with some sex offenders within the Church; how they were shuffled from assignment to assignment, so no one would have to deal with what they were doing.

It seems to me, Hasan was shuffled around with no one taking responsibility.  And, I am so sad to say, I am beginning to believe he wasn't formally confronted enough because of, perhaps, political correctness and an unwillingness of the authorities to confront him because he was Muslim.

Whatever is the case, something should've been done before he arrived at Ft Hood.

This is a tragedy on so many levels - and if political correctness was in any way allowed to "protect" him, we have to seriously not ever allow that to happen again.

Well, the proponents of a hyper-political correct country want to have the cake and eat it too.

In one hand they want not one person to be looked at with suspicion because of color religion or speech.

And then on the other hand they will always ask why something wasn't done in hindsight.

I don't like the fact that a person is looked at with suspicion because of their looks or religion but I also know that right now, some people who look a certain way and are of a particular religion really want Americans to die.

So what do you do?...

Hiya Buck,

I don't associate looking closely at Hasan with something akin to looking closely at him solely because of his religious Faith. The signs I see that should've been closesly looked at were his attitude, his so-called anti-American statements, his erratic behavior. regardless of his Faith.

It wouldn't matter to me if he was Muslim, Jewish, Christian, atheist; I don't care.  But his behavior, his words, his actions should have been investigated and dealth with.

If they didn't because he was Muslim, that is a whole other problem and, IMO, that sucks.  No one should be protected by political correctness.  If that was involved it was wrong.  If they didn't want to say anything because of political correctness, that decision was deadly.  That decision was fatal.

I am convinced, for the most part, that he was not dealt with because of the stigma of singling out a Muslim in that respect.

The implications of being the accuser and being wrong outweighed being right...

...

I am close to joining you in that assessment, Buck.

We will never really know what the reason was for allowing him to slip through the cracks...but I think that political correctness can be just as dangerous as being bigoted.

True, Elizabeth.

Agreed, Elizabeth. 

Thursday , November 12, 2009

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan called himself a "soldier of Allah" on

business cards found in his apartment after the shooting rampage at Fort Hood in which he is accused of murdering 13 people.

Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, reportedly obtained the business cards over the Internet. In addition to listing his profession and contact information, the cards contain a discrete reference to his religion: "SoA(SWT)."

Watchdogs say the first letters are shorthand among militant Muslims to "soldier of Allah." The last letters refer to "Subhanahu Wa Ta'all," which means "glory to God."

The business cards were among numerous discoveries in Hasan's apartment of interest to investigators, who also are looking into whether Hasan wired money to Pakistan before last week's massacre.

As new reports come out on this guy, I am truly starting to believe it wasn't the actions of just one man misinterpreting something.  It seems as if a new call to do harm, kill or damage at any level, minor to big, is all good in this extremist sect and vision of Islam.   Pretty heavy duty, and how do you deal with it? 


This post was modified from its original form on 12 Nov, 16:29

Classmates: Hasan defended suicide bombings, held Islamist views


Fort Hood, Texas (CNN) -- Those who knew Nidal Malik Hasan before he was a major in the Army -- and the suspect in last week's mass killing at Fort Hood -- say he was long known for militant Islamist views.

Doctors who crossed paths with Hasan in medical programs paint a picture of a subpar student who wore his religious views on his sleeve.

Several doctors who knew Hasan spoke to CNN, but only on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation of the shooting, which left 12 soldiers and one civilian dead and dozens of other people wounded.

Hasan, an Army psychiatrist who faces 13 counts of premeditated murder, "was clearly espousing Islamist ideology" during his time as a medical student at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland, one of his former classmates told CNN.

Hasan's family has revealed little about him, saying in media interviews that Hasan was a "good American" and a lifelong Muslim who complained he was harassed in the Army because of his religion.

His former classmates describe a much more militant Hasan.

His presentations for school were often laced with extremist Muslim views, one source said.

"Is your allegiance to Sharia law or the United States?" students once challenged Hasan, the source said.

"Sharia law," Hasan responded, according to the source.

The incident was corroborated by another doctor who was present.

The source recalled another instance in which Hasan was asked if the U.S. Constitution was a brilliant document. Hasan replied, "No, not particularly," according to the source.

The former classmate told CNN that he voiced concerns about Hasan to supervisors at the school.

A second former medical school colleague of Hasan said several people raised concerns about Hasan's overall competence.

Even though Hasan earned his medical degree and residency, some of his fellow students believed Hasan "didn't have the intellect" to be in the program and was not academically rigorous in his coursework.

Hasan "was not fit to be in the military, let alone in the mental health profession," this classmate told CNN. "No one in class would ever have referred a patient to him or trusted him with anything."

The first classmate echoed this sentiment.

Hasan was "coddled, accommodated and pushed through that masters of public health despite substandard performance," the classmate said. He was "put in the fellowship program because they didn't know what to do with him."

The second classmate said he witnessed at least two of Hasan's PowerPoint discussions that included what he described as extremist views.

In these presentations, which were supposed to be about health, Hasan justified suicide bombings and spoke about the persecution of Muslims in the Middle East, in the United States and in the U.S. military, the source said.

Some in the crowd rolled their eyes or muttered under their breath, he said, and others were clearly uncomfortable.

Those in the audience, which included program supervisors, did not loudly object to Hasan's presentations, but did complain to their higher-ups afterward.

The supervisors expressed "appreciation, understanding and agreement" that the complaints would be discussed, but it was unclear what action, if any, came, the source said.

When the classmate challenged Hasan personally, Hasan dodged the questions, the source said.

Despite the controversy that his schoolwork created, classmates did not view Hasan as mentally unstable or psychotic, the source said.

Questions remain over how much Hasan's behavior and actions in school were reflected in his personnel files.

Col. Kimberly Kesling, deputy commander of Clinical Services for Darnell Medical Center at Fort Hood and Hasan's supervisor at the post, told reporters last week that Hasan was doing a good job in Texas.

"As a supervisor, I am aware of the job performance of people coming into our organization, that is part of our credentialing process," Kesling said. "The types of things that were reported to me via his evaluation report were things that concerned me, but did not raise red flags toward this [the shootings] in any way, shape, or form."

"His evaluation reports said that he had some difficulties in his residency, fitting into his residency, and we worked very hard to integrate him into our practice and into our organization, and he adapted very well, was doing a really good job for us," she said.

(continued)

Prompted by reports of former classmates, however, Army investigators would like to speak with people who have had contact with Hasan and who may have information about his activities and behavior, Maj. Gen Kevin Bergner, head of U.S. Army public affairs, said.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates weighed in on the information surfacing about Hasan.

"I deplore the leaks that have taken place," he said on a trip to Oshkosh, Wisconsin. People are talking about "what they know, which is one small piece of the puzzle."

"They don't know whether or not what they're leaking might jeopardize a potential criminal investigation and trial," he said.

"People who have a piece of this, frankly, ought to keep quiet and let the authorities go forward on this in an organized and comprehensive way," Gates said.

Hasan came under investigation last year when his contacts with radical imam Anwar al-Awlaki were intercepted by terrorism investigators monitoring the cleric's communications, a federal law enforcement official told CNN.

An employee of the Defense Department's Criminal Investigative Services, assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force, decided to drop the investigation after reviewing the intercepted communications and Hasan's personnel files.

Obama demands accountability if Hasan danger signs missed

President Barack Obama vowed today to hold accountable anyone who may have missed "potential warning signs" about the danger posed by Fort Hood massacre suspect Nidal Malik Hasan.

The president's comments, in his weekly address to the nation, came as a lawyer for the Army major said that Hasan had been left paralyzed from the waist down after police shot him to end the slaughter on the Central Texas post.

"We must compile every piece of information that was known about the gunman, and we must learn what was done with that information," Obama said, according to an advance text of his address. "Once we have those facts, we must act upon them. If there was a failure to take appropriate action before the shootings, there must be accountability."

Shortly after the Nov. 5 shootings, Obama reportedly saw e-mails that Hasan had sent to a radical Muslim cleric in Yemen whom the FBI has investigated since the 1990s for possible terrorist ties. Federal authorities intercepted the e-mails about a year ago but did not pursue an investigation of Hasan, an Army psychiatrist. They said this week the communications were considered to be consistent with his post-doctoral research at a military university outside Washington, D.C.

On Nov. 6, the president ordered a far-reaching review of everything known about Hasan before the massacre, but the inquiry's existence was not revealed until this week. By that point, sources had told The Dallas Morning News that Hasan had also wired money to Pakistan, which has become a hub for terrorist fundraising and is in the grip of a militant Islamic insurgency.

"I will insist that the full story be told," the president said in his comments. "That is paramount, and I won't compromise that investigation today by discussing the details of this case. But given the potential warning signs that may have been known prior [to] these shootings, we must uncover what steps – if any – could have been taken to avert this tragedy."

"We must quickly and thoroughly evaluate and address any flaws in the system, so that we can prevent a similar breach from happening again," Obama added. "Our government must be able to act swiftly and surely when it has threatening information. And our troops must have the security that they deserve."