View Full Version : Shooting At Ft.Hood
Strike For The South
11-05-2009, 21:41
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/11/05/texas.fort.hood.shootings/index.html
Please keep these people in your prayers or your thoughts or whatever.
Louis VI the Fat
11-05-2009, 22:00
Whoa. That's bad.
I didn't find much information about what is going on yet.
:us-texas:
LeftEyeNine
11-05-2009, 23:04
Army official says at least 12 dead, 31 wounded at Fort Hood, TX shooting; shooter was U.S. soldier, two other soldiers apprehended 4:55pm EST
Wth ?
Things are still pretty crazy right now; we have very little confirmation of hard facts thus far. The most definite info I've been able to cobble together at the moment:
1.) 7-12 dead (one of them apparently being one of the assailants)
2.) 20-30 wounded
3.) 2-3 total gunmen: 1 supposedly killed, at least 1 apprehended, possibly a 3rd shooter is still at large.
4.) The gunmen were dressed in military uniforms, but word yet on whether they were actually members of any U.S. military branch.
4.) The gunmen were dressed in military uniforms, but word yet on whether they were actually members of any U.S. military branch.
All three were active duty Army. The dead gunman was a Major. Appears to have been motivated by opposition to US action in Iraq/Afghanistan. The Major was apparently Muslim and about to be deployed.
pevergreen
11-06-2009, 00:04
This is the type of thing that makes me angry.
:shame:
Vladimir
11-06-2009, 00:07
Everyone was exceptionally quiet at the gym today.
Bite your tong Fragony.
So wait, was the Muslim Major shot by Muslims or by non-Muslims? I think they were non-Muslim, but why would they shoot a Muslim in opposition to deployment? Fear of desertion/treason?
Vladimir
11-06-2009, 00:17
I'm not sure what's more outrageous, the shooting or your post.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-06-2009, 00:18
So wait, was the Muslim Major shot by Muslims or by non-Muslims? I think they were non-Muslim, but why would they shoot a Muslim in opposition to deployment? Fear of desertion/treason?
No, he typed it wrong. The Muslim Major was the shooter:
The slain gunman was identified as Maj. Malik Nadal Hasan, according to a law enforcement source. The source believes he is 39 or 40 years old.
Apparently a recent convert to Islam (according to ABC) and about to be deployed to Iraq, but I can't confirm the first one as there aren't many details available.
I heard he was a psychiatrist.
Apparently a recent convert to Islam (according to ABC) and about to be deployed to Iraq, but I can't confirm the first one as there aren't many details available.
Converts. They do tend to be fanatical about their new faith. Heck, it took Cat Stevens what, 30 years to realize that it's okay to sing....
Can you post a link, EMFM? I've only found that he has an Arab name, but that it was unclear whether or not he was a Muslim.
EDIT: Actually, I can only find allegations by FOX News that he was a convert. And I'm not interested in fair and balanced news.
Centurion1
11-06-2009, 01:08
he was a muslim convert, he decided he want going to serve his country even though the military provided him with an education and job and than cowardly shot unarmed people. Scum, absolute scum. and to top it off he was a flipping psychiatrist not a real soldier.
His cousin says that he has been a muslim all his life...not a convert.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-06-2009, 03:18
Can you post a link, EMFM? I've only found that he has an Arab name, but that it was unclear whether or not he was a Muslim.
EDIT: Actually, I can only find allegations by FOX News that he was a convert. And I'm not interested in fair and balanced news.
Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6511591/Fort-Hood-shooting-Nidal-Malik-Hasan-said-Muslims-should-rise-up.html)
ABC also said he was Muslim, but that link is much more damning. Then again, with that name you can probably assume he's Muslim, just as you can assume John Smith of Idaho probably isn't.
He also in the past made comments that muslims should "Rise up against the aggressors".
Devastatin Dave
11-06-2009, 03:37
I can't wait to see all the muslims in the world rise up and condemn this. Remainder of comment deleted by moderator in interest of a calmer "tone."
I can totally see Tom Cruise going "Psychiatry kills! Do you believe me now?! Huh? Huh??!!!"
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-06-2009, 04:12
It appears that Mark Steyn has nailed it. (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWNhMjMxYTJhNTM0ZGQ5YThkMWU5NDc0ZGZiZWIzZWY=)
Prince of the Poodles
11-06-2009, 04:26
Its so crazy. MSNBC is blaming the military, CNN is blaming PTSD(even though he wasn't in combat), and Fox, as usual, is the only one with the balls to say what's really going on. And the MSM is always so surprised at Fox's ratings. :shame:
Samurai Waki
11-06-2009, 04:28
Deeply disturbing to say the least... I wonder what kind of ramifications this will have for Muslims serving in the military, and what those soldiers who are about to be deployed will think of them when the go to their countries.
Crazed Rabbit
11-06-2009, 04:36
Its so crazy. MSNBC is blaming the military, CNN is blaming PTSD(even though he wasn't in combat), and Fox, as usual, is the only one with the balls to say what's really going on. And the MSM is always so surprised at Fox's ratings. :shame:
PoP! Long time, no see.
I haven't seen any coverage of it, but blaming the military, or PSTD for a guy who hasn't seen combat, is silly.
Not hard to see why this guy got bad evals at Walter Reed.
I can totally see Tom Cruise going "Psychiatry kills! Do you believe me now?! Huh? Huh??!!!"
That would be interesting...
And DevDave is here too! :medievalcheers: :barrel:
CR
Devastatin Dave
11-06-2009, 04:41
Deeply disturbing to say the least... I wonder what kind of ramifications this will have for Muslims serving in the military, and what those soldiers who are about to be deployed will think of them when the go to their countries.
Boo, ######, hoo about the muslims in the military. It should be a wake up call to keep an eye on them, thats what it SHOULD do. But I know exactly what will happen. Our Kenyan born President will come out tomorrow with the telepromters telling him to tell his subjects that Islam is a religion of peace and we should look at this as something else than what it really is, then all these poor soldiers at Ft Hood and throughout the Department of Defence will be sent to islamic sensitivity training. Thats what will happen. This isn't the first time a muslim soldier has gone sudden jihad on his fellow soldiers and it won't be the last.
CountArach
11-06-2009, 04:44
Its so crazy. MSNBC is blaming the military, CNN is blaming PTSD(even though he wasn't in combat), and Fox, as usual, is the only one with the balls to say what's really going on. And the MSM is always so surprised at Fox's ratings. :shame:
Fox isn't MSM? News to me.
My condolences to the families of those affected.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-06-2009, 04:46
Fox isn't MSM? News to me.
My condolences to the families of those affected.
Regardless of that, it appears that Fox, The Daily Telegraph, and maybe ABC are the only ones who are calling it like it is. The Globe and Mail even has the balls to say that his religion is unconfirmed, when his own family is saying he was Muslim.
Condolences. Thoughts are with their friends and relatives.
Its so crazy. MSNBC is blaming the military, CNN is blaming PTSD(even though he wasn't in combat), and Fox, as usual, is the only one with the balls to say what's really going on.
Yes. Congrats to Fox for jumping to conclusions and making assumptions before the FBI has had a chance to investigate the case and discern motive and the pertaining facts of the case.
Sasaki Kojiro
11-06-2009, 04:53
Boo, ######, hoo about the muslims in the military. It should be a wake up call to keep an eye on them, thats what it SHOULD do. But I know exactly what will happen. Our Kenyan born President will come out tomorrow with the telepromters telling him to tell his subjects that Islam is a religion of peace and we should look at this as something else than what it really is, then all these poor soldiers at Ft Hood and throughout the Department of Defence will be sent to islamic sensitivity training. Thats what will happen. This isn't the first time a muslim soldier has gone sudden jihad on his fellow soldiers and it won't be the last.
You might be right about the sensitivity training:
Maj. Hasan's cousin, Nader Hasan, told Fox News the psychiatrist had complained of harassment by his military colleagues.
"I don't think he's ever been disenchanted with the military," he said of his cousin. "It was the harassment."
"He hired a military attorney to try to have the issue resolved, pay back the government, to get out of the military. He was at the end of trying everything," Mr. Hasan said.
Nader Hasan said his cousin had been the target of harassment because of his "Middle Eastern ethnicity," even though he grew up in the United States, including in Virginia, where he attended Virginia Tech university.
His cousin is quick to blame the way this is quoted, although that doesn't really say much :juggle2:
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-06-2009, 04:55
Yes. Congrats to Fox for jumping to conclusions and making assumptions before the FBI has had a chance to investigate the case and discern motive and the pertaining facts of the case.
I'd say that assuming PTSD is a much larger jump than telling the two facts that he was both Muslim and had made comments that Muslims should rise up and drawing the appropriate conclusion.
:juggle2:
Sasaki Kojiro
11-06-2009, 05:00
I'd say that assuming PTSD is a much larger jump than telling the two facts that he was both Muslim and had made comments that Muslims should rise up and drawing the appropriate conclusion.
:juggle2:
This is the telling bit:
Hasan had been optimistic that President Obama would start pulling troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, Lee said, but when that didn't happen as quickly as he hoped, Hasan became angry.
"He was sort of a loner and kept to himself," Lee told Fox News. "He didn't socialize a lot with officers off duty or on duty."
Samurai Waki
11-06-2009, 05:00
Boo, ######, hoo about the muslims in the military. It should be a wake up call to keep an eye on them, thats what it SHOULD do. But I know exactly what will happen. Our Kenyan born President will come out tomorrow with the telepromters telling him to tell his subjects that Islam is a religion of peace and we should look at this as something else than what it really is, then all these poor soldiers at Ft Hood and throughout the Department of Defence will be sent to islamic sensitivity training. Thats what will happen. This isn't the first time a muslim soldier has gone sudden jihad on his fellow soldiers and it won't be the last.
Honestly Dave, I'm not trying to defend them. Thought it was a legitimate question. Actually... I'm far more concerned about the majority of non-muslim soldiers than this :daisy:
Devastatin Dave
11-06-2009, 05:06
You might be right about the sensitivity training:
His cousin is quick to blame the way this is quoted, although that doesn't really say much :juggle2:
Yes, if only there was more sensitivity training, this whole thing could have been avoided. We should start dropping sensitivity training personnel into nothern Pakistan to combat the radical muslims there. With some kind words, a hug, and some self esteem I'm sure they will see the error of their ways and everything will be roses.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-06-2009, 05:06
This is the telling bit:
The thing about PTSD is that it comes afterwards...regardless, at this stage I'm going with the two and two make four explanation, though there is no reason he shouldn't be classified as crazy too.
Devastatin Dave
11-06-2009, 05:07
Honestly Dave, I'm not trying to defend them. Thought it was a legitimate question. Actually... I'm far more concerned about the majority of non-muslim soldiers than this :daisy:.
Sorry dude, I need more sensitivity training. :laugh4:
Sasaki Kojiro
11-06-2009, 05:18
The thing about PTSD is that it comes afterwards...regardless, at this stage I'm going with the two and two make four explanation, though there is no reason he shouldn't be classified as crazy too.
I don't think muslim + made comments = shooting is 2+2=4. The reason for the attack is probably very similar to the reason for the virginia tech shooting, whatever that was.
His cousins claim that it was harrassment that drove him to it is clearly bogus, there are many middle eastern people in the military who haven't gone on shooting sprees.
I don't see any way in which his religion is more than incidental.
Prince of the Poodles
11-06-2009, 05:18
PoP! Long time, no see.
CR
Thanks for the welcome! I always seem to be drawn here when I want to spout off about a major news event.
Yes. Congrats to Fox for jumping to conclusions and making assumptions before the FBI has had a chance to investigate the case and discern motive and the pertaining facts of the case.
Not really. I've seen no conclusions jumped to on Fox, just facts reported. I was saying that Fox is the only cable network that is reporting all the facts, not selectively leaving out things about his religion.
And if you want to complain about jumping to conclusions, you should tune to MSNBC or CNN. They're launching into any and all possible conclusions besides the most obvious one.
(OH - and I'm not some far right guy. I just don't enjoy being patronized by certain media outlets. Give me the facts and let me decide. )
Sasaki Kojiro
11-06-2009, 05:24
Not really. I've seen no conclusions jumped to on Fox, just facts reported. I was saying that Fox is the only cable network that is reporting all the facts, not selectively leaving out things about his religion.
Have they reported his height and weight?
And if you want to complain about jumping to conclusions, you should tune to MSNBC or CNN. They're launching into any and all possible conclusions besides the most obvious one.
Hasan attended prayers regularly when he lived outside Washington, often in his Army uniform, said Faizul Khan, a former imam at a mosque Hasan attended in Silver Spring, Md. He said Hasan was a lifelong Muslim.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-06-2009, 05:30
When you combine comments made with his religion, plus the fact that he was apparently not operating alone, that should ring other bells besides the PTSD one.
Major Robert Dump
11-06-2009, 05:39
Maybe he was mad because they told him he had to work on Man-love Thursday in Iraq.
Hey! We have a good candidate for the first military death penalty in a long time. Odd, I woulda thought that other muslim who fragged his leadership in Iraq would have gotten it, but I was wrong.
NOTE: I've been watching MSNBC all night because they play it in the bank I'm dealing with tonight, and I haven't seen them blame it on the military. They aren't exactly advertising that he is Muslim, but....please, stop with the Fox News is the truth stuff....I had to watch Fox all night last night and could only laugh at their election coverage....Fox is just as bad as the others, just the other side of the coin.
Sasaki Kojiro
11-06-2009, 05:42
When you combine comments made with his religion, plus the fact that he was apparently not operating alone, that should ring other bells besides the PTSD one.
Who the heck is talking about PTSD? Cho didn't have PTSD either.
Last I heard it was lone gunman, if that is incorrect then it throws the case in a new light.
I expect they'll search his computer right quick to see if he made those comments about jumping on a grenade vs suicide bombing. But that would be similar to the plays and essays they revealed of cho's. I think the autobiographical details can be revealing, but you can't pin the cause on them. The bells that should be ringing are the crazy ones (for lack of a better word).
Papewaio
11-06-2009, 05:47
Shoot unarmed oppenents: coward.
Coward does not wish to go to a combat zone. Tries everything possible, attorney, pay back the military, make rants online so that he is crazy (doing a Klingor). Then as all these way outs fail he continues on to become an ultimate coward and kill the people he should have been serving.
I'd say death penalty for him. I think it was preplanned out of fear of going to a dangerous region, he is not insane as he used all the other options up first. When cornered he fought like a wild animal, just in a method that we find despicable.
Like any wild animal put him down, and move on. What ever though system he might be derived from, it clearly did not make him a human.
Major Robert Dump
11-06-2009, 06:22
Well hopefully he will just tell the police why he did it. He obviously had a death wish, I don't see why he would suddenly start grovelling now.
If the guy was so miserable after 9/11 he should have resigned. He's had 8 years to get out, he's an officer FFS. Sounds to me like he liked the pay and the free med school but didn't like the cost that came with it when the Army tried to collect.
Banquo's Ghost
11-06-2009, 09:00
Very sad and tragic event. My thoughts and condolences go out to the bereaved families.
Doesn't our own Gelatinous Cube serve at Fort Hood? I hope he is OK.
Yikes just heard of this this is just nasty, rip victims, and something with tongs and meathooks.
Pannonian
11-06-2009, 10:01
Very sad and tragic event. My thoughts and condolences go out to the bereaved families.
Doesn't our own Gelatinous Cube serve at Fort Hood? I hope he is OK.
Posted on 6th November 2009, 00:46 GMT.
I don't generally agree with Idaho on much, but I think he's really spot on here. There is no real difference between legal and illegal drugs, aside from the false perceptions and IMMENSE black market.
Legalise everything. Tax everything. Provide proper education and warnings for everything. Let people do what they want to their own bodies.
That said, criminals should still be punished. Lots of drugs ARE addictive, and some junkies would still resort to crime in order to pay for their habit. That's never going to go away, so why not legalise it and at least make the actual drug a non-issue (and, in fact, a gigantic economic boon) and continue to punish crime as normal?
Seriously. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain by ditching the reactionary attitude towards drugs and just legalising, regulating, and taxing them like alcohol and cigarettes.
I think the shock affected GC so much that he's starting to agree with Idaho. If he goes to Afghanistan and gets shell shock, he may even start agreeing with JAG.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/06/fort-hood-shooter-alive
An aide to Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Texas senator who was briefed by generals about the incident, said she had been told Hasan was upset about the deployment at the end of the year. Family and fellow officers said that he complained of harassment by other troops about his Middle Eastern ethnicity and Muslim faith.
Uh-oh.
This is pretty bad, hope you guys can keep a clear head. A shame he survived best to drop them in a hole and forget all about them
Hosakawa Tito
11-06-2009, 11:55
Very sad and tragic event. My thoughts and condolences go out to the bereaved families.
Doesn't our own Gelatinous Cube serve at Fort Hood? I hope he is OK.
I believe GC is convalescing from an injury and probably wouldn't be in that part of the base. Hopefully he'll check in and tell us his experience with the lock-down, the base is huge like a small city.
So the shooter survived, that is good. He deserves execution.
Nothing to see here, move on.
.
So the shooter survived, that is good. He deserves execution.
Not good, this is going to be a huge case with megaphones on all sides, him surviving is probably the worst thing that could have happened, every lunatic is going to make a point out of this from fuzzywuzzies to guncrazy militia's.
Louis VI the Fat
11-06-2009, 12:39
All news outlets I read and watched mentioned the background of the shooter. The main difference with Fox is that they seemed to delve deeper into the story, trying to get to the bottom of it. The mere fact he is a Muslim is not a complete explanation. Cho (Virginia Tech shooter) wasn't a Muslim, and those other millions of US Mulsims didn't kill 11 people either.
CNN released this interesting video. It is of Hasan a few hours before the shooting. He is wearing a traditional Arabian garb. Hasan was an American born of Jordanian descent, he didn't speak Arab well. Fully integrated, succesful. But troubled. Troubled by harasment, by being single at age 39. By being torn about America's involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. By his own ambiguous identity, as a Muslim psychiatrist dealing on a daily basis with the trauma's of the wars.
The garb and Hasan's comments seem to indicate he radicalised, went on sudden Jihad. Just why he radicalised, became susceptible to it, seems the more interesting question. Did radicalisation trigger him, or provided fundamentalism the missing piece of the puzzle he needed, his 'honourable' way out.
Gah! If only Islam would allow suicide! The guy should've jumped before a train. Instead of taking down others with him, in a bizarre bid for an excusable way out.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/06/fort.hood.suspect/index.html
I don't see how his religion or origin are relevant.
The guy's a nutjob. Crazy. Like any other person who wakes up and decides to go out and kill as many random people as he can for no reason (well, except for some fabricated, surreal reason which only in his own twisted mind justifies his actions; for any sane person, there simply is no justification for this).
You have nutjobs who want to re-play a movie, others some scene from a book, others claim they were inspired by a PC game, this one says something else.
Meh.
A nutjob, complete and utterly insane; that's all there is to say. Today, it's a US Army officer. Yesterday it was student, tomorrow it could be a lawyer.
How did this man become an officer in the US army? What selection procedures allow a mass murderer to pass and become an officer?
I don't see how his religion or origin are relevant.
The guy's a nutjob. Crazy. Like any other person who wakes up and decides to go out and kill as many random people as he can for no reason (well, except for some fabricated, surreal reason which only in his own twisted mind justifies his actions; for any sane person, there simply is no justification for this).
That what my gut says too, I think a random brain fried here. This was not a terrorist attack at least, I would be very surprised if it is.
How did this man become an officer in the US army? What selection procedures allow a mass murderer to pass and become an officer?
Un-needed comment removed
Troubled by harasment
[...]
Just why he radicalised, became susceptible to it, seems the more interesting question.
Think about it, you sympathise with the people your own organisation is killing, yet you are loyal to your organisation, try to help it etc. Nonetheless members of your own organisation are harassing you because of your connection to the people they are fighting against. The link in the OP also mentioned that he was apparently targeting people he knew, perhaps those who were harassing him?
Looks like he was in the middle but forced to take a side, now what sort of idiot would take the side of the guys who are harassing him because of his beliefs or skin colour?
If he was some jihadist nutjob who was dangerous from the start then congrats to the US army for being idiotic enough to hire him and letting him take care of their wounded.
Isn't that precisely what you want an officer to be?
If all officers are like that, then they should be put in cages when not on a mission. And also when they are on a mission.
Louis VI the Fat
11-06-2009, 13:36
How did this man become an officer in the US army? What selection procedures allow a mass murderer to pass and become an officer?Is that not putting it backwards? Is the question not how a US army officer became a mass murderer?
(Or, as Idaho stated so snappishly, an unconventional mass murderer?)
Looks like he was in the middle but forced to take a side, now what sort of idiot would take the side of the guys who are harassing him because of his beliefs or skin colour?
Ohhhhhhh poor guy he was just too much a peaceful person to give them a proper hit on the nose, and than it all went wrong you can take that for only so long after all, it became too distressing and he really tried but they simply don't understand him, howling to the moon is a great sign of respect. There is no excuse for what he did, no justification whatsoever.
Is that not putting it backwards? Is the question not how a US army officer became a mass murderer?
(Or, as Idaho stated so snappishly, an unconventional mass murderer?)
Ok, I'll rephrase: What selection procedures allow a potential mass murderer to pass and become an officer?
tibilicus
11-06-2009, 13:52
I don't see how his religion or origin are relevant.
By far the best post in this thread. I agree completely.
So what if he's a Muslim? I'm pretty certain that this is the first case of a US born Muslim performing such an atrocity. When compared to the amount of Christian nut jobs who seem to do this sort of thing on a regular basis in America, his religion shouldn't be an issue at all.
Or is it OK for some of the fox news followers in this thread to ignore such a fact as after all this guys religion is waaaaaay more evil than your religion.
All religions have their nut jobs, hell this wasn't even religiously motivated, all sects of society have their nut jobs, deal with it. the fact that he's Muslim is irrelevant.
Ohhhhhhh poor guy he was just too much a peaceful person to give them a proper hit on the nose, and than it all went wrong you can take that for only so long after all, it became too distressing and he really tried but they simply don't understand him, howling to the moon is a great sign of respect. There is no excuse for what he did, no justification whatsoever.
But there is a reason. You can either stop giving people reasons to do such things or keep wondering why "they're all just nuts".
I'm not saying give in to every demand but to stop harassment is not too much to ask, or is it? :inquisitive:
Furunculus
11-06-2009, 14:00
i first heard of this story last night from this very thread, and in all honesty wasn't particularly interested in the story of another nutcase going WACO on his neighbours. i got facts, i digested them, i left.
but we had a guest staying who is a card carrying guardianista, and she stuck bbc iplayer on to watch the morning news.................................................. and in five minutes of reporting I did not hear the word "muslim" once, and i got the impression that they didn't want to speak his name more than necessary because it sounded, you know, too muslim.
thank god the BBC is here to protect us proles from the dangerous extremes of our own minds!
But there is a reason. You can either stop giving people reasons to do such things or keep wondering why "they're all just nuts".
I'm not saying give in to every demand but to stop harassment is not too much to ask, or is it? :inquisitive:
If you think they are all nuts you are nuts, but if this happened because someone's oh so delicate feelings were just forcing him into a frenzy and we could have done so much more than I respectfully disagree with the concept
KukriKhan
11-06-2009, 14:20
Ok, I'll rephrase: What selection procedures allow a potential mass murderer to pass and become an officer?
For the record: US Army doctors are hired and managed separately from other officers (infantry, armor, cavalry, etc.). So are Army lawyers. The doc's and lawyers start out as Captains, unlike infantry guys who start as 2nd lieutenants.
To directly answer your question: the selection procedures are managed by guys just like him (army doc's; including army psychiatrists). He and his fellow army shrinks monitor and treat the wider population of soldiers. But who monitors and treats the guys who monitor and treat? That link apparently got skipped/overlooked.
Interesting article... (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_fort_hood_shooting_suspect)
On a form filled out by those seeking spouses through a program at the mosque, Hasan listed his birthplace as Arlington, Va., but his nationality as Palestinian, Khan said.
"I don't know why he listed Palestinian," Khan said, "He was not born in Palestine."
I am sure that religion had nothing to do with it. :no:
The guys loyalties obviously lay elsewhere. He should not have been in the military. It is not (as far as I am aware) a crime to not support US wars (and shouldn't be either), but it is the job of the military to fight those wars. If you do not support them, or are not willing to do your duty, you should be kicked out. Of course then they would be facing charges of discrimination...
Allah Akbar! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqWn2WN_HjM&feature=sub)
Definately NOT religious!
KukriKhan
11-06-2009, 14:43
Apparently, HERE (http://www.crdamc.amedd.army.mil/default.asp?page=psychology) is where he (Hasan) actually worked.
Mission
The Mission of the Resilience and Restoration Center (R&R Center) is to provide outpatient psychological and consultation services as appropriate to maintain the mental health of active-duty personnel. The R&R Center is staffed with active-duty and civilian professional staff including psychiatrists, psychiatric nurse practitioners, clinical psychologists, licensed professional counselors, social workers, and psychology technicians.
Warrior Combat Stress Reset Camp: 2-week intensive outpatient treatment program incorporating alternative treatment approaches for treatment of moderate to severe post traumatic stress symptoms
Just speculating here: maybe he flipped out after taking care of so many guys who had either themselves flipped out, or were about to.
al Roumi
11-06-2009, 14:45
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/11/200911641042388762.html
"The suspect has been named as Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a 39-year-old army psychiatrist.
"He became a psychiatrist at the Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington ... where he counselled soldiers coming back from war.
"Every day, he heard how horrible those stories were and he really started to question the wars, according to what his cousin and sources who knew him said.
"Hasan became more devout in his religion and started arguing with soldiers about whether the wars were right or not, to the point where he received disciplinary action and negative work reviews.
"He was transferred to the medical facility here at Fort Hood, where apparently these feelings continued.
"It raises a major question - how can a person responsible for the mental health of soldiers returning [from war] be allowed to continue in this profession when he has these kinds of questions himself?"
The wider repercussions of this are very troubling, as evidenced by the posts of the more rabid crazies on this forum.
More than one soldier report that. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091106/ap_on_re_us/us_fort_hood_shooting) Guy DEFINITELY was not religiously motivated. Glad all you intellectuals established that for me.
Seamus Fermanagh
11-06-2009, 14:47
My condolences and prayers are with the families of those killed in this attack. As of this morning, the media is reporting 13 dead and 30 injured to varying degrees. The lone attacker was, apparently, shot 4 times by a female civilian security officer and is listed in critical but stable condition. Whether Maj. Hasan will survive or not is uknown at present.
MRD: You are quite right, assuming Maj. Hasan did what has been alleged (and there is little doubt), he qualifies for the full Danny Deever treatment. Like you, however, I suspect that it will not happen.
Now, a little note Ex Moderatica:
All of you WILL discuss this in a relatively controlled and polite manner or the thread will cease and the infractions will fly. You are all well aware of the potential contentiousness of some of the issues this incident raises, so please exercise caution.
Yes, Vuk, he yelled "Allah Akhbar".
Thank you for giving us conclusive evidence that this man was not just a crazy nutjob, but a Muslim crazy nutjob.
He was also a doctor.
I blame studying medicin for what happened. Rory should be locked up. After all 43 people got shot by a doctor and he's a doctor. Maybe you should kick all doctors out of your country. And let's ban GTA while we're at it. Just talking about such measures make me feel safer already.[/sarcasm]
Yes, Vuk, he yelled "Allah Akhbar".
Thank you for giving us conclusive evidence that this man was not just a crazy nutjob, but a Muslim crazy nutjob.
He was also a doctor.
I blame studying medicin for what happened. Rory should be locked up. After all 43 people got shot by a doctor and he's a doctor. Maybe you should kick all doctors out of your country. And let's ban GTA while we're at it. Just talking about such measures make me feel safer already.[/sarcasm]
Andres, that is a phrase used by Jihadists to strike fear into their enemies hearts. You think that that is not evidence that he is a Jihadist?
EDIT: His height, medical study, etc are pretty irrelevant as motivations I think. There is no positive evidence that they motivated him, but there is evidence that his religion did. He did not scream "DOCTORS RULE!", He screamed "ALLAH AKHBAR!". That is what is what we know is relevant. He is a Jihadist. Don't you think that is important? Esp considering his past?
al Roumi
11-06-2009, 14:59
Andres, that is a phrase used by Jihadists to strike fear into their enemies hearts. You think that that is not evidence that he is a Jihadist?
Nonsense. Do you know what "Allahu Akbar" means?? God is great.
It is used in normal, daily speech as a phrase to explain gratefulness, pleasure and surprise.
The reason people might find it fearful is the context in which it is used by those ready to use violence: to at once justify a violent action and also surrender their fates to the whim of god.
Saying Allahu akbar before entering combat or whatever is like praying for god to be on your side -and to judge you fairly.
Your comment would mean that western armies are fanatical and scary for having Chaplins and conducting services before a mission.
Andres, that is a phrase used by Jihadists to strike fear into their enemies hearts. You think that that is not evidence that he is a Jihadist?
Jihadists are a little bit smarter than this they don't tell their knowologues that they are cracking, this was a loon and it was terrible, but there really isn't anything more to it.
Nonsense. Do you know what "Allahu Akbar" means?? God is great.
It is used in normal, daily speech as a phrase to explain gratefulness, pleasure and surprise.
The reason people might find it fearful is the context in which it is used by those ready to use violence: to at once justify a violent action and also surrender their fates to the whim of god.
Saying Allahu akbar before entering combat or whatever is like praying for god to be on your side -and to judge you fairly.
Your comment would mean that western armies are fanatical and scary for having Chaplins and conducting services before a mission.
Yes, I know what it means. It is a prayer of sorts, but it is also meant to show their conviction, and proclaim it before the world...right before they die. They are aware that displaying their conviction like that makes their enemies afraid. It was actually an MSNBC article I read where a psychologist saying that it was used to strike fear into people's hearts.
Jihadists are a little bit smarter than this they don't tell their knowologues that they are cracking, this was a loon and it was terrible, but there really isn't anything more to it.
At that poing they don't care Frag. They are expecting to die and want to kill as many infidels as they can for their god.
At that poing they don't care Frag. They are expecting to die and want to kill as many infidels as they can for their god.c
No they don't, at times like this it's best to order a pizza, give the lady a little love, and have some coffee when you wake up. Calm down and get a grip.
c
No they don't, at times like this it's best to order a pizza, give the lady a little love, and have some coffee when you wake up. Calm down and get a grip.
lol, he did not have a lady. :P
al Roumi
11-06-2009, 15:17
Come on man, I don't think that would be the first reason why they thought to say it - more a consequence of its effect and their resolution.
If I were a Taliban, I'd be scared by the sound of rotor-blades, jet engines and anything associated to any advantage the enemy might have over me.
Plus, I wouldn't be surprised if any Muslim soldiers, be they Taliban in Pakistan, Saudi military or Afghan National Army said "Allahu Akbar" before combat. Just as an English speaking one might say good luck to his mates.
They are expecting to die and want to kill as many (...) as they can (...)
Like any other nutjob who starts shooting random people for no reason.
Todays' nutjob happens to be a muslim, so he yells "allah akhbar" when he starts killing.
What's the difference with the other wacko's who kill people for no reason? The result stays the same, doesn't it? Alot of innocent people dead because of the madness of one person.
Why is the fact that this man was a muslim so important for you? Why is it relevant? Why does it matter?
Like any other nutjob who starts shooting random people for no reason.
Todays' nutjob happens to be a muslim, so he yells "allah akhbar" when he starts killing.
What's the difference with the other wacko's who kill people for no reason? The result stays the same, doesn't it? Alot of innocent people dead because of the madness of one person.
Why is the fact that this man was a muslim so important for you? Why is it relevant? Why does it matter?
This is why, because there are lots of harmless nutjobs out there. You need something to motivate them to turn violent. Those motivations are very dangerous. Radical islam is one of those that preys on unhinged nuts like him. A wacko is not necassarily dangerous. What makes him dangerous is what motivates him to be a violent nutjob. In this case, it seems to be radical islam that is the culprit. The motivation is very important.
al Roumi
11-06-2009, 15:27
Why is the fact that this man was a muslim so important for you? Why is it relevant? Why does it matter?
Amen.
Or, Allahu Akbar -there is clarity and sense in the words of the moderator!
Amen.
Or, Allahu Akbar -there is clarity and sense in the words of the moderator!
Why? Isn't the whole point of this discussion to figure out the motives? Isn't that the mystery that everyone is trying to figure out? Is it that when it is one that you don't like you suddenly aren't interested in motive? No offense, really, but I cannot understand how a motive is irrelevant in a discussion about motive!
If you think they are all nuts you are nuts, but if this happened because someone's oh so delicate feelings were just forcing him into a frenzy and we could have done so much more than I respectfully disagree with the concept
Have you every been harassed or bullied for years? Well, I've been and at times i wanted to kill them all in brutal ways. I didn't act on it as I knew it was wrong but then he is not me and everyone reacts differently.
Have you every been harassed or bullied for years? Well, I've been and at times i wanted to kill them all in brutal ways. I didn't act on it as I knew it was wrong but then he is not me and everyone reacts differently.
Everyone feels hostile toward people at times. The difference between a sane and insane person is A) Why they feel that way. and B) How they actually act. He obviously had mental problems if he was so committed that he would give up his own life (which he obviously knew would happen). Did anyone ever consider that if he was a religious extremist, the reason he did it may be so he did not have to fight his fellow terrorists in the Middle East? That would explain why he was so afraid of going over. He would feel like a traitor.
al Roumi
11-06-2009, 15:43
Why? Isn't the whole point of this discussion to figure out the motives? Isn't that the mystery that everyone is trying to figure out? Is it that when it is one that you don't like you suddenly aren't interested in motive? No offense, really, but I cannot understand how a motive is irrelevant in a discussion about motive!
Fair point, but mine was that you (and others) are making wider assertions based on this single reprehensible and tragic event, which only widens the turmoil caused by it.
To blandly assert that anyone saying Allahu Akbar is a "Jihadi" is naive, ignorant and frankly irresponsible.
By the way, "Jihad" means "Struggle" and can be used in much the way as the west uses the term "crusade" -which incidentaly excites equal horror to an Islamic audience as "Jihad" does to a Western one.
What about his supervisor? A muslim who is against the Iraq/Afganistan war, who wants to leave the military, who is mobbed because of his religion, who wants the troops to come home, who as a psychiatrist gets to hear all the traumatic experiences and personal catastophies unfiltered, probably has to work more then 40 hours a week, sending someone like him to Iraq or Afganistan against his will is really not a smart psychological decission. That the risk in such a situation for a man to explode and to loose the nerves being exorbitant greater should be clear to everyone, even american generals. A person like him acts like this because of sheer desperation and not because of idealogy.
(original text by El Senor Wolflero)
Fair point, but mine was that you (and others) are making wider assertions based on this single reprehensible and tragic event, which only widens the turmoil caused by it.
To blandly assert that anyone saying Allahu Akbar is a "Jihadi" is naive, ignorant and frankly irresponsible.
By the way, "Jihad" means "Struggle" and can be used in much the way as the west uses the term "crusade" -which incidentaly excites equal horror to an Islamic audience as "Jihad" does to a Western one.
I know what Jihad means, and I know about the greater and lesser Jihad. Thank you for asserting that I am ignorant for disagreeing with you. :bow:
Crusades and Jihads are quite different from each other (something I am sure you know), but I do not understand what Crusades have to do with anything. I think that in your zeal you have read far too much into what I said. I am not condemning "Eastern" things as you seem to imply, nor am I condemning muslims. Most of this thread has been devoted to arguing that religion did not play a role. I simply pointed out that yes, religion was a factor. And I did not say that anyone who says Allah Akhbar is a "Jihadi", that is you again reading too much into my posts. I said that someone who has a record of defending terrorists and condemning wars against them shouting it before he breaks out shooting his "comrades" is a pretty good sign that he is a Jihadist. There is a really big difference.
What about his supervisor? A muslim who is against the Iraq/Afganistan war, who wants to leave the military, who is mobbed because of his religion, who wants the troops to come home, who as a psychiatrist gets to hear all the traumatic experiences and personal catastophies unfiltered, probably has to work more then 40 hours a week, sending someone like him to Iraq or Afganistan against his will is really not a smart psychological decission. That the risk in such a situation for a man to explode and to loose the nerves being exorbitant greater should be clear to everyone, even american generals. A person like him acts like this because of sheer desperation and not because of idealogy.
(original text by El Senor Wolflero)
Sorry, I don't buy that. There seems to be pretty good evidence that he was idologically driven, whether stress and fear played a part or not (which it very well may have, and probably did).
Agent Miles
11-06-2009, 15:57
Human tragedy has no politics or religion. My condolences to all families concerned, even Hasan’s. Who can really say why some men hide their personal demons behind wider causes? Cowards pretend to be heroes and psychotics pretend to be psychiatrists. Everyone can join our Army, but by no means is an Army life for everyone. In February ’03 my wife and I sat in that theater on Fort Hood for my retirement briefing and we sat in the hallway of the Soldier Support Center across the street to out-process. This morning on every military post, they saluted the flag and went right back to training for the next mission.
Right.
When a normal american goes nuts and kills people he has psychological problems
When a muslim american goes nuts and kills people he was idealogical driven.
He was even serving in the american army - how do you connect that with your idealogy.
al Roumi
11-06-2009, 15:58
I know what Jihad means, and I know about the greater and lesser Jihad. Thank you for asserting that I am ignorant for disagreeing with you. :bow:
Crusades and Jihads are quite different from each other (something I am sure you know), but I do not understand what Crusades have to do with anything. I think that in your zeal you have read far too much into what I said. I am not condemning "Eastern" things as you seem to imply, nor am I condemning muslims. Most of this thread has been devoted to arguing that religion did not play a role. I simply pointed out that yes, religion was a factor. And I did not say that anyone who says Allah Akhbar is a "Jihadi", that is you again reading too much into my posts. I said that someone who has a record of defending terrorists and condemning wars against them shouting it before he breaks out shooting his "comrades" is a pretty good sign that he is a Jihadist. There is a really big difference.
Ok, my zeal may be the result of Fragony being over your shoulder and I can't let the sorts of things he peddles go by un-opposed. :dizzy2:
I appologise :sweatdrop:
If you read the Al jazeera article I posted above, it does paint a picture of his motiviations which does acknowledge the suspect's faith and the identification with his ancestral culture in some way.
Nonetheless, saying Allahu Akbar is no indication of being a Jihadi.
Human tragedy has no politics or religion. My condolences to all families concerned, even Hasan’s. Who can really say why some men hide their personal demons behind wider causes? Cowards pretend to be heroes and psychotics pretend to be psychiatrists. Everyone can join our Army, but by no means is an Army life for everyone. In February ’03 my wife and I sat in that theater on Fort Hood for my retirement briefing and we sat in the hallway of the Soldier Support Center across the street to out-process. This morning on every military post, they saluted the flag and went right back to training for the next mission.
Yeah, there is always a nut behind tragedies like this, but you are ignoring what motivates them. Yeah, politics and religion DO play a role. Look at Nazis, look at Crusades and Jihads (right or wrong, they resulted in enormous human loss), look at the horrors committed by the USSR. How can you say that politics and religion do not play a role?
Nikos_Rouvelas
11-06-2009, 16:08
I think both the shooters psychological condition and his belief in radical Islam pushed him over the edge. Thank God he did not get sent to Afghanistan where he would have had access to more powerful weapons.
Prince of the Poodles
11-06-2009, 16:14
WTH? A shoutout?? (http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/A-Disconnected-President.html)
Yeah, there is always a nut behind tragedies like this, but you are ignoring what motivates them. Yeah, politics and religion DO play a role. Look at Nazis, look at Crusades and Jihads (right or wrong, they resulted in enormous human loss), look at the horrors committed by the USSR. How can you say that politics and religion do not play a role?It can become a perversion of a valid discsussion
Agent Miles
11-06-2009, 16:30
JVA-He’s not motivated by anything larger than himself. He’s a coward pretending to be a soldier, a psychotic pretending to be a psychiatrist and a murderer pretending to be a holy warrior. He’s not the enemy; he’s just a pathetic failure hiding his insignificance behind a headline.
Right.
When a normal american goes nuts and kills people he has psychological problems
When a muslim american goes nuts and kills people he was idealogical driven.
He was even serving in the american army - how do you connect that with your idealogy.
Careful saying things like that round here. You might get your post deleted and get a warning :laugh4:
JVA-He’s not motivated by anything larger than himself. He’s a coward pretending to be a soldier, a psychotic pretending to be a psychiatrist and a murderer pretending to be a holy warrior. He’s not the enemy; he’s just a pathetic failure hiding his insignificance behind a headline.
This pretty much sums it up.
Careful saying things like that round here. You might get your post deleted and get a warning :laugh4:
People are always driven by something. Some times it is trying to get revenge for abuse as a child, some times it is wanting revenge against the government, other times it is religion. No one is saying that religion is his motivation because he is muslim, that has nothing to do with it. They are saying it was his motivation because he made it clear that it was.
JVA-He’s not motivated by anything larger than himself. He’s a coward pretending to be a soldier, a psychotic pretending to be a psychiatrist and a murderer pretending to be a holy warrior. He’s not the enemy; he’s just a pathetic failure hiding his insignificance behind a headline.
Even cowards need motivation and something to believe it to motivate their cowardly selfs to make a sacrafice. Those radical things they cling to as excuses are dangerous, because that gives them the excuse and courage to do what they want to do. And really, do you think that if he did not believe in radical islam that he would have done that? Probably not, so it is important.
It can become a perversion of a valid discsussion
No, taking things (anything) out of context can. As long as that is not done, it is a relevant part of the discussion. What about deliberately ignoring an important part of situation? Can that be a perversion of the discussion?
And really, do you think that if he did not believe in radical islam that he would have done that?
Yes.
Yes.
We know that radical islam motivated him, if it was not there, then what would have motivated him to shoot his fellow soldiers like that? Did you ever think that radical islam was the reason that he was afraid to go overseas?
al Roumi
11-06-2009, 16:52
Even cowards need motivation and something to believe it to motivate their cowardly selfs to make a sacrafice. Those radical things they cling to as excuses are dangerous, because that gives them the excuse and courage to do what they want to do. And really, do you think that if he did not believe in radical islam that he would have done that? Probably not, so it is important.
I'm afraid there is a fair precendent of people going on a bloody rampage in the US (and elsewhere) without a connection to Islam. Islamic extremists don't have a monopoly of violence in any context.
To my mind, he may have come to the opinion that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -or their implementation were unjust, or something he wanted no part in. As a civilian, he might have been a conscientious objector perhaps. It seems he repeatedly resisted posting to either war and in failing to avoid going, presumably he simply couldn't take it and snapped.
As a soldier, he had free access to the fort, training and presumably easy access to weapons.
Strike For The South
11-06-2009, 16:57
This is more telling of shell shock than of Islam.
We send these boys out and expect them to come back just the same. 99% of the populace doesn't feel the war at all it's just something that happening.
This is directly tied in to the high suicide rate of returning vets. You don't think this Pshycatrist heard those horror stories?
Blaming Islam is a cop out for people who don't want to admit there is a real problem with the military and PTSD.
I'm afraid there is a fair precendent of people going on a bloody rampage in the US (and elsewhere) without a connection to Islam. Islamic extremists don't have a monopoly of violence in any context.
To my mind, he may have come to the opinion that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -or their implementation were unjust, or something he wanted no part in. As a civilian, he might have been a conscientious objector perhaps. It seems he repeatedly resisted posting to either war and in failing to avoid going, presumably he simply couldn't take it and snapped.
As a soldier, he had free access to the fort, training and presumably easy access to weapons.
Of course there are other motivation, but what I am saying is that this was his, so the others are really not important to this discussion unless they may have also motivated him. You make a good point, but you forget, was the reason he object because of his belief if radical islam? I think there is a good chance of that. If so, take radical islam away and there are no motivations for him to do this that we know of.
This is more telling of shell shock than of Islam.
We send these boys out and expect them to come back just the same. 99% of the populace doesn't feel the war at all it's just something that happening.
This is directly tied in to the high suicide rate of returning vets. You don't think this Pshycatrist heard those horror stories?
Blaming Islam is a cop out for people who don't want to admit there is a real problem with the military and PTSD.
Not really Strike, there are many military shrinks out there and they do not do this. Hearing horror stories can make you feel sorry for your fellow soldiers and get depressed, but it doesn't lead you to murder them (while screaming a religious phrase). Yes, you are right, it may have let to a mental break down that depressed him enough to not care about himself, but it looks like what actually motivated him to murder his fellow soldiers was his belief in radical islam. You have to remember Strike, there are moderate muslims who do not feel like they have to kill non-muslims, and then there are the fundamentalists who do. Islamic fundamentalists are dangerous, because they feel that it is their duty. Horror stories may have depressed him and cause him mental anxiety, but it seems to be fundamentalist islam that motivated him to become a murderer. You cannot ignore the danger that fundamentalist islam (or any other radical set of beliefs that can motivate people to do things like this) poses to society. And no, of course that is not the only one, but it is the one relevant to this discussion.
al Roumi
11-06-2009, 17:15
Of course there are other motivation, but what I am saying is that this was his, so the others are really not important to this discussion unless they may have also motivated him. You make a good point, but you forget, was the reason he object because of his belief if radical islam? I think there is a good chance of that. If so, take radical islam away and there are no motivations for him to do this that we know of.
I'm afraid I disagree, I think there are other reasons equally as plausible -if not more so- than "radical" Islam. See what Strike For The South just said on PTSD for one, I would add a couple of moral ones:
Objection to the wars on the grounds of legitimacy (albeit strange for a soldier to let this stop them)
Objection to the wars because of the suspect's identification with his Middle eastern or Muslim ancestory and culture and a desire to play no part in what could be perceived as harming it
There are widespread reports of his devout religiosity. You probably know that Islam teaches against harming other Muslims -that's a perfectly plausible religious reason enough for him not to want to go to Iraq or Afghanistan
I'm afraid I disagree, I think there are other reasons equally as plausible -if not more so- than "radical" Islam. See what Strike For The South just said on PTSD for one, I would add a couple of moral ones:
Objection to the wars on the grounds of legitimacy (albeit strange for a soldier to let this stop them)
Objection to the wars because of the suspect's identification with his Middle eastern or Muslim ancestory and culture and a desire to play no part in what could be perceived as harming it
There are widespread reports of his devout religiosity. You probably know that Islam teaches against harming other Muslims -that's a perfectly plausible religious reason enough for him not to want to go to Iraq or Afghanistan
Yes, that is a religious reason for not wanting to go to Iraq, but what about murdering his fellow soldiers? Yeah, you are right, religious, but not the same type that most people follow.
Sasaki Kojiro
11-06-2009, 17:31
It's possible that his religion was the tipping point. Not because being muslim makes people go crazy, but because it feeds into the inner conflict he may have had about the war/deployment/harrassment etc. I doubt we'll know unless we find a diary of some sort. So it's certainly part of the story.
But Vuk, by blaming radical islam you are putting the cart before the horse.
WTH? A shoutout?? (http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/A-Disconnected-President.html)
So Mr George is frightened by slang, hand me a hanky.
It's possible that his religion was the tipping point. Not because being muslim makes people go crazy, but because it feeds into the inner conflict he may have had about the war/deployment/harrassment etc. I doubt we'll know unless we find a diary of some sort. So it's certainly part of the story.
But Vuk, by blaming radical islam you are putting the cart before the horse.
So Mr George is frightened by slang, hand me a hanky.
Not necassarily, because his conflict over the war and deployment may be due to his religion. I don't know either way, which is why I have been careful to say "I think" etc. We will probably find out soon.
al Roumi
11-06-2009, 17:34
Yes, that is a religious reason for not wanting to go to Iraq, but what about murdering his fellow soldiers?
Yeah but that's it, it's not a rational decision. Just like the sad list of rampages/massacres in schools and such, we write those perpertrators off as psycopaths/sociopaths.
Yeah, you are right, religious, but not the same type that most people follow.
I'm not sure I understand this, what do you mean?
Strike For The South
11-06-2009, 18:07
Not really Strike, there are many military shrinks out there and they do not do this. Hearing horror stories can make you feel sorry for your fellow soldiers and get depressed, but it doesn't lead you to murder them (while screaming a religious phrase). Yes, you are right, it may have let to a mental break down that depressed him enough to not care about himself, but it looks like what actually motivated him to murder his fellow soldiers was his belief in radical islam. You have to remember Strike, there are moderate muslims who do not feel like they have to kill non-muslims, and then there are the fundamentalists who do. Islamic fundamentalists are dangerous, because they feel that it is their duty. Horror stories may have depressed him and cause him mental anxiety, but it seems to be fundamentalist islam that motivated him to become a murderer. You cannot ignore the danger that fundamentalist islam (or any other radical set of beliefs that can motivate people to do things like this) poses to society. And no, of course that is not the only one, but it is the one relevant to this discussion.
And you have to remember the suicides and homicides commtied by returning vets borders on ridiculous. Religon may have been the tipping point but you don't rise to major with out some major background+pschyatric checks.
If we simply blame this on muslims we are doing our men in uniform a great diservice. A cry for help will be overshawdowed by a name and that's the tragedy here. More hate and no help.
America loves to claim we love our vets and now is the time to show the world we do. It's time to sack up and take responsibilty.
I'm sure religon had a role in this killing but there is simply more than "He was a muslim, that's why"
Everyone feels hostile toward people at times. The difference between a sane and insane person is A) Why they feel that way. and B) How they actually act. He obviously had mental problems if he was so committed that he would give up his own life (which he obviously knew would happen). Did anyone ever consider that if he was a religious extremist, the reason he did it may be so he did not have to fight his fellow terrorists in the Middle East? That would explain why he was so afraid of going over. He would feel like a traitor.
So everybody who ever committed manslaughter would be completely insane then?
If he just didn't want to go to the middle east he could have just shot himself, if he was an extremist, he probably had better means at his disposal and why would he have actually helped US soldiers?
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-06-2009, 18:26
This is more telling of shell shock than of Islam.
If I recall correctly, it is necessary to see combat to have shell shock.
Right.
When a normal american goes nuts and kills people he has psychological problems
When a muslim american goes nuts and kills people he was idealogical driven.
He was even serving in the american army - how do you connect that with your idealogy.
No, his religion is of no consequence unless he made statements to the effect that his religion did play a role, which Hasan did. Ergo, the logical conclusion from past comments made by Hasan is that his faith did play a role. This doesn't mean all Muslims are like this, but it does mean he was motivated in part by radical Islam, or at least used it as an excuse. If we want to understand the shooting, that is just as relevant as any psychological disorders he may or may not have had.
Strike For The South
11-06-2009, 18:31
If I recall correctly, it is necessary to see combat to have shell shock.
The man was a psychatrist who saw hunderds of these cases. I'm sure religon may have been the catalyst for this case but all reports say he had become "more" muslim as the years went on.
Make no mistake the man is a coward who should spend the rest of his life being raped and Islam played a role in this but I don't think it was the only thing nor the driving one.
Funny how quick people are to say: "It's Islam's fault", while the thread below this one is about parents letting their children die. Funny that nobody states "It's Christianity's fault", while the causes are in both cases religious.
Strike For The South
11-06-2009, 18:42
Funny how quick people are to say: "It's Islam's fault", while the thread below this one is about parents letting their children die. Funny that nobody states "It's Christianity's fault", while the causes are in both cases religious.
Do you think Islam had anything to do with this?
Crazed Rabbit
11-06-2009, 18:48
Funny how it seems like some people, when they find out that one of the motivations for a murderer might be Islam, suddenly stop wanting to discuss the shooter's motivations.
Every time a mass shooting story pops up, we here at the Org like to play amateur psychiatrist and discuss what made a person do it.
What's the difference with the other wacko's who kill people for no reason? The result stays the same, doesn't it? Alot of innocent people dead because of the madness of one person.
Why is the fact that this man was a muslim so important for you? Why is it relevant? Why does it matter?
But I guess that all ends when one of the motivations might be politically incorrect. :rolleyes:
Why does it matter? Really? One useful thing you can do after something like this is to determine the cause; try to find out why the shooter did what he did and see if you can prevent it in the future.
Deciding to put on blinders and ignore the motivations because you might not like what you see is not smart.
So Mr George is frightened by slang, hand me a hanky.
That's not the point - the point is Obama said he would be speaking about a mass shooting and opened with a joking manner and talked about some interior department deal.
CR
Devastatin Dave
11-06-2009, 18:52
I'm pretty certain that this is the first case of a US born Muslim performing such an atrocity. .
WRONG!!! This has happen numerous times its just that its not highly reported because everyone is afraid of offending this cult and its members. Thank Jesus Christ God all Mighty that Islam is a peacefull religion or we would all be ####**!!!:laugh4:
Devastatin Dave
11-06-2009, 18:54
Careful saying things like that round here. You might get your post deleted and get a warning :laugh4:
I know how you feel. Allah Akbar by brother...
Devastatin Dave
11-06-2009, 18:59
That's not the point - the point is Obama said he would be speaking about a mass shooting and opened with a joking manner and talked about some interior department deal.
CR
Obama is such a joke, but because he's a muslim, I won't go into too much detail out of fear he might read this forum and start blowing people away because i hurt his feelings.
Sasaki Kojiro
11-06-2009, 19:06
Funny how quick people are to say: "It's Islam's fault", while the thread below this one is about parents letting their children die. Funny that nobody states "It's Christianity's fault", while the causes are in both cases religious.
They are saying that.
Every time a mass shooting story pops up, we here at the Org like to play amateur psychiatrist and discuss what made a person do it.
Yes well, we play amateur economist, lawyer, judge, diplomat, scientist and businessman as well.
Funny how it seems like some people, when they find out that one of the motivations for a murderer might be Islam, suddenly stop wanting to discuss the shooter's motivations.
But I guess that all ends when one of the motivations might be politically incorrect. :rolleyes:
Why does it matter? Really? One useful thing you can do after something like this is to determine the cause; try to find out why the shooter did what he did and see if you can prevent it in the future.
Deciding to put on blinders and ignore the motivations because you might not like what you see is not smart.
This is wrong. You guys are saying "He's muslim and made suspect comments then when on a shooting spree, 2+2=4 thank god fox reports it like it is". That's simplistic, and saying so isn't "politically correct" or "ignoring the facts".
Let's say someone died of a disease. Your approach is to say "well look at the facts, his hair had fallen out, that led to his death" instead of "he had cancer, the chemotherapy led to hair loss, but it wasn't enough and he died".
Now clearly his religion and the comments he made are clues and shouldn't be ignored, but I haven't seen any real evidence that the other news stations were ignoring it.
That's not the point - the point is Obama said he would be speaking about a mass shooting and opened with a joking manner and talked about some interior department deal.
CR
I watched the video. The news anchor said "we'll go now to obama where we understand he's going to comment on the shootings" but really it was a prearranged speech and he talked about the shootings since it was timely. He said his introductory bit and then talked about the shootings.
The objection to his shoutout is the same as the objections to his fist bump last year.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-06-2009, 19:16
Funny how quick people are to say: "It's Islam's fault", while the thread below this one is about parents letting their children die. Funny that nobody states "It's Christianity's fault", while the causes are in both cases religious.
Christians were baited enough in that topic. The truth is that the parents followed a theologically incorrect opinion of Christianity (ie. they had no clue what the Bible said about such things), whereas this individual appears to follow a theologically radical version of Islam, not necessarily an incorrect one. Nobody is saying that most Muslims are like this, or that it is entirely Islam's fault, but we are saying that it is wrong to ignore the fact that Islam may have been a factor.
Now clearly his religion and the comments he made are clues and shouldn't be ignored, but I haven't seen any real evidence that the other news stations were ignoring it.
I didn't see them reporting it, and I saw at least one major newspaper say his religion was unconfirmed right after it had been confirmed by multiple independent sources. So yes, I'd say they were ignoring it. I'm not suggesting that he went on a killing spree because he was Muslim, but that a variety of issues, including his interpretation of radical Islam, may have contributed. It is wrong to ignore that his views on religion may have been a factor.
Crazed Rabbit
11-06-2009, 19:18
This is wrong. You guys are saying "He's muslim and made suspect comments then when on a shooting spree, 2+2=4 thank god fox reports it like it is". That's simplistic, and saying so isn't "politically correct" or "ignoring the facts".
I'm not saying he went shooting because he was Muslim. I think it was a factor, but probably not the biggest one, which was likely that he was a coward.
And I'm not talking about people calling the 'He's said Allah, he went on Jihad!' approach simplistic (I think it is simplistic); I'm talking about people saying what I quoted of Andres. You know, the people saying 'Why bother looking at motivations?' Would they be saying that if it were clear Islam was not a factor at all? That's my point.
Now clearly his religion and the comments he made are clues and shouldn't be ignored, but I haven't seen any real evidence that the other news stations were ignoring it.
Well, outside of the BBC I'd agree. But I wasn't talking about the media.
I watched the video. The news anchor said "we'll go now to obama where we understand he's going to comment on the shootings" but really it was a prearranged speech and he talked about the shootings since it was timely. He said his introductory bit and then talked about the shootings.
The objection to his shoutout is the same as the objections to his fist bump last year.
Some situations call for scrapping the prearranged schedule. And I don't think the writer of the article cares about the term 'shout-out'; it's the light hearted manner in which Obama begins his remarks. He opened up a speech where he talks about 12 soldiers being murdered with a 'shout out'.
CR
Devastatin Dave
11-06-2009, 19:26
I watched the video. The news anchor said "we'll go now to obama where we understand he's going to comment on the shootings" but really it was a prearranged speech and he talked about the shootings since it was timely. He said his introductory bit and then talked about the shootings.
The objection to his shoutout is the same as the objections to his fist bump last year.
He's SUPPOSE to be the commander in chief, his duty is to the military FIRST, not giving shout outs. I know thats hard to understand, but this man has no clue much like his worshippers.
Sasaki Kojiro
11-06-2009, 19:30
I'm not saying he went shooting because he was Muslim. I think it was a factor, but probably not the biggest one, which was likely that he was a coward.
And I'm not talking about people calling the 'He's said Allah, he went on Jihad!' approach simplistic (I think it is simplistic); I'm talking about people saying what I quoted of Andres. You know, the people saying 'Why bother looking at motivations?' Would they be saying that if it were clear Islam was not a factor at all? That's my point.
Yes. A lot of the thread is just arguing between people who feel that islam is given a pass by the media and people who are worried about xenophobia. That's why people are over or under emphasizing his religion.
Some situations call for scrapping the prearranged schedule. And I don't think the writer of the article cares about the term 'shout-out'; it's the light hearted manner in which Obama begins his remarks. He opened up a speech where he talks about 12 soldiers being murdered with a 'shout out'.
CR
Oh, but the guy who wrote that article is an idiot, and this reminds me of all that "he sat and read a childrens book!!!" stuff they said about bush.
He didn't seem light hearted to me. And the speech was about something entirely different and was written previously. The audience wasn't there for a speech about ft hood, they had another issue which was presumable very important. He thanked them for having him and acknowledged them and then said his bit about the shootings.
Objecting to "shout out" is old fashioned...same as objecting to fist bump.
If I may be forgiven for posting something that isn't about Obama, Fox News, Islam or the BBC, I find this kinda freaky:
Killeen, TX, the town in which Ft. Hood is situated? There was an even bigger massacre there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luby%27s_massacre), although I expect everyone's forgotten about it. Who knows, maybe the acts of violence really do leave an imprint on the place.
If I may be forgiven for posting something that isn't about Obama, Fox News, Islam or the BBC, I find this kinda freaky:
Killeen, TX, the town in which Ft. Hood is situated? There was an even bigger massacre there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luby%27s_massacre), although I expect everyone's forgotten about it. Who knows, maybe the acts of violence really do leave an imprint on the place.
DRRN YOU FOR MENTIONING SOMETHING OTHER THAN OBAMA, FOX NEWS, ISLAM, OR BBC! I will never forgive you!
~;)
That said, maybe you are reading too much into a coincidence? :inquisitive:
EDIT: I tell you what Lemur, we can take this even MORE off topic! That shooting was a conspiracy by George Bush so that he could make guns easier for his cowboy friends to carry, and this newest one was a conspiracy by Obama to show how muslims are discriminated against in the military and how treating them badly can hurt us all! BRILLIANT! Now you have to say Obama, Fox News, Islam, BBC, AND Bush! (Has there ever been a Backroom thread since 2004 where Bush was not mentioned? (usually involved in conspiracy theories :P :laugh:))
If I may be forgiven for posting something that isn't about Obama, Fox News, Islam or the BBC, I find this kinda freaky:
Killeen, TX, the town in which Ft. Hood is situated? There was an even bigger massacre there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luby%27s_massacre), although I expect everyone's forgotten about it. Who knows, maybe the acts of violence really do leave an imprint on the place.
Come on, they always do things bigger in Texas! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman)
And Hasan went to Virginia Tech. :yes:
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-06-2009, 20:29
Killeen, TX, the town in which Ft. Hood is situated? There was an even bigger massacre there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luby%27s_massacre), although I expect everyone's forgotten about it. Who knows, maybe the acts of violence really do leave an imprint on the place.
I don't think anybody has forgotten about that, it was where Suzanna Hupp's parents were killed and the reason for her excellent testimony thereafter.
Meneldil
11-06-2009, 20:32
No, his religion is of no consequence unless he made statements to the effect that his religion did play a role, which Hasan did. Ergo, the logical conclusion from past comments made by Hasan is that his faith did play a role. This doesn't mean all Muslims are like this, but it does mean he was motivated in part by radical Islam, or at least used it as an excuse. If we want to understand the shooting, that is just as relevant as any psychological disorders he may or may not have had.
Agreed. If the guy goes around shooting people while screaming a religious prayer, then religion obviously had a role into this.
It also seems quite likely that everything is tied to his religion. The guy apparently feared to fight fellow muslims, and was bullied because of his religion. In these conditions, it's quite likely that he went crazy because of all this. Which obviously doesn't mean "ZOMG MUSLIMS ARE EVIL".
It's indeed a case of some guy going nut, but it seems to me that he went nut for religious reasons.
Do you think Islam had anything to do with this?
Naturally not. Thing is an insane guy shot other people. Mind you, there are criminals everywhere. It's pretty much part of being a human. Most people can control themselves, though.
Seamus Fermanagh
11-06-2009, 20:54
Agreed. If the guy goes around shooting people while screaming a religious prayer, then religion obviously had a role into this.
It also seems quite likely that everything is tied to his religion. The guy apparently feared to fight fellow muslims, and was bullied because of his religion. In these conditions, it's quite likely that he went crazy because of all this. Which obviously doesn't mean "ZOMG MUSLIMS ARE EVIL".
It's indeed a case of some guy going nut, but it seems to me that he went nut for religious reasons.
I concur.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-06-2009, 21:02
Agreed. If the guy goes around shooting people while screaming a religious prayer, then religion obviously had a role into this.
It also seems quite likely that everything is tied to his religion. The guy apparently feared to fight fellow muslims, and was bullied because of his religion. In these conditions, it's quite likely that he went crazy because of all this. Which obviously doesn't mean "ZOMG MUSLIMS ARE EVIL".
It's indeed a case of some guy going nut, but it seems to me that he went nut for religious reasons.
:bow:
Sasaki Kojiro
11-06-2009, 21:12
I concur.
The religiousness was certainly connected:
The former imam at a Silver Spring, Md., mosque where Major Hasan worshiped for about 10 years described him as proud of his work in the Army and “very serious about his religion.” The former imam, Faizul Khan, said that Major Hasan had wanted to marry an equally religious woman but that his efforts to find one had failed.
“He wanted a woman who prayed five times a day and wears a hijab, and maybe the women he met were not complying with those things,” the former imam said.
But I think if you look at all the things that pushed him towards this, you'll find that they affected him because of his particular mental state or makeup. Many people are deeply religious and have trouble finding a wife, many soldiers have doubts about the war and don't want to be deployed, many are harassed.
I think you would have to look at the common threads between this and other mass killings. Perhaps they all are deeply unhappy, blame the institution or society at large, are so decide to take a bit of revenge with them.
Did you want to inject as much misery in our lives as you can just because you can?...I didn't have to do this. I could have left. I could have fled. But no, I will no longer run. It's not for me. For my children, for my brothers and sisters that you [******], I did it for them… When the time came, I did it. I had to...You had a hundred billion chances and ways to have avoided today, but you decided to spill my blood. You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision was yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off.
To say that he "went nut for religious reasons" is not accurate imo.
btw:
in another video, [Cho] compared himself to Jesus Christ,[137] explaining that his death will influence generations of "defenseless people".
Louis VI the Fat
11-07-2009, 00:28
I vote: Sasaki for explanatory insight. :yes:
and this newest one was a conspiracy by Obama to show how muslims are discriminated against in the military and how treating them badly can hurt us all!
So you're saying that a majority of people who ran amok were outsiders and/or treated badly is purely random?
Were the last five school shooters muslims or were they perhaps outsiders who often got harassed by other students? Well, I thought it was kinda obvious but it seems most here want to find some other angle here that serves the current political climate or whatever much better.
I'm waiting for the first politician to find out the guy played CounterStrike so we can finally ban it worldwide. :dizzy2:
Louis VI the Fat
11-07-2009, 00:57
I'm waiting for the first politician to find out the guy played CounterStrike so we can finally ban it worldwide. :dizzy2:Speaking of which, considering this shooting took place on an army base, does this shed new light on the idea that if only there is an abundance of arms fewer shootings will occur?
I mean, apparantly the shooter had guns, and the army base had, erm, lots of guns too.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-07-2009, 01:02
Speaking of which, considering this shooting took place on an army base, does this shed new light on the idea that if only there is an abundance of arms fewer shootings will occur?
I mean, apparantly the shooter had guns, and the army base had, erm, lots of guns too.
Apparently his victims were all unarmed, and he managed to kill a few more because it was thought that one of the victims was the shooter. Or something like that.
Crazed Rabbit
11-07-2009, 01:04
Speaking of which, considering this shooting took place on an army base, does this shed new light on the idea that if only there is an abundance of arms fewer shootings will occur?
I mean, apparantly the shooter had guns, and the army base had, erm, lots of guns too.
US Army bases are incredibly strict about personally owned arms; you can't carry them around with you, and some base commanders even ban (legally) carrying your own guns off the base.
EDIT: The PDF of a policy announcement (http://www.usarak.army.mil/policies/PUBS-ACROBAT/USARAK_Policies/CGCOFS%20POLICY%20STATEMENT%2020.pdf) by an Army Major General banning USARAK stationed soldiers from legally carrying guns in public places (in addition to on the army base), unlike civilians in Alaska (where the base is located) who can carry concealed guns without any permits.
EDIT: Info from Fort Hood: (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9BQBRSO0&show_article=1)
FORT HOOD, Texas (AP) - Pfc. Marquest Smith, on his way to Afghanistan in January, was completing routine paperwork about a bee-sting allergy when the sounds erupted.
A loud, popping noise. Moans. The sudden, urgent shout of "Gun!"
Smith poked his head over the cubicle's partition and saw an extraordinary sight: An Army officer with two guns, firing into the crowded room.
The 21-year-old Fort Worth native quickly grabbed the civilian worker who'd been helping with his paperwork and forced her under the desk. He lay low for several minutes, waiting for the shooter to run out of ammunition and wishing he, too, had a gun.
Packed into cubicles with 5-foot-high dividers, the 300 unarmed soldiers were sitting ducks. Those who weren't hit by direct fire were struck by rounds ricocheting off the desks and tile floor
CR
So you're saying that a majority of people who ran amok were outsiders and/or treated badly is purely random?
Were the last five school shooters muslims or were they perhaps outsiders who often got harassed by other students? Well, I thought it was kinda obvious but it seems most here want to find some other angle here that serves the current political climate or whatever much better.
I'm waiting for the first politician to find out the guy played CounterStrike so we can finally ban it worldwide. :dizzy2:
lmao, and you took that seriously? lolzeroo
a completely inoffensive name
11-07-2009, 03:40
I don't think this thread could be any worse if I even tried my best at trolling in it. I am surprised this fiasco of a debate hasn't been locked yet. Oh well, lots of lulz for me at idiotic posts.
Banquo's Ghost
11-07-2009, 09:19
I don't think this thread could be any worse if I even tried my best at trolling in it. I am surprised this fiasco of a debate hasn't been locked yet. Oh well, lots of lulz for me at idiotic posts.
At times of tragedy, emotions run high. Often, members express those emotions here amongst their friends and their posts may not be quite so clearly thought out as usual. Sometimes those emotions sharpen insights for those of us far away from the incident.
The Backroom is more more like a pub than a formal debating chamber. As long as the rules are observed, friends are welcome to sound off.
Ok, my zeal may be the result of Fragony being over your shoulder and I can't let the sorts of things he peddles go by un-opposed. :dizzy2:
I appologise :sweatdrop:
What, calling for restraint, be careful with making this religious, and keeping a clear head?
yeah I have done that evil me
I think we just have a nutter here.
Samurai Waki
11-07-2009, 10:10
He didn't get his guns from the base... that much has been made clear. The Armory would never let a Medical Psychologist no matter how high the rank free access to the Armory. Also, as has been speculated, he had to have planned the killings much in advance, so that further rules out the possibility that he could have obtained his weaponry from the armory, since inspections of inventory are quite frequent. Well, that's what the Master Sargent from the Fort Benning Armory had said over some Radio Talk Show I was listening to on the drive to school this morning, he didn't think the procedure would have been any different, if not more strict, at Ft. Hood since it's the primary base for deployment to the two major conflict zones. Could always be wrong though :shrug:
Meneldil
11-07-2009, 11:31
To say that he "went nut for religious reasons" is not accurate imo.
btw:
The real question is, could all this have happened if the guy wasn't a faithful muslim? If he didn't have a muslim name? If he didn't give a crap about his fellow brothers-in-religion?
I'm not saying Islam pushed him to do it. I'm saying what pushed him to do it is tied to his religious views.
I'm certain we all have a killer burried deep inside of us. What made this one comes to light was what the guy perceived as an unfair treatement of his religion imo.
Now, I find it quite funny that you people keep asking "why do you care he was muslim?". As soon as a shooting happens, we discuss the shooter's background for weeks, whether said shooter was a goth, an antisocial guy, an asian, played Quack3, listened to some random bad band.
But then I don't see anyone going "why do you care he listened heavy metal/was antisocial/asian?". This politicaly correct view of the world is saddening.
Guy was a religious nutjob, felt his religion was being overly bashed (which might very well be true) and went nut. Simply scrapping the religion part because you know, "muslims are fine and dandy and facing already enough prejudice as it is" is stupid.
And the whole "shooters are insane" speech is unimaginative. Most shooters have reasons to do what they do. We might not understand them, we might find them stupid, but they're here. Insanity is used to conveniently label everything we don't understand.
Screw political correction, it will no doubt be laughable, but we don't know anything yet before dragging it into the discussion as Islam instead of the guy being a muslim we are kinda missing the fact that someones brains fried, some things require more tact than others, to not make it more than it is.
tibilicus
11-07-2009, 12:58
The real question is, could all this have happened if the guy wasn't a faithful muslim? If he didn't have a muslim name? If he didn't give a crap about his fellow brothers-in-religion?
I'm not saying Islam pushed him to do it. I'm saying what pushed him to do it is tied to his religious views.
You don't know that yet, there's no evidence to support it either.
And what pushed him to do it was he was his own pathetic cowardice, this sort of thing happens quite regularly except obviously not on the same scale. To put it bluntly this guy would rather of died/ been arrested than be deployed..
There's absolutely zero evidence he was motivated by religion, the claim that the attack was because he might of said Alluh Akbar is ridiculous, it was to my knowledge that many Muslim devotees say this phrase in many situations as it means "God is great", Muslims use this for many reasons, it's not some kind of death cry, it's not some kind of declaration they hate the west and want to kill us all, it's no worse than a Christian crossing the cross across his chest, it's simply a deceleration of faith, and it was already established before hand that the guy was a Muslim..
To put it into simple context ever seen The Wire? Brother Mouzounne, a Nation of Islam member gets shot, as he lies there bleeding he recites the words "Aluuh Akbar" as he thinks he's about to die, does this mean he's a jihadist,? How do we not know this guy wasn't simply making a deceleration of his faith before his death? That doesn't necessarily mean he was doing it in the name of God..
I'm not trying to excuse the guys actions at all, all I'm saying is wait for the full facts and the truth to be revealed before you all jump to conclusions. The orgs full of a clever people, sadly a majority of you are displaying your ability to not think rationally, aren't waiting for the true facts to be uncovered and seem to be rushing to conclusions which cant properly be drawn up yet.
Fisherking
11-07-2009, 13:31
The person to blame is the shooter.
He did it to make a statement and likely to end his life.
Had it been only about deployment he could have resigned his commission and soon been back to work in most any military hospital in the states.
Military Officers have no set term of service and can basically quit.
He had other motives for staying in the Army.
His religious views may have played a part but that should no more cover the whole religion than when any other religious nut does something as tragic.
The last I heard he was unconscious.
I do so hope he recovers from his wounds and faces what he has done.
KukriKhan
11-07-2009, 14:14
I have questions:
1) Why did no one notice that the shooter was cracking up before the shooting?
2) Did he ever get a security clearance, requiring a background check?
3) Did he own the weapons he used?
4) What did his immediate supervisor and chain of command think of him?
In short: was this crazy incident predictable? Was it preventable?
Guilt certainly lies with the shooter; but there are probably some lessons to be learned here.
We know that radical islam motivated him
We do
Blaming Islam is a cop out for people who don't want to admit there is a real problem with the military and PTSD.
If PTSD was called what it actually was, Shell Shock, then it would be taken a lot more seriously.
lmao, and you took that seriously? lolzeroo
I have questions:
1) Why did no one notice that the shooter was cracking up before the shooting?
2) Did he ever get a security clearance, requiring a background check?
3) Did he own the weapons he used?
4) What did his immediate supervisor and chain of command think of him?
In short: was this crazy incident predictable? Was it preventable?
Guilt certainly lies with the shooter; but there are probably some lessons to be learned here.
5) Was he being harassed by others?
I think the answer to 3 is Yes, they say it were his own privately-owned guns.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-07-2009, 17:24
There's absolutely zero evidence he was motivated by religion, the claim that the attack was because he might of said Alluh Akbar is ridiculous, it was to my knowledge that many Muslim devotees say this phrase in many situations as it means "God is great", Muslims use this for many reasons, it's not some kind of death cry, it's not some kind of declaration they hate the west and want to kill us all, it's no worse than a Christian crossing the cross across his chest, it's simply a deceleration of faith, and it was already established before hand that the guy was a Muslim..
You know, the context is kind of important. If one of the people shot was Muslim and said it before he died, it would be fairly obvious that he was using it in a different context than his killer. :book:
If PTSD was called what it actually was, Shell Shock, then it would be taken a lot more seriously.
PTSD =/= Shell shock.
Combat stress reaction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_stress_reaction) (aka Shell shock or Battle fatigue)
Now, I find it quite funny that you people keep asking "why do you care he was muslim?". As soon as a shooting happens, we discuss the shooter's background for weeks, whether said shooter was a goth, an antisocial guy, an asian, played Quack3, listened to some random bad band.
But then I don't see anyone going "why do you care he listened heavy metal/was antisocial/asian?". This politicaly correct view of the world is saddening.
I can only speak for myself, of course, but I always follorw the "who cares if he was a ***/he played ***/he watched ***/he listened to ***, he was a nutjob just like all other nutters who wake up and decide to go killing random people" line of thought when tragedies like this occur, because I sincerely think that blaming such a shooting on video games, books, films or music is as silly as blaming it on the killers' origin or religion.
My apologies if I'm mistaken, but I don't think I've ever said otherwise in another thread about such a shooting, so your assertion as if my posts are inspired by political correctness is not only unfair but also simply not true.
The things such people say/write/yell to justify what is not justifiable can be different, but in the end, they're all completely and utterly insane.
So when I ask "why is his religion so important", then that is a sincere question.
All these people who do such things have something which is supposed to have "inspired" them; I say it doesn't matter, because the real questionj is "why did it inspire this specific person to go over the edge? Why this guy? What is it about him that he reacts that way?"
:shrug:
Sasaki Kojiro
11-07-2009, 18:24
The real question is, could all this have happened if the guy wasn't a faithful muslim? If he didn't have a muslim name? If he didn't give a crap about his fellow brothers-in-religion?
I'm not saying Islam pushed him to do it. I'm saying what pushed him to do it is tied to his religious views.
Well, I said it was tied to his views as well. I think we disagree about how important it was. I also think it could easily be a case of square peg square hole--if you were to generalize, I think it's possible that a number of things could take on the psychological role that his religion had.
I'm certain we all have a killer burried deep inside of us. What made this one comes to light was what the guy perceived as an unfair treatement of his religion imo.
Eh, certainly we all have a killer in us. It isn't buried deep either. Self defense, defense of family. But the fact that the percentage of people who turn to mass murder is so small indicates that it is something specific to them. We don't all have a psychopath buried in us for example, it's a biological condition.
I think the isolation was more than likely the biggest factor.
Now, I find it quite funny that you people keep asking "why do you care he was muslim?". As soon as a shooting happens, we discuss the shooter's background for weeks, whether said shooter was a goth, an antisocial guy, an asian, played Quack3, listened to some random bad band.
But then I don't see anyone going "why do you care he listened heavy metal/was antisocial/asian?". This politicaly correct view of the world is saddening.
The people asking "why do you care he was muslim?" probably think it is similar to all the talk after columbine about how the listened to marilyn manson.
Well, they could be being politically correct or they could genuinely think it isn't related. If someone disagrees with you it isn't necessarily because they are politically correct.
Guy was a religious nutjob, felt his religion was being overly bashed (which might very well be true) and went nut. Simply scrapping the religion part because you know, "muslims are fine and dandy and facing already enough prejudice as it is" is stupid.
That's a shallow view to take. If you want to figure out what the profile of these kind of shooters is for future reference, you have to look deeper. You have to understand what kinds of people react this way to their religion being bashed and why. It isn't the simple formula you are making it out to be.
And the whole "shooters are insane" speech is unimaginative. Most shooters have reasons to do what they do. We might not understand them, we might find them stupid, but they're here. Insanity is used to conveniently label everything we don't understand.
I speculated on the reasons and posted a quote from another killer with some of his claimed reasons :whip:
*************
Keeping with that, since I find it more interesting than the argument about what's politically correct, here's some food for thought:
Stress can be contagious, which is why psychotherapists need to take extra care regarding their own mental health. Had Dr. Hasan himself been emotionally traumatized and ethically conflicted by hearing the grotesque horror stories of war from his fellow soldiers? By constantly being told about his fellow Muslims and Army brethren slaughtering and maiming each other for their countries? This could result in a form of what we call countertransference: the psychotherapist's personal reactions to his or her patients and their particular presenting problems. Countertransference is a common phenomenon in mental health professionals, an occupational hazard, and must be carefully monitored. When it begins to become disturbing for the psychotherapist, impairing his or her objectivity and interfering with the treatment process, it becomes crucial to address it in supervision, consultation and/or one's own personal therapy. If the countertransference cannot be resolved in relatively short order, or at least kept in check, psychotherapists must ethically recuse themselves from such cases and refer the patient elsewhere. This begs the question: Should Dr. Hasan, given his apparently passionate religious and political beliefs, have been working with such patients in the first place?
....
From a forensic perspective, there is certainly far too little information available at this time to come to any meaningful conclusions regarding such a defendant's mental status. And it is improper to do so without having conducted a formal forensic evaluation. But determining his state of mind at the time of this crime and prior to it will prove crucial to his legal case. As a forensic criminal psychologist, here are some of the questions I would be asking myself if appointed by the court to evaluate such a defendant: Was the defendant clinically depressed, possibly to the point of paranoid psychosis? Could there have been any kind of substance abuse or intoxication involved? Was he in treatment and taking any psychiatric medications? Is there an underlying personality disorder? Were these shootings a tragic, impulsive manifestation of a manic or hypomanic episode, indicating the possible presence of bipolar disorder? Or, was this the hateful, calculating, vengeful act of a profoundly angry, frustrated, resentful and embittered--but not psychotic--person? (See my previous posts on post-traumatic embitterment disorder.)
Was Dr. Hasan a suicidal individual, who, like so many mass murderers, chose to die--very much like a suicide-bomber--taking as many victims with him as possible? Psychiatrists as a group have a notoriously high rate of suicides, though suicide rates in Muslim populations are exceedingly low. The notion that Hasan had become actively suicidal is supported by unconfirmed reports today that he allegedly advised his landlord two weeks ago that he would be leaving his apartment on the day of the shooting--despite the fact that he was not likely to actually be physically deployed for another few months. Hasan also is said to have given away his belongings, furniture, food, cleaned out his apartment, and said goodbye to friends just prior to the massacre, handing some of them copies of the Koran. Unless he was convinced he was leaving the country in the immediate future, such preparatory behavior could be interpreted as a prelude to suicide. Or, in this case, premeditated homicide-suicide. Hasan may have hoped to have time to take his own life after his murder spree, or be taken out by police. So-called suicide by cop.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evil-deeds/200911/murder-and-mayhem-fort-hood-post-traumatic-embitterment-madness-or-political-
Psychology today is kind of a pop psychology mag, but :shrug:
We don't all have a psychopath buried in us for example, it's a biological condition.
Indeed.
I think the isolation was more than likely the biggest factor.
Yep.
He certainly fits the profile of most psychopaths. Loner, male, 30-40, difficulties to follow social norms.
The people asking "why do you care he was muslim?" probably think it is similar to all the talk after columbine about how the listened to marilyn manson.
Indeed. Thank you :bow:
That's a shallow view to take. If you want to figure out what the profile of these kind of shooters is for future reference, you have to look deeper. You have to understand what kinds of people react this way to their religion being bashed and why. It isn't the simple formula you are making it out to be.
Correct.
Nice post :bow:
Strike For The South
11-07-2009, 18:36
Clearly the biggest thing here is that he was insane but had he been raised a hindu would've he snapped?
Furunculus
11-07-2009, 18:44
What about his supervisor? A muslim who is against the Iraq/Afganistan war, who wants to leave the military, who is mobbed because of his religion, who wants the troops to come home, who as a psychiatrist gets to hear all the traumatic experiences and personal catastophies unfiltered, probably has to work more then 40 hours a week, sending someone like him to Iraq or Afganistan against his will is really not a smart psychological decission. That the risk in such a situation for a man to explode and to loose the nerves being exorbitant greater should be clear to everyone, even american generals. A person like him acts like this because of sheer desperation and not because of idealogy.
(original text by El Senor Wolflero)
he just randomly went skitz with two other guys, who randonly went skitz too, at the same time.................?
best said by mark steyn so far:
there's something deeply weird about the media's instinctive avoidance of the M-word or the T-word and the careless abandon with which they speculate about "post-traumatic stress disorder" even as the emerging facts render it absurd (a three-man conspiracy to commit PTSD?).
Sasaki Kojiro
11-07-2009, 18:51
Clearly the biggest thing here is that he was insane but had he been raised a hindu would've he snapped?
I think they they should (and certainly will) pay closer attention to muslims who are conflicted about our wars and are being harrassed. Check to see if they are alienated etc.
If he'd been buddhist maybe he would have set himself on fire? Well, my impression is that those guys were doing it for very different reasons.
It's possible that a different religion could have counteracted his character. He probably wouldn't have gone on a killing spree if he hadn't been in the army or if he'd found a wife. No doubt there are plenty of possible killers who get derailed. Or maybe he would have failed at finding a devout hindu wife and still been harrassed for his ethnicity.
there's something deeply weird about the media's instinctive avoidance of the M-word or the T-word and the careless abandon with which they speculate about "post-traumatic stress disorder" even as the emerging facts render it absurd (a three-man conspiracy to commit PTSD?).
Not really well said at all, since there weren't three men, they extensively mention muslim, and terrorist doesn't seem applicable.
If he'd been buddhist maybe he would have set himself on fire? Well, my impression is that those guys were doing it for very different reasons.
Yes, lighting yourself alight is the favourite Buddhist way of making a statement. Except in Japan, where (in the case of a civil war) you arm yourself and slaughter other people.
I remember a lot of Sikhs being physically and verbally abused after 9/11. Would it have mattered? I don't think so; if you don't look Caucasian you could be prone to harrassment.
Yes, lighting yourself alight is the favourite Buddhist way of making a statement. Except in Japan, where (in the case of a civil war) you arm yourself and slaughter other people.
I remember a lot of Sikhs being physically and verbally abused after 9/11. Would it have mattered? I don't think so; if you don't look Caucasian you could be prone to harrassment.
Well, if by harassment they mean the occassional joke or weird comment once in a while, sometimes followed by a slap on the back by a good friend, then yes, he was nuts, but if it's a constant thing that is rather serious, then it's a bit like opening a can of worms. I remember a teacher of mine once tried to investigate why I was an outsider in class (so obviously he noticed something) but the others just said they were making casual jokes like they did with everyone else. One time they turned around and told me to go away as they wanted nothing to do with me, they certainly did not do that with anyone else. It can be really hard to tell, in that one argument I was almost convinced myself, on other days I was really enraged, it can be very low-key yet so hurtful and I really wanted to fight back, just couldn't do it with words, neither with fists, you can guess where this can lead, you need something powerful, something they cannot just talk away, something that shows them and possibly makes them sorry about what they did... Singling out the guys who treated you worse while sparing those who had at least some compassion is also a way to keep thinking you are actually sane, just punishing those ********* who are treating you badly.
Well, I'm not sure how much this fits here, apparently the harassment was only brought up in one of the early articles, I'm just saying it can be a big factor and people who harass others over the course of months or years really cause big harm and IMO partly have themselves to blame if the person snaps, it's a bit like poking a bear with a stick making yourself think it's just a harmless rabbit...
Then again I'm probably insane myself so maybe I'm just proving everyone's point. :shrug:
Centurion1
11-07-2009, 23:24
The person to blame is the shooter.
He did it to make a statement and likely to end his life.
Had it been only about deployment he could have resigned his commission and soon been back to work in most any military hospital in the states.
Military Officers have no set term of service and can basically quit.
He had other motives for staying in the Army.
His religious views may have played a part but that should no more cover the whole religion than when any other religious nut does something as tragic.
The last I heard he was unconscious.
I do so hope he recovers from his wounds and faces what he has done.
Just a clarification here. i just finished my marine corps and army rotc applications and this is how it works. 5 year active or 8 years reserve after college. if you are so lucky to get to be a medical porfessional they tack on two years for every year of medical school. you do your residency in the military. So he most likely wasnt quite done yet.
My thoughts on this guy........
complete coward i hope he burns, freezes, etc. in whatever hell you can imagine. He was a PSYCHOLOGIST. he would be on some of the most secure bases on Earrh while over there or maybe if he was lucky enough he would remain on a ship. Statistically he would probably be safer not like he would be going out on patrols in the afghani mountains.
Second i think religion played a role in this event. do i think it was the one factor, no. but i do not think that it could ever have helped. He obviously followed a radical form of islam as can be seen by his idea that suicide bombers are like American soldiers who throw themselves on grenades.
Thirdly i do not believe he was in any way shape or form suffering from ptsd. my cousin suffered from minor forms of ptsd after returning from iraq and another has nightmares after returning from a tour in afghanistan. The man cannot have ptsd, simply not possible.
Fourthly, I find it very difficult to believe he was harassed. no one harasses a major in the United States Army. Lower ranks for obvious reasons and higher ranks because you don't reach lieutenant colonel and higher by being a d. bag. I doubt the man even received very much innocent ribbing.
Fifthly, this man was insane, obviously.
finally i hate this man so passionately for his cowardice. My cousins segeant was an arab-american (believe his parents were kuwaiti or something of that ilk) who happened to be a sunni muslim. He was according to my cousin one of the bravest men he had ever met and won a bronze (award for valor) star while over in iraq........ so i hope this guy gets the death penalty and is sent to his eternal punishment even sooner.
Oh and does anyone else remember that guy right before desert storm (muslim) who threw a grenade into a tent of his comrades so he didnt have to fight........
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-07-2009, 23:39
Just a clarification here. i just finished my marine corps and army rotc applications and this is how it works. 5 year active or 8 years reserve after college. if you are so lucky to get to be a medical porfessional they tack on two years for every year of medical school. you do your residency in the military. So he most likely wasnt quite done yet.
I think he started over ten years ago, but I'm not one hundred percent sure.
KukriKhan
11-08-2009, 04:45
it can be very low-key yet so hurtful and I really wanted to fight back, just couldn't do it with words, neither with fists, you can guess where this can lead, you need something powerful, something they cannot just talk away, something that shows them and possibly makes them sorry about what they did... Singling out the guys who treated you worse while sparing those who had at least some compassion is also a way to keep thinking you are actually sane, just punishing those ********* who are treating you badly.
I won't be surprised to read the FBI behavioralist's profile on our shooter going through exactly that kind of process, just before the shooting.
Soldiers have a rough job. They talk rough among themselves, or when they're encouraged (like by a shrink whose job is to get feelings to the surface so they can be dealt with). Maybe after the 5 thousand, 3 hundred and thirty second reference he heard about "those :daisy: camel jockeys" (or worse) he forgot that compartmentalization thing he learned in med school, and took it personally. Then went to work loaded for bear, waiting for "the next redneck who DARES say anything bad about my people". Everybody knows I love Devastatin' Dave - imagine if your job was to meet, greet and fix 20 of him every day...
I'm not making excuses for the guy. Just trying to see the trigger. Soldiers have GOT to blow off steam. What's been damaged here (on top of the obvious deaths and wounded, ruined lives) is the underlying trust between soldiers; the assurance that despite the hardships endured and the horrors seen, THE ARMY (uniformed and vets, if not civilians) will institutionally understand. Now Officers, and in particular, Medical Officers, and even more particularly Med Officers with non-European nametags, will be more suspect by soldiers.
Not good. He killed a dozen, wounded what, 30? 31 I say: the 31st being soldier brotherhood. In that way, he did more damage than obl on 911.
---------------------------------------------------------
Meanwhile: ex-POTUS beats current POTUS to Disaster Site (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g9WYOpev3OyMQ8Hdgq4e3s_wJdrAD9BQQQPO0)
Major Robert Dump
11-08-2009, 06:58
Why do my posts keep disappearing? Am i timing out on my crappy wi-fi in BFE? I don't think I said anything offensive for a change wtf
btw the post above mine is spot on. Teasing will always exist in the military and theres no way to fix it without firing everybody.
Kadagar_AV
11-08-2009, 07:50
Teasing is one thing... harassment and bullying something else entirely. As a military officer you should know about this.
I do not, however, think that ordinary teasing was what made this guy go get his guns.
Banquo's Ghost
11-08-2009, 09:18
Why do my posts keep disappearing? Am i timing out on my crappy wi-fi in BFE? I don't think I said anything offensive for a change
As far as I can tell, no moderator action has been taken against any of your posts.
Kukri, Husar, Sasaki - very good, insightful posts, thank you. I'm still formulating an opinion, so such thoughts are very interesting. :bow:
Fisherking
11-08-2009, 10:51
It is disturbing to me that a medical professional would do something like this. A Dr. who is supposed to be a healer.
Evidently he had served with the Army for at least 12 years in some capacity, but what his required service time was would only be speculation.
It is just my opinion but I think they guy brought on his own problems and did his religion a disservice by his actions.
By BRETT J. BLACKLEDGE, Associated Press Writer Brett J. Blackledge, Associated Press Writer – Sat Nov 7, 3:35 am ET
WASHINGTON – He was by turns caring and contentious, a man quick to say "I am blessed" in casual greeting yet one who seemed to stew in discontent that he could not always keep to himself.
Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan, suspect in the assault that killed 13 people at Fort Hood, Texas, and hurt 30, salved the emotional wounds of troops returning from war even as he objected to his own looming deployment to Afghanistan, where he was to counsel soldiers suffering from stress.
But Hasan argued with fellow soldiers who supported U.S. war policy, say those who know him professionally and personally. He was a counselor who once required counseling for himself because of trouble he had dealing with some patients, said a former boss.
Authorities on Friday seized Hasan's home computer, searched his apartment and took away a Dumpster as the 39-year-old Army major lay in a coma in the hospital, attached to a ventilator.
There are many unknowns about the man authorities say is responsible for the worst mass killing on a U.S. military base.
Most of all, his motive.
For six years before reporting for duty at Fort Hood, in July, Hasan worked at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center pursuing his career in psychiatry, as an intern, a resident and, last year, a fellow in disaster and preventive psychiatry. He received his medical degree from the military's Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md., in 2001.
While an intern at Walter Reed, Hasan had some "difficulties" that required counseling and extra supervision, said Dr. Thomas Grieger, who was the training director at the time.
Grieger said privacy laws prevented him from going into details but noted that the problems had to do with Hasan's interactions with patients. He recalled Hasan as a "mostly very quiet" person who never spoke ill of the military or his country.
"He swore an oath of loyalty to the military," Grieger said. "I didn't hear anything contrary to those oaths."
But, more recently, federal agents grew suspicious.
At least six months ago, Hasan came to the attention of law enforcement officials because of Internet postings about suicide bombings and other threats, including posts that equated suicide bombers to soldiers who throw themselves on a grenade to save the lives of their comrades.
They had not confirmed Hasan is the author of the posting, and a formal investigation had not been opened before the shooting, said law enforcement officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the case.
Federal authorities seized Hasan's computer Friday during a search of his apartment in Killeen, Texas, said a U.S. military official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation.
His anger was noted by a classmate, who said Hasan "viewed the war against terror" as a "war against Islam."
Dr. Val Finnell, a classmate of Hasan's at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, attended a master's in public health program in 2007-2008. Finnell says he got to know Hasan because the group of public health students took an environmental health class together. At the end of the class, everyone had to give a presentation. Classmates wrote on topics such as dry cleaning chemicals and mold in homes, but Finnell said Hasan chose the war against terror. Finnell described Hasan as a "vociferous opponent" of the terror war. Finnell said Hasan told classmates he was "a Muslim first and an American second."
Hasan recently was involved in a spat with another Fort Hood soldier residing in his apartment complex, apparently related to his Muslim beliefs.
The manager of the complex, John Thompson, said the other soldier, John Van de Walker, allegedly keyed Hasan's car and also removed and tore up a bumper sticker that read "Allah is Love." Thompson said Van de Walker had been in Iraq and was upset to learn that Hasan was Muslim.
A report filed with Killeen police on Aug. 16 indicates that Hasan's vehicle, a 2006 Honda Civic, had been scratched by an unknown object causing an estimated $1,000 worth of damage. The report indicates that Van de Walker, 30, was arrested on Oct. 21 and charged with criminal mischief. The matter has been referred for prosecution, according to the report.
The phone number for Van de Walker wasn't in service Friday, and Thompson, the apartment manager, said he had moved out of the complex.
In an interview with The Washington Post, Hasan's aunt, Noel Hasan of Falls Church, Va., said he had been harassed about being a Muslim in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and he wanted to get out of the Army. She said he had sought a discharge for several years, and even offered to repay the cost of his medical training.
Hasan was in the preparation stage of deployment, which can take months, though Army spokeswoman Col. Cathy Abbott was uncertain when Hasan was to leave.
Abbott said Hasan was to deploy with an Army Reserve unit that provides what the military calls "behavioral health" counseling.
Another military official said Hasan had indicated he didn't want to go to Iraq but was willing to serve in Afghanistan. The official did not have authorization to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.
A different military official said Hasan's family has Palestinian roots. There have been reports that he was harassed for his Muslim religion, but the official says there is no indication Hasan filed a complaint with military officials about that.
Alice Thompson, the manager at the apartment complex where Hasan lived, said he'd been living there since mid-August. Thompson said she didn't talk to him other than to say hello in passing. Thompson said he always answered her "How are you?" with "I am blessed."
Noel Hasan said her nephew "did not make many friends" and would say "the military was his life."
A cousin, Nader Hasan, told The New York Times that after counseling soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with post-traumatic stress disorder, Hasan knew the scars of war well.
"He was mortified by the idea of having to deploy," Nader Hasan said. "He had people telling him on a daily basis the horrors they saw over there."
Retired Army Col. Terry Lee, who said he worked with Hasan, told Fox News that Hasan had hoped President Barack Obama would pull troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Lee said Hasan got into frequent arguments with others in the armed forces who supported the wars, and had tried hard to prevent his pending deployment.
Col. Kimberly Kesling, deputy commander of clinical services at Darnall Army Medical Center at Fort Hood, said she had known Hasan.
"You wouldn't think that someone who works in your facility and provided excellent care for his patients, which he did, could do something like this," Kesling said. She described him as "a quiet man who wouldn't seek the limelight" and said she was shocked when she heard he was the suspect in the shootings.
Hasan attended prayers regularly when he lived outside Washington, often in his Army uniform, said Faizul Khan, a former imam at a mosque Hasan attended in Silver Spring, Md. He said Hasan was a lifelong Muslim.
"I got the impression that he was a committed soldier," Khan said. He spoke often with Hasan about Hasan's desire for a wife.
On a form filled out by those seeking spouses through a program at the mosque, Hasan listed his birthplace as Arlington, Va., but his nationality as Palestinian, Khan said.
"We hardly ever got to discussing politics," Khan said. "Mostly we were discussing religious matters, nothing too controversial, nothing like an extremist."
Hasan earned his rank of major in April 2008, according to a July 2008 Army Times article.
He served eight years as an enlisted soldier. Military records show he also served in the ROTC as an undergraduate at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg and received a bachelor's degree in biochemistry there in 1997.
But college officials said Friday that Hasan graduated with honors in biochemistry in 1995 and there was no record of him serving in any ROTC program.
He previously had attended Barstow Community College in Barstow, Calif., and Virginia Western Community College in Roanoke, Va., according to Virginia Tech records.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_fort_hood_shooting_suspect
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-08-2009, 17:06
Teasing is one thing... harassment and bullying something else entirely. As a military officer you should know about this.
I do not, however, think that ordinary teasing was what made this guy go get his guns.
I don't either. As said, the man was an officer. I doubt he was being harassed by ordinary soldiers or by his superiors.
Seamus Fermanagh
11-08-2009, 17:44
Harassment is one of those things that is largely in the eye of the beholder. I recall one discussion regarding moderator efforts in multiplayer fora wherein many of the MP posters were aghast that they COULDN'T belittle and verbally abuse other MPers in their posts without moderator intervention. Their version of things suggested that such interaction was normal and that nobody in that milieu would ever construe it as harassing or mean.
This is why all the harassment lawsuits require some "neutral" standard for judging harassment. Hasan may very well have felt harassed by a host of "little things" that in and of each "little thing" carried no meaning or intention to harass.
Kukri made an excellent point. After the 200th client who -- in processing their own angst resultant from combat stress -- appeared callous or even happy at harming people who very much looked like, sounded like, and believed as did Major Hasan, he may have had trouble compartmentalizing things.
We will learn much more over the coming months.
Evil:
The line between officers and enlisted in the USA is oddly blurred at points. Teasing and venting can take many forms and some of them, I am assured by those who have served, do function across categories. Perhaps Kukri or MRD could regale us with a tale or two regarding the likely results of an O-3 forcing a RSM to pop to attention in front of the troops or otherwise embarassing that NCO.
Kadagar_AV
11-08-2009, 20:05
From what little I have read, it seems like he got diapers thrown at his home (something about that being what his head dress looks like), he woke up one morning and found his car scratched, he got continous verbal abuse at the base...
Now, please DO NOT get me wrong. There is no excuse for what he did.
However, in a way I can relate to him. :shame:
From all the records, he seems like a guy who tried to do his country good. Something must have changed for him to start killing his fellow men.
So what is my actual point?
My point would be... These snaps could be anywhere, at any time. Why dont we all leave this with the lesson that you should care for, and look after, the very people around you in your daily life.
A small smile, or a compliment, or whatever nice gesture between people can have a huge impact on someones day. So don't be shy, try and, well, just be nice to one another.
I can't get one thought out of my head.... Imagine if the soldier came to work ready to kill people, and was met by someone who said "Hey mate, thanks, you really helped me".
You know, it could have been the difference between life and death for a lot of people.
So, make sure to appreciate the people around you, see everyone as a fellow human being. That way the odds of you ending up with a bullet in your head will diminish.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-08-2009, 20:21
From what little I have read, it seems like he got diapers thrown at his home (something about that being what his head dress looks like), he woke up one morning and found his car scratched, he got continous verbal abuse at the base...
Link? I haven't seen any North American sources backing that up yet.
KukriKhan
11-08-2009, 20:52
Link? I haven't seen any North American sources backing that up yet.
Army Times.com quoting the AP (http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/11/ap_army_hood_shootings_110609/)
The manager of the apartment complex said Hasan recently was involved in a spat with another soldier living there over Hasan’s religious beliefs. A bumper sticker that read “Allah is Love” was ripped off Hasan’s car, which was keyed, said the manager, John Thompson.
Thompson said the neighbor had been in Iraq and was upset to learn that Hasan was Muslim.
Another neighbor, 42-year-old Kim Rosenthal, said Hasan didn’t seem too upset by his scratched vehicle.
“He said it was Ramadan and that he had to forgive people,” Rosenthal said. “He forgave him and moved on.”
I haven't seen any diaper stories (yet).
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/06/fort-hood-shooter-alive
An aide to Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Texas senator who was briefed by generals about the incident, said she had been told Hasan was upset about the deployment at the end of the year. Family and fellow officers said that he complained of harassment by other troops about his Middle Eastern ethnicity and Muslim faith.
Uh-oh.
...:no:
Devastatin Dave
11-08-2009, 23:56
SO the general excuse from the blame others crowd is the guy's a pussy who couldn't handle some teasing and, even though he was never involved in combat but just by hearing it made him nuts and went off and killed a dozen folks.
LOL, thats a lot of bull squeeze to swallow to think all this brought him to this point. At the same time the blame others crowd completely refuse to believe that Islam had nothing to do with it.
Oh well, enjoyed the reminder why sometimes common sense has no place in intellectual circles. I hope the moon barker gets lined up in front of a firing squad regardless of how the bleeding hearts think he's a victim.
SO the general excuse from the blame others crowd is the guy's a pussy who couldn't handle some teasing and, even though he was never involved in combat but just by hearing it made him nuts and went off and killed a dozen folks.
There's a difference between "some teasing", which is virtually irremovable in any society, and constant harrassment, each and every day over an extended period of time.
LOL, thats a lot of bull squeeze to swallow to think all this brought him to this point. At the same time the blame others crowd completely refuse to believe that Islam had nothing to do with it.
No, harrassment has to do with stuff. It's degrading. It's really a precarious time for people who look Arab.
Seamus Fermanagh
11-09-2009, 01:08
SO the general excuse from the blame others crowd is the guy's a pussy who couldn't handle some teasing and, even though he was never involved in combat but just by hearing it made him nuts and went off and killed a dozen folks.
LOL, thats a lot of bull squeeze to swallow to think all this brought him to this point. At the same time the blame others crowd completely refuse to believe that Islam had nothing to do with it.
Oh well, enjoyed the reminder why sometimes common sense has no place in intellectual circles. I hope the moon barker gets lined up in front of a firing squad regardless of how the bleeding hearts think he's a victim.
I believe they use a hanging for this kind of offense, though I haven't checked in a while.
Okay, having checked (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/us-military-death-penalty), it is now apparent that lethal injection would be the likely method. No Danny Deever or "Don't make a mess of it" stuff.
Hosakawa Tito
11-09-2009, 01:21
According to some accounts, the shooter's anti-mission feelings were known by some, but political correctness got in the way of reporting/acting on the warning signs. The Article. (http://www.buffalonews.com/nationalworld/national/story/853984.html)
The quote:
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.
Centurion1
11-09-2009, 01:57
^ i would be afraid to do the same thing for the same reasons. there is a point when political correctness goes too far. usually ALL of political correctness goes to far.
aimlesswanderer
11-09-2009, 07:50
Given that there are about 100,000 deaths or injuries caused by firearms in the US every single year, it does not, sadly, surprise me when incidents like this occur. Since strict gun laws were enacted after the worst massacre in Australia's history, there have been none here. A coincidence? A large majority of Australians would think not.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/americas-gun-outrage-276-people-killed-or-wounded-a-day-20091109-i4gj.html
And more on topic, a great great grandma and a great grandpa of mine came out to Australia in the mid-late 1800s sometime (Gold Rush!), and a great grandma was definitely born here. Despite this, when I meet people, the conversation sometimes (though not often, thank goodness) goes like this:
Them: "where are you from?" / "Your English is really good, where are you from?"
Me: "Australia"
Them: "No, where are you really from?"
Me: "Australia, I was born in Sydney"
Them: "Wow, really?"
Me: "Yes, my mother and her mother were as well. Great grandma was born somewhere in Australia too"
Them: "Wow, really?"
Me: "YES FRIKKIN REALLY!" *not normally quite so loud, and thankfully the conversation has only gotten this far a few times, but I found it intensely annoying.
Why does the conversation go like this you might wonder? Well, because I look Chinese, since that is where the vast majority of my ancestors came from. I don't speak anything but English. I don't 'dress Asian'. I don't believe in any religion, and certainly not a "funny" (ie non Christian) one. Yet people (invariably persons of Anglo-European background) sometimes have difficulty processing the fact that I am as "Australian" as they are, and my ancestors have quite possibly been here longer than theirs.
In Australia at least, before Muslims were the object of societies' suspicion, fear and paranoia, it was Asians who were the Great Fear. Asians forming ethnic ghettoes, Asian gangs/triads, Asians not assimilating, Asian drug dealers, too many Asian immigrants, Asians who couldn't speak English, etc etc. But the levels of hysteria and fear were far far lower than that directed towards Muslims and persons of "Middle Eastern appearance" now. All I experienced were a few comments like "go back where you came from", "**** Asians", all very low level and infrequent. But it did make me angry when it happened. The assumption that because I didn't "look Australian", that I didn't belong.
Major Hasan, being both Muslim and of "Middle Eastern appearance" (the double whammy to all too many people = must be a fanatical Muslim terrorist) would have conversations and experiences like mine (and many far less friendly) waaaaaaay more often. I can only imagine what effect this must have had on him, but I rather doubt it would be good. It could have built up slowly over the years, and then it just got too much. One too many remarks about "Muslim are all terrorists", "looks like a terrorist" or such, and then tragedy strikes - helped along by a ready supply of guns.
Just my view.
Fisherking
11-09-2009, 08:17
This morning I seem to be reading and hearing a lot of testimony about Hasan that is pretty damning.
This is one:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-11-07/major-hasans-hidden-militancy/?cid=hp:beastoriginalsL2
While at first I thought it ridiculous to blame the Army for his actions, it is becoming apparent to me that the policies of political correctness and sensitivity trading seem to be at the root of the problem.
Had this man been of just about any other religion and expressing such radical religious views I don’t doubt that something would have been done.
His ideas about his religion was a big part of the problem. Because so many would blame the whole religion, they turned a blind eye.
Crazed Rabbit
11-09-2009, 08:22
Given that there are about 100,000 deaths or injuries caused by firearms in the US every single year, it does not, sadly, surprise me when incidents like this occur. Since strict gun laws were enacted after the worst massacre in Australia's history, there have been none here. A coincidence? A large majority of Australians would think not.
Bah. Less than 15,000 people per year are actually murdered by others who use guns. Most of those are criminals involved in drugs or other dangerous activities.
The article you linked is simply trash and not even up to the standards of the average anti-gun person on The Org (he uses DC to point out how bad guns are? What a moron!). Suffice to say the majority of Americans don't cower in fear at the thought of firearms or liberty. Unlike, according to the author, Australia.
CR
According to some accounts, the shooter's anti-mission feelings were known by some, but political correctness got in the way of reporting/acting on the warning signs. The Article. (http://www.buffalonews.com/nationalworld/national/story/853984.html)
The quote:
Well can hardly blame them because their fear was valid, they would have been kicked from school and probably face criminal charges.
Ironside
11-09-2009, 13:00
SO the general excuse from the blame others crowd is the guy's a pussy who couldn't handle some teasing and, even though he was never involved in combat but just by hearing it made him nuts and went off and killed a dozen folks.
LOL, thats a lot of bull squeeze to swallow to think all this brought him to this point. At the same time the blame others crowd completely refuse to believe that Islam had nothing to do with it.
Oh well, enjoyed the reminder why sometimes common sense has no place in intellectual circles. I hope the moon barker gets lined up in front of a firing squad regardless of how the bleeding hearts think he's a victim.
Considering that he had at least about 8 years to plan out his evil plan and ended up with massacre+attemted suecide by military, we can either conclude that he was very incompetent on that area or radicalized over the years. Considering that all accounts points at option B, a very interesting follow up question is why he started to radicalize, as in there lies the answer on how to prevent this in the future.
Without using the bull squeeze as you put it, why would he go nuts by simply getting redeployed in a combat zone? He would not kill muslims, so his faith was not in danger. And why would he stay in a organisation that kills muslims if radical Islam was his only motivator?
Going amature shrink I would guess that he got extremely freaked out by the idea of going to a combat zone due to what he heard. In an attemt to justify it, he turned deeper into Islam to give him an excuse for this, while still keeping a loyalty to the military. When getting order to redeploy, he couldn't keep it together anymore and caused this tragedy in an attemted suecide.
But we'll see what the proffesionals can piece together in time
Does it matter really why he snapped, I'll start caring about that if it turns out there is any sort of organization behind it. Right now it's just a madman, people aren't going to get any satisfactory answers and should stop looking imho, religious nut or not in the end just a nut. What I find shocking is that all the signals were right in their face all the time and they didn't do anything, not because they didn't see it but because they were afraid to speak out because of pc-mania. In a way leftist lemmings have the blood of these soldiers on their hands this wouldn't have happened without the suffocating social control that is political correctness.
Given that there are about 100,000 deaths or injuries caused by firearms in the US every single year, it does not, sadly, surprise me when incidents like this occur. Since strict gun laws were enacted after the worst massacre in Australia's history, there have been none here. A coincidence? A large majority of Australians would think not.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/americas-gun-outrage-276-people-killed-or-wounded-a-day-20091109-i4gj.html
And more on topic, a great great grandma and a great grandpa of mine came out to Australia in the mid-late 1800s sometime (Gold Rush!), and a great grandma was definitely born here. Despite this, when I meet people, the conversation sometimes (though not often, thank goodness) goes like this:
Them: "where are you from?" / "Your English is really good, where are you from?"
Me: "Australia"
Them: "No, where are you really from?"
Me: "Australia, I was born in Sydney"
Them: "Wow, really?"
Me: "Yes, my mother and her mother were as well. Great grandma was born somewhere in Australia too"
Them: "Wow, really?"
Me: "YES FRIKKIN REALLY!" *not normally quite so loud, and thankfully the conversation has only gotten this far a few times, but I found it intensely annoying.
Why does the conversation go like this you might wonder? Well, because I look Chinese, since that is where the vast majority of my ancestors came from. I don't speak anything but English. I don't 'dress Asian'. I don't believe in any religion, and certainly not a "funny" (ie non Christian) one. Yet people (invariably persons of Anglo-European background) sometimes have difficulty processing the fact that I am as "Australian" as they are, and my ancestors have quite possibly been here longer than theirs.
In Australia at least, before Muslims were the object of societies' suspicion, fear and paranoia, it was Asians who were the Great Fear. Asians forming ethnic ghettoes, Asian gangs/triads, Asians not assimilating, Asian drug dealers, too many Asian immigrants, Asians who couldn't speak English, etc etc. But the levels of hysteria and fear were far far lower than that directed towards Muslims and persons of "Middle Eastern appearance" now. All I experienced were a few comments like "go back where you came from", "**** Asians", all very low level and infrequent. But it did make me angry when it happened. The assumption that because I didn't "look Australian", that I didn't belong.
Major Hasan, being both Muslim and of "Middle Eastern appearance" (the double whammy to all too many people = must be a fanatical Muslim terrorist) would have conversations and experiences like mine (and many far less friendly) waaaaaaay more often. I can only imagine what effect this must have had on him, but I rather doubt it would be good. It could have built up slowly over the years, and then it just got too much. One too many remarks about "Muslim are all terrorists", "looks like a terrorist" or such, and then tragedy strikes - helped along by a ready supply of guns.
Just my view.
An interesting perspective aimlesswanderer. Alas you won't get much intelligent engagement from those on this board who have made up their minds that it "all those crazy moooslims" or "don't blame the poor guns".
Banquo's Ghost
11-09-2009, 14:24
What I find shocking is that all the signals were right in their face all the time and they didn't do anything, not because they didn't see it but because they were afraid to speak out because of pc-mania. In a way leftist lemmings have the blood of these soldiers on their hands this wouldn't have happened without the suffocating social control that is political correctness.
After some calm and reasoned posts, you have fallen prey to your anxieties again. Several of the major school shootings have been committed by people who, after the event, we have wondered aloud why the signs weren't acted upon. Interning all goths, emos and young men who write bad poetry seems to be the answer there.
In other words, hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Contrary to your assertion, I think you'll find radical Muslims are reported to the police and authorities far more often these days. Whereas I think there may well be a good reason to look hard at how these reports are dealt with (some I'm sure, are not pursued energetically because of political correctness, particularly in relation to community "leaders" such as imams, but many more are pursued very energetically against innocent persons - at least, this is the European reality) I also think that the sheer volume and often trivial nature of these reports actually overwhelm the security services. Prejudice, not political correctness, is the culprit here.
Arresting people for wearing a beard after the hours of darkness may well satisfy you, but is likely to end up missing the real dangers. Unless it is found that this fellow was actually part of a plot, the only blood on anyone's hands is staining him.
The paradox that interests me is that so much appears to be made of his unwillingness to serve in Afghanistan. If he was ethically against the war, he could have made a stand by refusing the order. He would have served jail time, but kept his conscience intact. If he was afraid of injury or death, it doesn't make a lot of sense to try and avoid that risk by actions that guarantee his death - either there and then, or at the end of a rope/intravenous drip.
A rampage against fellow soldiers speaks of something more malign. I have seen video footage of him doing some shopping hours before the killings and he appeared calm and engaged. Terrorists sure of their cause often appear like this once the plan is in motion - but equally, a psychological trigger can unleash the insanity otherwise repressed.
It's baffling. And to those who ask why his reasons need to be understood, let me say that the relatives need this information. When you lose a loved one, the worst thing is to be left without knowing why. Even if it turns out that he just went mad, one can move on. "Dunno" and a shrug of the collective shoulder causes years of anxiety as to whether it could have been prevented.
I am not trying to make anything more out of this than it is, lone shooter, religious nut, but the signals were somewhat stronger here don't you think. Nobody is going to be anxious about reporting about a goth with silly behaviour, that is not my anxiety that is simply how it is.
Arresting people for wearing a beard after the hours of darkness may well satisfy you, but is likely to end up missing the real dangers.
que, am I confused or just confusing
Banquo's Ghost
11-09-2009, 15:09
I am not trying to make anything more out of this than it is, lone shooter, religious nut, but the signals were somewhat stronger here don't you think. Nobody is going to be anxious about reporting about a goth with silly behaviour, that is not my anxiety that is simply how it is.
I'm not sure that the signals were stronger in this case. As always, it's easier to read the omens after the event.
Arresting people for wearing a beard after the hours of darkness may well satisfy you, but is likely to end up missing the real dangers.
que, am I confused or just confusing
Sorry, Fragony - it's a reference to an old comedy sketch about an over-zealous policeman (http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2007/ntnon-constable-savage-p1.php).
I'm not sure that the signals were stronger in this case. As always, it's easier to read the omens after the event.
In this case that is just rediculous, he was an advicer for the Obama administration on 'certain sensitivities' this is a major fail, anybody not seing this comming or refusing to see it comming should feel kinda silly by now.
KukriKhan
11-09-2009, 15:26
It's baffling. And to those who ask why his reasons need to be understood, let me say that the relatives need this information.
And another reason is that the Army needs to know. The whole idea of having an organized military is the artificial (learned) construct of "on-off" killing. Directed, managed violence. Killing only when ordered to, and stopping immediately when ordered to. Without that kind of precise control, you don't have an army, you have an armed mob.
Taking matters into your own hands is prohibited. Somehow this shooter lost (or never internalized) that trained prohibition. The army needs to know why - what step in his training got skipped, what error in leadership occurred, what detail of indoctrination got overlooked.
Well, at least we established that religion was only a minor element. Definately not his motivation. (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/fort-hood-shooter-contact-al-qaeda-terrorists-officials/story?id=9030873)
Louis VI the Fat
11-09-2009, 15:35
Hasan, the sole suspect in the massacre of 13 fellow US soldiers in Texas, attended the controversial Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Great Falls, Virginia, in 2001 at the same time as two of the September 11 terrorists, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt. His mother's funeral was held there in May that year.
The preacher at the time was Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born Yemeni scholar who was banned from addressing a meeting in London by video link in August because he is accused of supporting attacks on British troops and backing terrorist organisations.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6521758/Fort-Hood-shooting-Texas-army-killer-linked-to-September-11-terrorists.html
He also told colleagues at America's top military hospital that non-Muslims were infidels condemned to hell who should be set on fire. The outburst came during an hour-long talk Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, gave on the Koran in front of dozens of other doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington DC, where he worked for six years before arriving at Fort Hood in July.
Colleagues had expected a discussion on a medical issue but were instead given an extremist interpretation of the Koran, which Hasan appeared to believe.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6526030/Fort-Hood-gunman-had-told-US-military-colleagues-that-infidels-should-have-their-throats-cut.html
Devastatin Dave
11-09-2009, 15:41
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6521758/Fort-Hood-shooting-Texas-army-killer-linked-to-September-11-terrorists.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6526030/Fort-Hood-gunman-had-told-US-military-colleagues-that-infidels-should-have-their-throats-cut.html
Wow, color me shocked.
This article must have been written by Zionists.:laugh4:
Thanks Louis, but this will prove nothing to most in this thread.
Fisherking
11-09-2009, 16:02
And another reason is that the Army needs to know. The whole idea of having an organized military is the artificial (learned) construct of "on-off" killing. Directed, managed violence. Killing only when ordered to, and stopping immediately when ordered to. Without that kind of precise control, you don't have an army, you have an armed mob.
Taking matters into your own hands is prohibited. Somehow this shooter lost (or never internalized) that trained prohibition. The army needs to know why - what step in his training got skipped, what error in leadership occurred, what detail of indoctrination got overlooked.
I don’t know what he may have learned in this regard in ROTC if he was ever required to drill, but Medical Officers don’t receive much actual military training and only a little indoctrination.
The mans warped views of Islam seem to go back as far as anyone has repotted on.
His mother died in 2001, he held her funeral at a Mosque in New York that was also the Mosque used by some members of the 9-11 plot. It was know as a radical institution. Why? He lived in VA.
His outbursts in medical school and at Walter Reed Medical Center all pointed to someone who sympathized with the radical elements of Islam.
He had expressed the view that anyone of a religion not Islam was an infidel and that infidels should be burned.
His deployment would have placed him in little danger and never required that he be armed unless in self defense and as a last resort.
He would have been near a population which shared his faith and in a position to help people likely both military and civilian.
I am a little puzzled about his speaking to an Imam about not being able to find a wife.
It seem he never did, despite being an Army Major and a Physiatrist.
I am wondering why he didn’t have gold diggers lined up at the door.
Sasaki Kojiro
11-09-2009, 17:54
After some calm and reasoned posts, you have fallen prey to your anxieties again. Several of the major school shootings have been committed by people who, after the event, we have wondered aloud why the signs weren't acted upon. Interning all goths, emos and young men who write bad poetry seems to be the answer there.
In other words, hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Contrary to your assertion, I think you'll find radical Muslims are reported to the police and authorities far more often these days. Whereas I think there may well be a good reason to look hard at how these reports are dealt with (some I'm sure, are not pursued energetically because of political correctness, particularly in relation to community "leaders" such as imams, but many more are pursued very energetically against innocent persons - at least, this is the European reality) I also think that the sheer volume and often trivial nature of these reports actually overwhelm the security services. Prejudice, not political correctness, is the culprit here.
It's a very good point that there are always tons of warning signs revealed after the shooting. People just tend to pass those over. The officers who didn't file reports because the were worried about political correctness clearly didn't really believe that he was going to go postal.
But your last statement I disagree with. People have to be able to report activity without worrying about themselves. If you get a bunch more reports because of prejudice, you need to hire more security people.
However, given how it was evidently pretty obvious he was a radical muslim, it seems silly to blame political correctness for the whole thing. Unless you want to suggest that the army is a liberal bastion of sensitivity. The fact is, people find it very hard to believe that someone they know would go crazy and start shooting people. It seems he was pretty unlikable, people probably just avoided him for the most part.
Although political correctness and why people hate it is probably a subject for another thread.
An interesting perspective aimlesswanderer. Alas you won't get much intelligent engagement from those on this board who have made up their minds that it "all those crazy moooslims" or "don't blame the poor guns".
It's hard to be intelligently engaged by people who don't exist :laugh4:
Interning all goths, emos and young men who write bad poetry seems to be the answer there.
You make this sound like it's a bad thing. :inquisitive:
Louis VI the Fat
11-09-2009, 18:51
A rampage against fellow soldiers speaks of something more malign. I have seen video footage of him doing some shopping hours before the killings and he appeared calm and engaged. Terrorists sure of their cause often appear like this once the plan is in motion - but equally, a psychological trigger can unleash the insanity otherwise repressed.
It's baffling. And to those who ask why his reasons need to be understood, let me say that the relatives need this information. When you lose a loved one, the worst thing is to be left without knowing why. Even if it turns out that he just went mad, one can move on. "Dunno" and a shrug of the collective shoulder causes years of anxiety as to whether it could have been prevented.I think the line between 'terrorist attack' and 'Virginia Tech-like shooting' is very blurred here. An interesting case.
Also, I want Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen, who is the Imam and 'spiritual counceller' of three of the 9-11 attackers and of this Hasan, hung for treason.
Fisherking
11-09-2009, 18:52
However, given how it was evidently pretty obvious he was a radical muslim, it seems silly to blame political correctness for the whole thing. Unless you want to suggest that the army is a liberal bastion of sensitivity.
The answer to this might shock you. But yes to a certain extent it is. Most especially when the Democrats are in power.
The top brass is very political and the Secretary of the Army is a civilian.
Those people make all the rules, remember. And you might be surprised at how much political correctness affects the Armed Forces.
Prince of the Poodles
11-09-2009, 20:30
This guy is spot on:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/11/08/fort-hood-nidal-malik-hasan-muslims-opinions-columnists-tunku-varadarajan.html
'Going Muslim'
Tunku Varadarajan, 11.09.09, 12:00 AM EST
America after Fort Hood.
"Going postal" is a piquant American phrase that describes the phenomenon of violent rage in which a worker--archetypically a postal worker--"snaps" and guns down his colleagues.
As the enormity of the actions of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan sinks in, we must ask whether we are confronting a new phenomenon of violent rage, one we might dub--disconcertingly--"Going Muslim." This phrase would describe the turn of events where a seemingly integrated Muslim-American--a friendly donut vendor in New York, say, or an officer in the U.S. Army at Fort Hood--discards his apparent integration into American society and elects to vindicate his religion in an act of messianic violence against his fellow Americans. This would appear to be what happened in the case of Maj. Hasan.
The difference between "going postal," in the conventional sense, and "going Muslim," in the sense that I suggest, is that there would not necessarily be a psychological "snapping" point in the case of the imminently violent Muslim; instead, there could be a calculated discarding of camouflage--the camouflage of integration--in an act of revelatory catharsis. In spite of suggestions by some who know him that he had a history of "harassment" as a Muslim in the army, Maj. Hasan did not "snap" in the "postal" manner. He gave away his possessions on the morning of his day of murder. He even gave away--to a neighbor--a packet of frozen broccoli that he did not wish to see go to waste, even as he mapped in his mind the laying waste of lives at Fort Hood. His was a meticulous, even punctilious "departure."
We are a civilized society. One of our cardinal rules of coexistence is that we (try always to) judge people only by their actions and not by their identity, whether racial, religious or sexual. This is our great strength as a society, and also, in the present circumstances, our great weakness: How to address the threat posed by the fact that, of the hundreds of thousands of Muslims in our midst, there are a few (perhaps many more than a few) who are so radicalized that they would kill their fellow Americans? Must we continue to be neutral in handling all people from different groups even though we know that there are differential risks posed by people of one group? The problem here is a heightened version of the airport security problem, where we check all people--including Chinese grandmothers--regardless of risk profiles. But can we afford that on a grand, national scale? (And I mean that question not merely in a financial sense, but also in terms of the price we'd pay in failing to detect a threat in time.)
This being America, we will insist on going a long way to preserve the appearance of equality, and that is no bad thing in terms of moral principle. But like all values, the appearance of equality is not infinite in its appeal--especially if it flies in the face of common sense and self-preservation. A short time after the shootings at Fort Hood, President Obama asked us not to jump to conclusions. To many Americans, this was a grating request, of a piece with the political correctness that was responsible--it has emerged--for the hands-off treatment by the Army of Maj. Hasan. How else could he have been left in the position of treating U.S. troops, given the stories we've now heard about his incendiary statements and apparent incompetence?
This is the same mindset that led the FBI to deny the possibility that the Fort Hood massacre was linked to terrorism even before they could have had any idea that was the case. We don't have to be paranoid about Arab males; we just have to avoid the opposite: Being fearful of coming across as Islamophobic, and thereby failing to look straight at a situation.
This is part of a larger--and too-hot-to-touch--American problem, which is the privileging of religion, and its frequent exemption from rules of normal discourse. Muslims may be more extreme because their religion is founded on bellicose conquest, a contempt for infidels and an obligation for piety that is more extensive than in other schemes. President Obama was as craven as a community college diversity vice-president when he said that no one should jump to conclusions. Everyone did, and he lost credibility with people who cannot stand civic piety in the face of the murderous kind.
Muslims are the most difficult "incomers" in the ongoing integration challenge, which America has always handled with pride--and a kind of swagger. We're the salad bowl/melting pot. Drive through Queens to see how we do this.
America differentiates itself on integration from Western European countries, which are far more cringing and guilt-driven in their approach. But can the American swagger persist if many Americans come genuinely to view Muslims as Fifth Columnists? The integration compact depends on a broad trust that the immigrant's desire to be American can happily co-exist with his other forms of racial/cultural/religious identity. Once that trust doesn't exist, America faces a problem in need of urgent resolution.
Have we reached that point of breakdown in trust? Not yet, I think, and not by some distance; but a few more murderous incidents of the Maj. Hasan variety--a few more shouts of "Allahu Akbar" as Americans are shot dead--will push many Americans on to a dangerous cusp.
I will end on a practical note. The PC--political correctness--problem is an obvious and thorny issue that the U.S. Army, at least, has to tackle. The Army had a self-identified Islamic fundamentalist in its midst, blogging about suicide bombings and telling everyone he hated the Army's mission; and yet, they did, or could do, nothing about it. In effect, the "don't-jump-to-conclusions" mentality was underway long before this man killed his colleagues.
So, first, it should be part of the mandatory duty of every member of the armed forces to report any remarks or behavior of fellow service members that could be construed as indicating unfitness for duty for any reason.
Second, there should be a duty to report such data up the chain of command, regardless of the assessment of the local commander.
Third, there should be a single high-level Pentagon or army department that follows all such cases in real time, whether the potential ground for alarm is sympathy with white supremacism, radical Islamism, endorsement of suicide bombing or simple mental unfitness.
Let the first lesson of the Hasan atrocity be this: The U.S. Army has to be a PC-free zone. Our democracy and our way of life depend on it.
Hosakawa Tito
11-10-2009, 02:31
However, given how it was evidently pretty obvious he was a radical muslim, it seems silly to blame political correctness for the whole thing. Unless you want to suggest that the army is a liberal bastion of sensitivity. The fact is, people find it very hard to believe that someone they know would go crazy and start shooting people. It seems he was pretty unlikable, people probably just avoided him for the most part.
Not silly at all. Senior officers desire to be promoted. Having red flags in one's personnel file on "hot button" issues like cultural diversity bias is perceived, warranted or not, as a sure way to stagnate one's career advancement. So putting yourself on paper in a formal complaint is considered not worth the risk. The warnings were there, multiple warnings, but everyone passed the "hot potato" instead of addressing the potential problem. I'm sure the Army feels that if they listen to all the whiners who don't want to be deployed because of xyz, then there will be no one willing to go. If that is the case, then no matter how they handle it, the mission is doomed to failure.
An interesting perspective aimlesswanderer. Alas you won't get much intelligent engagement from those on this board who have made up their minds that it "all those crazy moooslims" or "don't blame the poor guns".
It's hard to be intelligently engaged by people who don't exist :laugh4:
Unintelligent insults that don't warrant a reply and should be removed.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-10-2009, 02:34
Nope, his religion definitely had nothing to do with it. Nothing. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6526030/Fort-Hood-gunman-had-told-US-military-colleagues-that-infidels-should-have-their-throats-cut.html)
Centurion1
11-10-2009, 03:31
Originally Posted by aimlesswanderer View Post
Given that there are about 100,000 deaths or injuries caused by firearms in the US every single year, it does not, sadly, surprise me when incidents like this occur. Since strict gun laws were enacted after the worst massacre in Australia's history, there have been none here. A coincidence? A large majority of Australians would think not.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...1109-i4gj.html
And more on topic, a great great grandma and a great grandpa of mine came out to Australia in the mid-late 1800s sometime (Gold Rush!), and a great grandma was definitely born here. Despite this, when I meet people, the conversation sometimes (though not often, thank goodness) goes like this:
Them: "where are you from?" / "Your English is really good, where are you from?"
Me: "Australia"
Them: "No, where are you really from?"
Me: "Australia, I was born in Sydney"
Them: "Wow, really?"
Me: "Yes, my mother and her mother were as well. Great grandma was born somewhere in Australia too"
Them: "Wow, really?"
Me: "YES FRIKKIN REALLY!" *not normally quite so loud, and thankfully the conversation has only gotten this far a few times, but I found it intensely annoying.
Why does the conversation go like this you might wonder? Well, because I look Chinese, since that is where the vast majority of my ancestors came from. I don't speak anything but English. I don't 'dress Asian'. I don't believe in any religion, and certainly not a "funny" (ie non Christian) one. Yet people (invariably persons of Anglo-European background) sometimes have difficulty processing the fact that I am as "Australian" as they are, and my ancestors have quite possibly been here longer than theirs.
In Australia at least, before Muslims were the object of societies' suspicion, fear and paranoia, it was Asians who were the Great Fear. Asians forming ethnic ghettoes, Asian gangs/triads, Asians not assimilating, Asian drug dealers, too many Asian immigrants, Asians who couldn't speak English, etc etc. But the levels of hysteria and fear were far far lower than that directed towards Muslims and persons of "Middle Eastern appearance" now. All I experienced were a few comments like "go back where you came from", "**** Asians", all very low level and infrequent. But it did make me angry when it happened. The assumption that because I didn't "look Australian", that I didn't belong.
Major Hasan, being both Muslim and of "Middle Eastern appearance" (the double whammy to all too many people = must be a fanatical Muslim terrorist) would have conversations and experiences like mine (and many far less friendly) waaaaaaay more often. I can only imagine what effect this must have had on him, but I rather doubt it would be good. It could have built up slowly over the years, and then it just got too much. One too many remarks about "Muslim are all terrorists", "looks like a terrorist" or such, and then tragedy strikes - helped along by a ready supply of guns.
Just my view.
An interesting perspective aimlesswanderer. Alas you won't get much intelligent engagement from those on this board who have made up their minds that it "all those crazy moooslims" or "don't blame the poor guns".
im asian too. to be specific i am about 1/4 chinese. It is very easily noticeable. I dont get very much abuse. The worst is from my japanese friend but i give as good as i get........
really idah so you one of them liberal hippies who want to legalize crack cocaine and make it part of our government rationed meals along with our welfare check and rising deficit.
A Very Super Market
11-10-2009, 04:17
Hippies...... do...... crack.......?
Political correctness is silly. A radical muslim is a greater risk factor than a geriatric retirement home resident. The argument for political correctness is non-existant. It is essentially to judging all humans as equals when they are not equal. I'm reminded of a controversy a while back when a firewoman was fired because she didn't pass the fitness exam. Her response was to deride the test as unfair because it was measured by elite male firemen. How exactly is this supposed to represent our advancement as a society? No one is calling for gender roles to revert back the housewife and man, but it's merely a fact of life. No one simply decided one day that weiners made you stronger. It was learned through experience.
In the same way, it is foolish to cry "unfair" when a radical muslim of Middle Eastern descent decides to go on a religion-fueled rampage. Yet there is no need to panic and discharge every muslim soldier, because it was clear that it was the circumstances that bred this. The man was inherently unstable, and in an enviroment where he viewed everyone (And they demonstrated themselves) as against his cause, it was bound to happen. Does that mean it's okay to let radical muslims join the army? Absolutely not, as it goes against common sense.
Sasaki Kojiro
11-10-2009, 04:38
Nope, his religion definitely had nothing to do with it. Nothing. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6526030/Fort-Hood-gunman-had-told-US-military-colleagues-that-infidels-should-have-their-throats-cut.html)
Actually, the article you posted implied that his religion did have something to do with it :book:
Page 7 all you're willing to commit to is "his religion was tied to it somehow"? Man up and say something more ;)
Major Robert Dump
11-10-2009, 04:47
The army is a bastion of liberal sensitivity when it comes to minorities (except asians and funny religions, like jehovahs witnesses) and their feelings
Having an EO complaint brought against you stays on your record, even if you are found innocent. The entire investigation process is hard on the accused, while virtually nothing happens to the accuser if the accusations are found to be without merit. Promotion boards for minority NCOs sometimes ask if the soldier has ever been discriminated against, and if they have, they get promotion points for it.
IT's as if people are encouraged to complain and make EO complaints. It's an open-door policy gone wrong. I just finished one that was an absolute nightmare and without merit, and still some female NCOs think we made the wrong decision by finding the guy innocent. What happened? A young female bragged and bragged that she was gonna get a tit job when she took leave. EVERYONE KNEW because thats all she talked about. I knew about it on my first day at the uniot because I heard her talkign about it. So she comes back from leave with new goods, showing them off to people, basking in the attention, and a male soldier who she doesn't like asked her how the surgery went and if she likes her new look, and she freaked out and pressed an EO charge on him because "he is creepy and mean." He wasn't flirting, he wasn't asking anything that wasn't public knowledge, but apparently she felt that because she didn't like him there were simply some public facts that could not be discussed with him without being offensive. Had I not heard her talking about this on my first day there, this man would have been hung out to dry for harassment.
At my Transportation Officer course I had two Saudi International students. They were royalty captains. They were totally chauvenistic, lazy and arrogant turds. They openly spoke about how the females who burped and cursed and drank would be whipped in their country. They flagged us with their rifles all the time. They were late all the time. They claimed to be offended during live-fire exercises with OPFOR because our iraqi-model MOUT assault was playing a call to prayer song, and when the range OIC said he wasn't going to change the song, they took the complaint up the chain with the help of several bleeding heart officers (some of them female -- which really dumbfounded me).
Meanwhile, I get threatened by the school commandant for jokingly giving them pork rib MREs (i had others ready for them), for bringing islam into our classroom discussions on ROE and geopolitics, for asking them if they were Shias (oh that one pissed them off, quite funny, i did it on purpose).
Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree here, but I think there is an underlying reason that there are more black female Sergeant Majors than any other demographic, despite only making up less than 10% of the overall force.
So yes, it is a bastion of liberal thinking when it comes to "protecting and elevating" certain people. That's why homos in the military would be such a nightmare.....i think the soldiers would accept them....i just think the EO complaints would go through the roof.
And Mormons.....oh my god. Don't even think about talking about the book of Mormon with them if you aren't a mormon or looking to convert....they will nail your ass to the wall in a heartbeat.....we can't help it if its a funny story
Strike For The South
11-10-2009, 05:02
The army is a bastion of liberal sensitivity when it comes to minorities (except asians and funny religions, like jehovahs witnesses) and their feelings
Having an EO complaint brought against you stays on your record, even if you are found innocent. The entire investigation process is hard on the accused, while virtually nothing happens to the accuser if the accusations are found to be without merit. Promotion boards for minority NCOs sometimes ask if the soldier has ever been discriminated against, and if they have, they get promotion points for it.
IT's as if people are encouraged to complain and make EO complaints. It's an open-door policy gone wrong. I just finished one that was an absolute nightmare and without merit, and still some female NCOs think we made the wrong decision by finding the guy innocent. What happened? A young female bragged and bragged that she was gonna get a tit job when she took leave. EVERYONE KNEW because thats all she talked about. I knew about it on my first day at the uniot because I heard her talkign about it. So she comes back from leave with new goods, showing them off to people, basking in the attention, and a male soldier who she doesn't like asked her how the surgery went and if she likes her new look, and she freaked out and pressed an EO charge on him because "he is creepy and mean." He wasn't flirting, he wasn't asking anything that wasn't public knowledge, but apparently she felt that because she didn't like him there were simply some public facts that could not be discussed with him without being offensive. Had I not heard her talking about this on my first day there, this man would have been hung out to dry for harassment.
At my Transportation Officer course I had two Saudi International students. They were royalty captains. They were totally chauvenistic, lazy and arrogant turds. They openly spoke about how the females who burped and cursed and drank would be whipped in their country. They flagged us with their rifles all the time. They were late all the time. They claimed to be offended during live-fire exercises with OPFOR because our iraqi-model MOUT assault was playing a call to prayer song, and when the range OIC said he wasn't going to change the song, they took the complaint up the chain with the help of several bleeding heart officers (some of them female -- which really dumbfounded me).
Meanwhile, I get threatened by the school commandant for jokingly giving them pork rib MREs (i had others ready for them), for bringing islam into our classroom discussions on ROE and geopolitics, for asking them if they were Shias (oh that one pissed them off, quite funny, i did it on purpose).
Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree here, but I think there is an underlying reason that there are more black female Sergeant Majors than any other demographic, despite only making up less than 10% of the overall force.
So yes, it is a bastion of liberal thinking when it comes to "protecting and elevating" certain people. That's why homos in the military would be such a nightmare.....i think the soldiers would accept them....i just think the EO complaints would go through the roof.
And Mormons.....oh my god. Don't even think about talking about the book of Mormon with them if you aren't a mormon or looking to convert....they will nail your ass to the wall in a heartbeat.....we can't help it if its a funny story
Hmmmm very interesting MRD. I've heard the exact same story told to me by a friend of mine (not the same examples obv but very much in the same vain)
Centurion1
11-10-2009, 05:03
^ yeah there is a reason. for example at the naval academy they want more minority students so that the face of the officer corps reflects the enlisted. And the minority students are allowed to have lower grades and sat scores. Fair, no but neither is affirmative actions. Yeah really good way to run the military. being stupid doesn't get some office thing messed up , people can DIE
As ive said a million times the worst thing to be in america is a poor white kid.
Strike For The South
11-10-2009, 05:06
^ yeah there is a reason. for example at the naval academy they want more minority students so that the face of the officer corps reflects the enlisted. And the minority students are allowed to have lower grades and sat scores. Fair, no but neither is affirmative actions. Yeah really good way to run the military. being stupid doesn't get some office thing messed up , people can DIE
As ive said a million times the worst thing to be in america is a poor kid.
FIFY
Evil_Maniac From Mars
11-10-2009, 05:10
Actually, the article you posted implied that his religion did have something to do with it :book:
Nope, absolutely nothing. No idea how anyone could think something like that.
Centurion1
11-10-2009, 05:33
sorry i left a really key part out of my post.
I said,
"as i said a million times the worst thing to be is a poor kid."
I meant to say a poor WHITE kid
that should explain things much better.
i assume strike that fify means something like DUH
EDIT: oh wait strike just changed my post in his quote. Disregard this above part. Yeah strike i see where your coming from but if you were applying to college and you were a poor white kid you would have as most of the same issues as a poor black kid but not near as many advantages.
Of course thanks to the lord i am not poor so i cant even really speculate on how it must be like
Strike For The South
11-10-2009, 05:37
sorry i left a really key part out of my post.
I said,
"as i said a million times the worst thing to be is a poor kid."
I meant to say a poor WHITE kid
that should explain things much better.
i assume strike that fify means something like DUH
Fixed it for You
How so? Being poor sucks in more ways than one and it doesn't really matter if you're black or white.
Poor is poor and a white kid who grew up in inner city Houston has it just as bad as a black boy from Appalachia.
Affrimative action is a dinosuar and does not address the uniuque problems of poverty we are experincing now. Besides the white will get plenty of cash simply for being poor. The whole system is Fubared.
If you have never been in poverty it becomes extremely diffucult to explain that it is so much more than money.
Devastatin Dave
11-10-2009, 06:24
nevermind
Major Robert Dump
11-10-2009, 06:39
nevermind
No Dave, don't edit, i want to hear what u have to say man.
I'm not defending what this dude did, and I think it has everything to do with his religion and extremism, but my point is that the current military adaption of EO makes it difficult for people who are not part of the protected class to speak up.
What I want to know....what i really want to know...is what retard thought it would be a good idea to put a muslim counselor in a position to counsel soldiers coming out of a war with muslims. I think probably, at some point, many people thought WTF???? but didn't or couldn't say anything because they were afraid of EO backlash.
Devastatin Dave
11-10-2009, 06:48
No Dave, don't edit, i want to hear what u have to say man.
I'm not defending what this dude did, and I think it has everything to do with his religion and extremism, but my point is that the current military adaption of EO makes it difficult for people who are not part of the protected class to speak up.
What I want to know....what i really want to know...is what retard thought it would be a good idea to put a muslim counselor in a position to counsel soldiers coming out of a war with muslims. I think probably, at some point, many people thought WTF???? but didn't or couldn't say anything because they were afraid of EO backlash.
The thing is, I don't want to ruin your argument by agreeing with you and poison your well thought out post about the EO abuses in the military that no one sees. I had the misfortune of rating 2 substandard females and having to lie on their EPRs out of fear of getting ####** by EO. One of the reasons I got out was because I could not do my job abymore without compremising my integrity. This happens a lot more than the outside world knows.
This cowardly murderer, BECAUSE OF HIS RELIGION AND HIS STATEMENTS ABOUT HIS RELIGION THAT WAS REPORTED, KNOWN, AND INVESTIGATED, should have never been put were he was or had the rank he had. He is a glaring example of how PC gets people killed.
Sasaki Kojiro
11-10-2009, 07:01
should have never been put were he was or had the rank he had. He is a glaring example of how PC gets people killed.
This is probably the best we can take away from this. With the other shootings, there were also obvious signs that were overlooked. You had the virginia tech guy getting recommended for mental treatment but being able to buy guns because he was never committed. The problem is usually people not reporting because they end up thinking it's not a big deal, you can't compound that by having people worried what will happen to them if they report.
Nope, his religion definitely had nothing to do with it. Nothing. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6526030/Fort-Hood-gunman-had-told-US-military-colleagues-that-infidels-should-have-their-throats-cut.html)
I also think people who harass me should have their throats cut. :inquisitive:
Major Robert Dump
11-10-2009, 08:56
I certainly don't think the issue here is that he was teased into murder.....it's the military, everyone gets teased for one thing or another
I think the issue is that this guy never belonged in the first place, and despite his obvious anti-american views, certain doctrine kept him in the loop...not only in the loop. but in the officer corps...as a MAJOR...a major is no frikkin joke, that's not something u get overnight FFS, yet he managed to milk a career out of it and got free schooling and a commission and a rank higher than most non-muslim officers will ever see (most officers stop/retire at captain)
I still want to know who thought he would be an appropriate counselor in post deployment in the current wars, despite his religion.
Muslims simply have no place in the US Military right now. Given the protected status of minorities, it makes them practically untouchable in regards to complaints and grievances. The more shunned and minority you are, the more protected you are.
This cowardly murderer, BECAUSE OF HIS RELIGION AND HIS STATEMENTS ABOUT HIS RELIGION THAT WAS REPORTED, KNOWN, AND INVESTIGATED, should have never been put were he was or had the rank he had. He is a glaring example of how PC gets people killed.
Agreed. This didn't have to happen
al Roumi
11-10-2009, 11:11
^ yeah there is a reason. for example at the naval academy they want more minority students so that the face of the officer corps reflects the enlisted. And the minority students are allowed to have lower grades and sat scores. Fair, no but neither is affirmative actions. Yeah really good way to run the military. being stupid doesn't get some office thing messed up , people can DIE
As ive said a million times the worst thing to be in america is a poor white kid.
Ah well, that's an excellent reason for having a Welfare state and some form of state provided health... But that's a whole other line of discussion -although it is ironic that many who bemoan the conditions of the white poor also disprove of state led interventions that would help them (Hello Mr&Mrs Republicans).
Back to the shooting, if this guy really was this extreme (the evidence is kind of irrefutable now) -and overtly so, it is mad that he was in the position he was and being asked to go to Afghanistan/Iraq.
Then again, I can't imagine why he would have stayed on either -if you don't agree with what you are being asked to do, get out!
Fisherking
11-10-2009, 11:16
It looks like he will survive.
I understand he is awake and talking to the medical staff...
This brings up another question.
Will he be court-martialed or will he face charges in a civilian court.
He faces a death sentence anyway you look at it.
I don’t know when the last time was that the Army imposed such a penalty or what methods they might use.
Federal or Texas Courts would use lethal injection.
We would get more news of events and motives in a court case but a surer and quicker verdict in a court-martial preceding.
Firing squad hopefully, don't think there will be a lack of volunteers.
Seamus Fermanagh
11-10-2009, 13:29
Pretty sure this will be handled in military system.
Military system used lethal injection now.
Hosakawa Tito
11-10-2009, 15:50
I still want to know who thought he would be an appropriate counselor in post deployment in the current wars, despite his religion.
Rest assured there will be a mad rush to the shredders to cya the senior ranks. What really bothers me is how this reluctance to see evil seems to trump the judgement of so many of our leaders.
"The malice of the wicked, is reinforced by the weakness of the virtuous." Churchill
Fisherking
11-10-2009, 18:42
Rest assured there will be a mad rush to the shredders to cya the senior ranks. What really bothers me is how this reluctance to see evil seems to trump the judgement of so many of our leaders.
Unfortunately, in our ever more legalistic and pc land, the Officer Corps of all the services have become ever more politicized.
It grows worse at the upper echelons of command but you can see the beginnings all the way down to company level.
Just as Politicians take cover from controversy, so do our Military Leaders.
It needs reformed, but so do a lot of things. And those making the rules have an interest in keeping things as they are.
Unfortunately, in our ever more legalistic and pc land, the Officer Corps of all the services have become ever more politicized.
Was there ever a point in our history where the Officer Corps was not politicized? Especially as one works up the command chain? Coming from a military family, I can tell you that I see little functional difference between a Lieutenant General and a politician. Well, you can bet that the LtG is better educated, but that's about it.
Maybe you're making a more nuanced point that I'm missing?
Yes, based on evidence that's coming out, Nidal Malik Hasan should not have been a major, and probably should not have been wearing the uniform.
Vladimir
11-10-2009, 19:28
Was there ever a point in our history where the Officer Corps was not politicized? Especially as one works up the command chain? Coming from a military family, I can tell you that I see little functional difference between a Lieutenant General and a politician. Well, you can bet that the LtG is better educated, but that's about it.
Maybe you're making a more nuanced point that I'm missing?
Yes, based on evidence that's coming out, Nidal Malik Hasan should not have been a major, and probably should not have been wearing the uniform.
Lemur's right. Even the Greeks knew that generals were less soldiers and more politicians. I'd argue that the transformation process starts when you reach full colonel. Once you get the bird, all you want is the star.
Devastatin Dave
11-10-2009, 21:23
Was there ever a point in our history where the Officer Corps was not politicized? Especially as one works up the command chain? Coming from a military family, I can tell you that I see little functional difference between a Lieutenant General and a politician. Well, you can bet that the LtG is better educated, but that's about it.
Maybe you're making a more nuanced point that I'm missing?
Yes, based on evidence that's coming out, Nidal Malik Hasan should not have been a major, and probably should not have been wearing the uniform.
Wow, something I agree with you... wanna start dating again, its been a while.
Fisherking
11-10-2009, 21:34
Was there ever a point in our history where the Officer Corps was not politicized? Especially as one works up the command chain? Coming from a military family, I can tell you that I see little functional difference between a Lieutenant General and a politician. Well, you can bet that the LtG is better educated, but that's about it.
Maybe you're making a more nuanced point that I'm missing?
Yes, based on evidence that's coming out, Nidal Malik Hasan should not have been a major, and probably should not have been wearing the uniform.
General Officers have always had to pay attention to politics. That has ever been the case.
I am more talking about political correctness run amok.
When Field Grade and even Company Grade Officers are more concerned about smoking policy or tattoos than they are with the training and readiness of their units it is a problem.
Rather than promoting the people most knowledgeable and capable of leading, they pass over these people in favor of those who toe the pc line.
When leaders no longer have the gumption to tell it as it is but instead tell the commander what he wishes to hear, you have a huge problem.
You do not build a strong military by having everyone afraid to speak out when something is wrong. Particularly when it may not be the politic thing to do.
When the force is composed of only those who can say yes sir rather than suggest changes, or is not free to point out poor performance for fear of an EEO complaint.
All the information you get is good news. Nothing is ever wrong. The military says all is well , but would be better if they had more men and money...
Familiar?
Seamus Fermanagh
11-11-2009, 00:43
The military, at least in the USA, has been a government tool for social change (planned and unplanned) since the ACW if not before. It has always reflected the politics of the era in question, down to an including EEO complaints counting against your promotion chances in our current milieu.
Drives you nuts, but it isn't really new.
Man o man, (http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091110/us_time/08599193733400) I just love BS PC.
Well the anointed one has spoken, it was stress. Well, back to the order of the day shall we.
Fisherking
11-11-2009, 08:38
Stress?
Oh, what’s that mean?
They give him an Article 15 for Disorderly Conduct make him take a stress management course and send him back to duty?
:wall:
My bad he said that it could have been stress and that we should avoid drawing conclusions.
Yeah, should've thrown him out of the army so he would have gone on that rampage among civilians because clearly the lives of army personnel are worth much more than those of civilians. Or did I get something wrong here and muslim extremists stop being just that once you throw them out of the army for being muslim extremists? :inquisitive:
I mean yeah, no place for extremists in the army but throwing them out does not solve the problem, does it? And how do people in the USA become muslim extremists anyway? Are there so many hate-preaching mullahs over there who preach at army bases converting the local muslims into terorists? Did his superiors turn him into one as a special surprise training exercise for the whole base? Was he abducted by muslim alien mullahs that changed his brain tubes to make him a terrorist? Or did he come up with the idea himself because it was too much fun living in the USA and the people around him were too good friends so that he thought it's too good to be true I gotta kill 'em all? :inquisitive:
Obama's reaction is the right one, let's wait until more facts come out even if things aren't looking good right now.
Louis VI the Fat
11-11-2009, 13:57
Obama's reaction is the right one, let's wait until more facts come out I agree. We need to get to the bottom of this and then hang Hasan and his Imams.
Devastatin Dave
11-11-2009, 15:24
Yeah, should've thrown him out of the army so he would have gone on that rampage among civilians because clearly the lives of army personnel are worth much more than those of civilians. Or did I get something wrong here and muslim extremists stop being just that once you throw them out of the army for being muslim extremists? :inquisitive:
:
Then what would you suggest? If we lock them up then all the euroweenies and terrorist loving libs will scream louder than a Code Pink hussy in front of a Marine recruiting center. Please, Ole Wise One, give us the wisdom to correct our Barbaric and simple ways. Cure us of our ignorance and bring forth the enlightenment that we've yet to discover.:laugh4:
euroweenies
This happened in your place, your lemmings, not ours.
KukriKhan
11-11-2009, 19:56
In the mythical parallel universe known as Kukri-land, the following people would be prosecuted:
https://jimcee.homestead.com/ArmyMajorMalikNadalHasan.jpg
MAJ Hasan
Charge: murder x 12
Verdict: guilty
Sentence: firing squad manned by relatives of the dead
https://jimcee.homestead.com/braverman.jpg
COL Braverman, Hasan's Commander
Charge: Failure to control/command Hasan
Verdict: guilty
Sentence: reduced in rank to PFC, assigned bedpan-cleaning detail for 5 years
https://jimcee.homestead.com/C.Green_dhr_FtHood.jpg
Charles Green, Ft Hood G1, in charge of the 300 soldiers at the Readiness Center
Charge: Failure to provide adequate security at the SRC
Verdict: guilty
Sentence: fired, pension forfeited, case referred to victims' families for civil litigation.
https://jimcee.homestead.com/ColHillUSAGcdr.jpg
Colonel Hill, Commander, USA Garrison Ft Hood
Charge: Failure to provide adequate security at Fort Hood
Verdict: guilty
Sentence: reduced in rank to PFC, assigned permanent guard duty at Camp Renegade, Kirkuk Iraq
https://jimcee.homestead.com/LTGconeIIIcdr.jpg
LtGen Cone, III Corps Commander
Charge: failure to protect soldiers under his command
Verdict: guilty
Sentence: Reduction in rank to 1st Lieutenent, assigned duty as Platoon Leader in Afghanistan
That's just this morning. This afternoon we move up the chain-of-command, and sideways into law enforcement and intel.
Gotta admit, I like the Kukri plan. Just once I'd like to see **** roll uphill.
Major Robert Dump
11-12-2009, 01:19
They should charge him with an extra murder count since one of the girls was preggers.
Hosakawa Tito
11-12-2009, 01:23
Yeah I like that plan too, but the first thing the Joint Chiefs and Directors for the CIA, DIA and other applicable alphabet-soup agencies should have done was immediately lock down the shredders.
Crazed Rabbit
11-12-2009, 01:42
From the Washington Times: (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/11/end-clinton-era-military-base-gun-ban/)
Among President Clinton's first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.
Because of Mr. Clinton, terrorists would face more return fire if they attacked a Texas Wal-Mart than the gunman faced at Fort Hood, home of the heavily armed and feared 1st Cavalry Division. That's why a civilian policewoman from off base was the one whose marksmanship ended Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan's rampage.
...
The wife of one of the soldiers shot at Fort Hood understands all too well. In an interview on CNN Monday night, Anchor John Roberts asked Mandy Foster how she felt about her husband's upcoming deployment to Afghanistan. Ms. Foster responded: "At least he's safe there and he can fire back, right?"
It is hard to believe that we don't trust soldiers with guns on an Army base when we trust these very same men in Iraq and Afghanistan. Mr. Clinton's deadly rules even disarmed officers, the most trusted members of the military charged with leading enlisted soldiers in combat. Six of the dead and wounded had commissions.
CR
Louis VI the Fat
11-12-2009, 01:53
Interesting is to compare Fort Hood with another shooting a few moths ago, at another US base.
BAGHDAD (The International) — Last week, fatal shooting of five service members at a U.S. military stress clinic in Iraq has prompted a military investigation into how mental health within the armed forces is handled. The alleged gunman, Sgt. John M. Russell, has been charged with five counts of murder and one count of aggravated assault.
Five killed in base shooting
Russell, a communications specialist in the 54th Engineer Battalion, was serving his third tour in Iraq at the Camp Liberty military base and was scheduled to depart the country in August with the rest of his battalion. He had previously served in Bosnia and Kosovo.
Prior to Monday’s shootings, Russell’s superiors, concerned about his mental state, confiscated his weapon and referred him to the camp’s combat stress clinic for psychological counseling. Anonymous witnesses from Camp Liberty reported that Russell argued with a soldier at the clinic, returned later, and used another service member’s weapon to shoot his alleged victims. The five victims killed were all military service members: two clinic staff members and three soldiers at the clinic. Their names were released once their family members were notified. Three additional service members were wounded. Military officials are unclear if Russell knew the victims and are investigating all possible motives.
Edit - and a link, duh: http://theinternationalonline.com/articles/58-us-military-base-shooting-prompts-quest
Major Robert Dump
11-12-2009, 02:29
From the Washington Times: (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/11/end-clinton-era-military-base-gun-ban/)
CR
Maybe officers and senior NCOs.....maybe make guns a little more accessible in the armories....maybe allow individual soldiers to exercise their right to carry based on state and city law etc.....but giving every joe a sidearm stateside is a bad, bad, bad idea, especially if its issued. I like the idea of individual permit use better. Not to demean the service members, but a sizable chunk of the armed forces are young, hot headed men full of piss and vinegar who can't manage their credit, their alcohol or their military career. Letting them roam around post willy nilly with guns is a poor idea.
That being said, i like the idea of certain individuals being able to carry, based on rank, MOS and security clearances. On the other hand, let us not forget our perpetrator in this crime was a MAJOR and the perp in the above post was a senior NCO.
The rules now is that if you have a personal firearm and you bring it onto a base you have to lock it up at the base armorer...not the unit armorer...the base armorer. Long line....paper work...wait wait wait. This is why I wasn't armed when I got shot in Lawton. No point is bringing a gun to Ft Sill if I was going to have to lock it away every morning and pick it up every night. At Virginia I was housed off post, so I kept a weapon on hand there.
On a related note, the deck security on the USS Cole had to keep their weapons and magazines green.
EDIT: Oh, and Bush had 8 years to change that law, but he didn't.
Blaming Clinton is a little far fetched, although I didn't read the whole article because it spiralled into partisan crap pretty quickly
Sasaki Kojiro
11-12-2009, 02:34
Because of Mr. Clinton, terrorists would face more return fire if they attacked a Texas Wal-Mart than the gunman faced at Fort Hood, home of the heavily armed and feared 1st Cavalry Division. That's why a civilian policewoman from off base was the one whose marksmanship ended Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan's rampage.
What BS. Did bush change the policy? No. When was the last time the author protested it?
Crazed Rabbit
11-12-2009, 03:00
Yeah, it's not Clinton's fault. The point about unarmed soldiers stands.
CR
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.