2009 Fort Hood Shooting

[Guest CA]

I'm sorry but someone who intentionally enters a building with 2 firearms and enough clips to fire off 100+ rounds was not insane but rather acting on their own ability. Islam or terrorist beliefs aside, he knew what he was doing and did it on purpose. May he pay for his crimes and die a slow painful death.

[Guest StreamOfTheSky]

The press is reporting that Hassan might plead not guilty by reason of insanity. That kinda blows the whole theory behind it being a planned terrorist act right out of the water now, doesn't it?

If he intentionally committed the murders in defense of Islam, why negate it through an insanity plea? That will kill any chance of martyrdom he would have had. It also pulls the rug out from under any theories behind his motivations, as that plea simply means he wasn't in his right mind when he committed the shootings.

I am sure some will claim he is only trying to save his own neck; but given the promises of such a glorious life after death, why would that concern such a devout Muslim? The 9/11 terrorists are pleading not guilty so they can so that they can air their criticisms of U.S. foreign policy, if Hassan was following their lines, than why didn’t he follow the same tact?

I think what we are seeing is the real truth behind this attack…that it was the actions of a deranged individual, and not some planned terrorist operation...

Well, just to play devil's advocate...perhaps he didn't mind going out in a "blaze of glory" (makes me sick to even phrase it like that), killing some infidels like a good Muslim soldier so he can go to heaven. Now that that's been shot and he faces the prospect of a fair trial and somber, austere execution or life sentence, he doubts he'll still qualify as a martyr and thus may as well save his own skin. Perhaps the tremendous insult to all those who died or were injured of him escaping justice is his motivation for the plea, rather than a desire to live.

I don't think it was a terrorist attack, but I could see a terrorist that's caught doing everything he could to prevent the justice system from punishing him.

[tac airlifter]

The press is reporting that Hassan might plead not guilty by reason of insanity. That kinda blows the whole theory behind it being a planned terrorist act right out of the water now, doesn't it?

I think what we are seeing is the real truth behind this attack…that it was the actions of a deranged individual, and not some planned terrorist operation...

I think your assesment is premature. Perhaps we should wait and see exactly what he does and says instead of relying on what little information his lawyers allow out. Still a lot of rumors about funds transfers to Pakistan and all manner of suspicious contacts; not saying any of it is true but this whole affair has been prematurly judged from the initial report. I'm in wait and see mode for a final undestanding of the entire event.

[M2]

The Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984, enacted by Congress in 1984 in response to the verdict in the John Hinckley trial, and codified at 18 U.S.C. § 17, states that a person accused of a crime can be judged not guilty by reason of insanity if "the defendant, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of his acts."

However, since Hassan will be tried under the UCMJ and not civil law, it will be interesting to see how this plea (if used) plays out.

Regardless, it does not appear that Hassan was motivated by extreme/radical religious beliefs as some have claimed, given the consideration of this plea; but all will be clearer as he goes before the court martial board...and he explains himself.

Either way, I believe it is more important that he pays for the crimes he been charged with (don't forget he's still innocent until proven guilty), and there is a better chance of that through pursing justice via what will be a pretty much cut-and-dry criminal approach than through convoluted allegations of a planned terrorist act.

[tac airlifter]

However, since Hassan will be tried under the UCMJ and not civil law, it will be interesting to see how this plea (if used) plays out.

Regardless, it does not appear that Hassan was motivated by extreme/radical religious beliefs as some have claimed, given the consideration of this plea; but all will be clearer as he goes before the court martial board...and he explains himself.

Either way, I believe it is more important that he pays for the crimes he been charged with (don't forget he's still innocent until proven guilty), and there is a better chance of that through pursing justice via what will be a pretty much cut-and-dry criminal approach than through convoluted allegations of a planned terrorist act.

If the gov doesn't fully investigate the very real possibility that an extremist Muslim was operating in accordance with an organization of extremist Muslims to commit this attack, it will become a conspiracy that will never die. 20 years from now families will be doing specials on CNN about "why did the gov come out so fast denying this could have been a terrorist attack before we even knew who shot who (remember the initial reports about some casualties being from friendly fire?)?"

I cannot understand the reasoning behind the premature bid to label this either terrorism or the act of a lone crazy gunman. Why don't we all just wait to see what the investigation uncovers and proceed from there? The rush to assumptions based on incomplete evidence just screams "agenda!" More devastating than the loss of lives would be the loss of credibility in the governments ability to be straight with people about what happened and why. So I hope you don't take this the wrong way M2, but I really think your assessment is premature and unhelpful to the national dialogue.

[M2]

Apparantly you aren't too tuned into the "national dialogue," as this discussion/debate is going on all over the country...

[PapaJu]

At least Time is calling it like it is...

[M2]

Not really, notice the question mark after the label and the byline...

[tac airlifter]

Not really, notice the question mark after the label and the byline...

Did you read the article? It doesn't claim to have the conclusion, but it comes down pretty hard on the side of this being a terrorist event, and interestingly, it calls out the Army leadership for being so hasty to call this the actions of a lone deranged indivudual. From pg 27 "The massacre at ft hood was, depending on whom you believed, yet another horrific workplace shooting by a deranged nutcase who suddently snapped, or it was an intimate act of war, a plot that can't be foiled because it is hatched inside a fanatics head and leaves no trail until it is left in blood. In their first response, officials betrayed an eagerness to to assume it was the first; the more we learn, the more we have cause to fear it was the second" Granted that is the begining of the article but that is the consistant theme.

So I say again, the rush to judgement based on incomplete evidence just screams "agenda!" Your assesment is premature, and if you were tuned in to the national dialouge and actually reading articles you cite, you'll see how bad this looks to quickly jump on the "lone gunman" train when so much evidence is mounthing to couter that. Why don't we wait and see? I don't understand the eagerness to claim this wasn't terrorism without even close to all the facts.

[PapaJu]

Did you read the article? It doesn't claim to have the conclusion, but it comes down pretty hard on the side of this being a terrorist event, and interestingly, it calls out the Army leadership for being so hasty to call this the actions of a lone deranged indivudual. From pg 27 "The massacre at ft hood was, depending on whom you believed, yet another horrific workplace shooting by a deranged nutcase who suddently snapped, or it was an intimate act of war, a plot that can't be foiled because it is hatched inside a fanatics head and leaves no trail until it is left in blood. In their first response, officials betrayed an eagerness to to assume it was the first; the more we learn, the more we have cause to fear it was the second" Granted that is the begining of the article but that is the consistant theme.

So I say again, the rush to judgement based on incomplete evidence just screams "agenda!" Your assesment is premature, and if you were tuned in to the national dialouge and actually reading articles you cite, you'll see how bad this looks to quickly jump on the "lone gunman" train when so much evidence is mounthing to couter that. Why don't we wait and see? I don't understand the eagerness to claim this wasn't terrorism without even close to all the facts.

Right, the article did actually lean towards painting him as a terrorist. And rightly so, for what we know so far.

[M2]

Did you read the article? It doesn't claim to have the conclusion, but it comes down pretty hard on the side of this being a terrorist event, and interestingly, it calls out the Army leadership for being so hasty to call this the actions of a lone deranged indivudual. From pg 27 "The massacre at ft hood was, depending on whom you believed, yet another horrific workplace shooting by a deranged nutcase who suddently snapped, or it was an intimate act of war, a plot that can't be foiled because it is hatched inside a fanatics head and leaves no trail until it is left in blood. In their first response, officials betrayed an eagerness to to assume it was the first; the more we learn, the more we have cause to fear it was the second" Granted that is the begining of the article but that is the consistant theme.

So I say again, the rush to judgement based on incomplete evidence just screams "agenda!" Your assesment is premature, and if you were tuned in to the national dialouge and actually reading articles you cite, you'll see how bad this looks to quickly jump on the "lone gunman" train when so much evidence is mounthing to couter that. Why don't we wait and see? I don't understand the eagerness to claim this wasn't terrorism without even close to all the facts.

If my assessment is prematures, then why isn't the article's? I don;t understand the acceptance of one hypothesis while another is ignored. You claim there is all this "evidence" to support the theory that it was a planned terrorist attack supported by AQ or some other organization, where is it? I think it is bandwagoning being driven by a sensationalized media.

And for the record I am not saying it was so much the actions of a lone individual as it doesn't appear to be an orchestrated terrorist attack. You don't prove a hypothesis, you disprove it!

Edited November 25, 2009 by M2

[tac airlifter]

If my assessment is prematures, then why isn't the article's? I don;t understand the acceptance of one hypothesis while another is ignored. You claim there is all this "evidence" to support the theory that it was a planned terrorist attack supported by AQ or some other organization, where is it? I think it is bandwagoning being driven by a sensationalized media.

And for the record I am not saying it was so much the actions of a lone individual as it doesn't appear to be an orchestrated terrorist attack. You don't prove a hypothesis, you disprove it!

The article isn't premature because it doesn't make an assesment. First line of my post: "it doesn't claim to have the conclusion." I am also not making a final judgment. Rememeber this "I'm in wait and see mode for a final understanding of the entire event."

But you answered my question, you think the peopel calling this terrorism are the media just sensationalizing it. Thats fair and the media has certainly proved itself overzealous to paint a picture without facts (example, looks like Munnely didn't may not have even hit Hasan, but the media certainly jumped right into calling her a hero). My point was the Casey came out immediately after the attack without any facts known and said basically, this isn't terrorism and we shouldn't let diversity suffer. I think he was foolish to do that, because it drove the image of Army leadership trying to cover up someone who was a muslim radical and anti-american. Now it looks like his coworkers knew he was a jihadist but they were to afraid of being labeled discriminatory. All I'm saying is that just because this dudes lawyer says he'll plead not guilty, does not prove this wasn't terrorism.

Edited November 25, 2009 by tac airlifter

[M2]

Think bigger picture and you might start to understand why Casey made that comment (and I am not subscribing to any Army conspiracy theory). Rationally, someone has to counterbalanced all the speculation that the hyper-media was spewing in an attempt to be the first to report the news without letting the lack of facts stand in the way.

Honestly, I agree with you on the 'wait and see' approach; but it is a little late for that and the only way to get any resemblance of impartiality here is to hammer the claims with an equal dose of the opposite/counter argument. I am lucky as I got to read a lot of information/analysis on this incident that most folks on here don't get a chance to see, and it with that knowledge that I see the logic in the belief that if a determination has to be made with what is known right now, what happened at Hood was not a terrorist attack.

But this thread is going in endless loops, so I will make this my final comment and allow everyone else to get one more in as well; at which point the topic will have been adequately schnitzeled and put to rest.

Cheers! M2

[Vertigo]

adequately schnitzeled

Mmmm... schnitzels.

[M2]

Hey, the BCS wasn't contentious enough; so I thought I would re-open another topic of great debate..

Fort Hood findings: Superiors ignored own worries on Hasan

WASHINGTON -- A Defense Department review of the shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, has found the doctors overseeing Maj. Nidal Hasan's medical training repeatedly voiced concerns over his strident views on Islam and his inappropriate behavior, yet continued to give him positive performance evaluations that kept him moving through the ranks.

The picture emerging from the review ordered by Defense Secretary Robert Gates is one of supervisors who failed to heed their own warnings about an officer ill-suited to be an Army psychiatrist, according to information gathered during the internal Pentagon investigation and obtained by The Associated Press. The review has not been publicly released.

Hasan, 39, is accused of murdering 13 people on Nov. 5 at Fort Hood, the worst killing spree on a U.S. military base.

What remains unclear is why Hasan would be advanced in spite of all the worries over his competence. That is likely to be the subject of a more detailed accounting by the department. Recent statistics show the Army rarely blocks junior officers from promotion, especially in the medical corps.

Hasan showed no signs of being violent or a threat. But parallels have been drawn between the missed signals in his case and those preceding the thwarted Christmas attempt to blow up a Detroit-bound U.S. airliner. President Barack Obama and his top national security aides have acknowledged they had intelligence about the alleged bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, but failed to connect the dots.

The Defense Department review is not intended to delve into allegations Hasan corresponded by e-mail with Yemen-based radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki before the attack. Those issues are part of a separate criminal investigation by law enforcement officials.

In telling episodes from the latter stages of Hasan's lengthy medical education in the Washington, D.C., area, he gave a class presentation questioning whether the U.S.-led war on terror was actually a war on Islam. And fellow students said he suggested that Shariah, or Islamic law, trumped the Constitution and he attempted to justify suicide bombings.

Yet no one in Hasan's chain of command appears to have challenged his eligibility to hold a secret security clearance even though they could have because the statements raised doubt about his loyalty to the United States. Had they, Hasan's fitness to serve as an Army officer may have been called into question long before he reported to Fort Hood.

Instead, in July 2009, Hasan arrived in central Texas, his secret clearance intact, his reputation as a weak performer well known, and Army authorities believing that posting him at such a large facility would mask his shortcomings.

Four months later, according to witnesses, he walked into a processing center at Fort Hood where troops undergo medical screening, jumped on a table with two handguns, shouted "Allahu Akbar!" - Arabic for "God is great!" - and opened fire. Thirteen people were killed in the spree and dozens more were wounded.

Hasan has been charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder. He remains at a San Antonio military hospital, undergoing rehabilitation for paralysis stemming from gunshot wounds suffered when security guards fired back during the massacre. Authorities have not said whether they plan to seek the death penalty.

After the Fort Hood shooting, Gates appointed two former senior defense officials to examine the procedures and policies for identifying threats within the military services. The review, led by former Army Secretary Togo West and retired Navy Adm. Vernon Clark, began Nov. 20 and is scheduled to be delivered to Gates by Jan. 15.

Army Lt. Col. Jonathan Withington, a Pentagon spokesman, declined to comment on the West-Clark review because it's not complete. "We will not know the specific content of the report until it is submitted to the secretary of defense," he said.

Hasan's superiors had a full picture of him, developed over his 12-year career as a military officer, medical student and psychiatrist, according to the information reviewed by AP.

While in medical school at the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences from 1997 to 2003, Hasan received a string of below average and failing grades, was put on academic probation and showed little motivation to learn.

He took six years to graduate from the university in Bethesda, Md., instead of the customary four, according to the school. The delays were due in part to the deaths of his father in 1998 and his mother in 2001. Yet the information about his academic probation and bad grades wasn't included in his military personnel file, leaving the impression he was ready for more intense instruction.

In June 2003, Hasan started a four-year psychiatry internship and residency at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., and he was counseled frequently for deficiencies in his performance. Teachers and colleagues described him as a below average student.

Between 2003 and 2007, Hasan's supervisors expressed their concerns with him in memos, meeting notes and counseling sessions. He needed steady monitoring, especially in the emergency room, had difficulty communicating and working with colleagues, his attendance was spotty and he saw few patients.

In one incident already made public, a patient of Hasan's with suicidal and homicidal tendencies walked out of the hospital without permission.

Still, Hasan's officer evaluation reports were consistently more positive, usually describing his performance as satisfactory and at least twice as outstanding. Known as "OERs," the reports are used to determine promotions and assignments. The Army promoted Hasan to captain in 2003 and to major in 2009.

At Walter Reed, Hasan's conflict with his Islamic faith and his military service became more apparent to superiors and colleagues, according to the information. He made a pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia, a trip expected of all Muslims at least once. But he was also cited for inappropriately engaging patients in discussions about religious issues.

Early in 2007, Maj. Scott Moran became director of psychiatry residency and took a much firmer line with Hasan. Moran reprimanded him for not being reachable when he was supposed to be on-call, developed a plan to improve his performance, and informed him his research project about the internal conflicts of Muslim soldiers was inappropriate.

Nonetheless, Hasan presented the project, entitled "Koranic World View as It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military," and it was approved as meeting a residency program requirement, according to the information.

Hasan graduated from the Walter Reed residency program and began a two-year fellowship in preventive and disaster psychiatry. Despite his earlier reservations, Moran wrote a solid reference letter for Hasan that said he was a competent doctor.

Reached by telephone, Moran declined to comment.

Hasan completed the fellowship June 30, 2009. Two weeks later he was at Fort Hood.

[Steve Davies]

fellow students said he suggested that Shariah, or Islamic law, trumped the Constitution and he attempted to justify suicide bombings.

So, is the Army the only service where you get promoted in spite of espousing such views, or are all the armed services to frightened to act? If so, why?

[tac airlifter]

Obviously I read articles written by Ralph with a grain of salt, but I've got to agree on this one. With even POTUS now calling this a terrorist attack and not the work of a lone gunman I am suprised at how incomplete and empty this report is.

Hood Massacre Report Gutless and Shameful

By RALPH PETERS

January 16, 2010

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

hood_massacre_report_gutless_and_yaUphSPCoMs8ux4lQdtyGM

There are two basic problems with the grotesque non-report on the Islamist- terror massacre at Fort Hood (released by the Defense Department yesterday):

* It's not about what happened at Fort Hood.

* It avoids entirely the issue of why it happened.

Rarely in the course of human events has a report issued by any government agency been so cowardly and delusional. It's so inept, it doesn't even rise to cover-up level.

"Protecting the Force: Lessons From Fort Hood" never mentions Islamist terror. Its 86 mind-numbing pages treat "the alleged perpetrator," Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, as just another workplace shooter (guess they're still looking for the pickup truck with the gun rack).

The report is so politically correct that its authors don't even realize the extent of their political correctness -- they're body-and-soul creatures of the PC culture that murdered 12 soldiers and one Army civilian.

Reading the report, you get the feeling that, jeepers, things actually went pretty darned well down at Fort Hood. Commanders, first responders and everybody but the latest "American Idol" contestants come in for high praise.

The teensy bit of specific criticism is reserved for the "military medical officer supervisors" in Maj. Hasan's chain of command at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. As if the problem started and ended there.

Unquestionably, the officers who let Hasan slide, despite his well-known wackiness and hatred of America, bear plenty of blame. But this disgraceful pretense of a report never asks why they didn't stop Hasan's career in its tracks.

The answer is straightforward: Hasan's superiors feared -- correctly -- that any attempt to call attention to his radicalism or to prevent his promotion would backfire on them, destroying their careers, not his.

Hasan was a protected-species minority. Under the PC tyranny of today's armed services, no non-minority officer was going to take him on.

This is a military that imposes rules of engagement that protect our enemies and kill our own troops and that court-martials heroic SEALs to appease a terrorist. Ain't many colonels willing to hammer the Army's sole Palestinian-American psychiatrist.

Of course, there's no mention of political correctness by the panel. Instead, the report settles for blinding flashes of the obvious, such as "We believe a gap exists in providing information to the right people." Gee, really? Well, that explains everything. Money well spent!

Or "Department of Defense force protection policies are not optimized for countering internal threats." Of course not: You can't stop an internal threat you refuse to recognize.

The panel's recommendations? Wow. "Develop a risk-assessment tool for commanders." Now that's going to stop Islamist terrorists in their tracks.

The Fort Hood massacre didn't reflect an intelligence failure. The intelligence was there, in gigabytes. This was a leadership failure and an ethical failure, at every level. Nobody wanted to know what Hasan was up to. But you won't learn that from this play-pretend report.

The sole interesting finding flashes by quickly: Behind some timid wording on pages 13 and 14, a daring soul managed to insert the observation that we aren't currently able to keep violence-oriented religious extremists from becoming chaplains. (Of course, they're probably referring to those darned Baptists . . .)

To be fair, there's a separate, classified report on Maj. Hasan himself. But it's too sensitive for the American people to see. Does it even hint he was a self-appointed Islamist terrorist committing jihad? I'll bet it focuses on his "personal problems."

In the end, the report contents itself with pretending that the accountability problem was isolated within the military medical community at Walter Reed. It wasn't, and it isn't. Murderous political correctness is pervasive in our military. The medical staff at Walter Reed is just where the results began to manifest themselves in Hasan's case.

Once again, the higher-ups blame the worker bees who were victims of the policy the higher-ups inflicted on them. This report's spinelessness is itself an indictment of our military's failed moral and ethical leadership.

We agonize over civilian casualties in a war zone but rush to whitewash the slaughter of our own troops on our own soil. Conduct unbecoming.

[M2]

I've said it before and I will say it again...Ralph Peters is a fucking moron!

Seriously, anyone who believes that he can redraw the borders in the Middle East has no concept of reality...

And this article just confirms once again that his opinion of anything is worthless.

[tac airlifter]

Exactly what in the article did you disagree with?

[M2]

OK, you asked, so here ya go...

What do I disagree with in Peters article? Basically everything. For one, Peters knows jack shit about what happened except for what he has read in the press. What true or firsthand knowledge does he have of the events at Ft Hood. None. What access does he have to the classified reports on the incident. None. So what knowledge does Peters have that makes him such a fucking expert?

Secondly, he is very judgmental like he's some fucking expert on the topic. Sorry, no matter how people are trying to label it, the Ft Hood shooting was "another office shooting," except this one was perpetrated by a Muslim and it happened on a military base.

Sorry, I don't care if Hasan exchanged emails with UBL himself, this was not a coordinated, terrorist attack as some are making it out to be. It was a lone shooter who is/was a nutjob. He may have had radical thoughts, and he may have conversed with others that thought the same; but he was not supplied weapons, funded by or received operational guidance or assistance by any terrorist group. Had he not been a Muslim, this would have blown over by now.

Thirdly, the attacks on the officer evaluation system--and how it should have identified him as a problem--are a joke. Does Peters think that Hasan was the first person to get evals that were better than he was?

I've seen so many inflated OPRs, OERs and FITREPs (I was the exec for a two star who dual-hatted as a joint organization commander, so I've seen them from all services) and Hasan's case is no different than the hundreds of "my top officer" reports that flew across my desk. You want an honest evaluation system? Then get some honest commanders. But there are too many careerists who are more worried about their next promotion then actually giving out honest ratings to their troops. Hell, I tried to put comments in an OPR about a captain who was severely overweight and get so much pushback that I almost filed an IG complaint about it. I should have made it out as a referral OPR, but I had enough trouble getting what I wanted to put through the Army colonel that was my rater and his additional rater so honestly even I caved in a bit. It only shows that no matter what happens, no service will ever get close to an honest evaluation system although I will admit at least the Navy tracks and limits the number of ratings any senior rater can give (something the USAF needs to look into).

Next, "protected-species minority?" Fuck Peters for even insinuating this bullshit. Do you really believe that minorities are that protected in the military? Yes, I've witnessed numerous instances of "gender protection" but no matter how PC the military has gotten, to make such an accusation is ludicrous. I am beginning to believe that Peters was one of these Army LTCs who didn't make full bird, and now blames it on some minority quotas or some other bullshit instead of his own limited abilities. I've seen nothing that convinces me he was some stellar soldier, he had a good career just like millions of other Army officers before him. Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't qualify him to be an expert on everything.

Lastly, Peters acts like there were all these "signs" that Hasan was going to snap and start shooting people. Honestly, anyone whose spent time on G-series orders knows that many individuals show similar dysfunctional traits but don't end up killing 13 and wounding 30+. Hell, I imposed disciplinary actions on several people who I was concerned may have posed a threat to me; and I've met lots of people in uniform that could easily be labeled as "unstable," but it doesn't mean they'll actually do something and in some cases it makes them better at their job. Sorry, Peters claim that "all the intelligence was there" and that there was clear warning prior to the shooting is just more of his bullshit.

Peters can easily criticize, he's one of a mass number of media whose expertise lies in "Monday morning quarterbacking." It is easier just to print a brilliant opinion of what should have happened after the fact, and act intellectually superior to military authorities; but the bottom line is that he offers no tangible recommendations to what could be done to prevent such an incident from occurring again. Arm more personnel on base? Stricter inspections of POVs coming through the gate? Kick all the Muslims out of the military? What does he offer?

I also wonder how Peters "suddenly" became this huge military expert when these exceptional attributes seem to not exist when he was in uniform. If this Peters is so brilliant, then why didn't he achieve a much higher rank while he was in the Army? I think I know why...

Just my opinion, others may vary...

[SuperWSO]

OK, you asked, so here ya go...

Sorry, I don't care if Hasan exchanged emails with UBL himself, this was not a coordinated, terrorist attack as some are making it out to be. It was a lone shooter who is/was a nutjob. He may have had radical thoughts, and he may have conversed with others that thought the same; but he was not supplied weapons, funded by or received operational guidance or assistance by any terrorist group. Had he not been a Muslim, this would have blown over by now.

Just my opinion, others may vary...

M2

I will start by agreeing that Ralph Peters is an f-ing tool. He did an article in 2005 while I was deployed that said the Air Force was doing nothing for the war. He is a highly opinionated asshole.

Where we still disagree is on Hasan. You have repeatedly stated that he was nothing but a disgruntled office shooter. The typical office shooter is responding to a perceived injustice. The folks at work have wronged him/denied advancement/stole his tuna on rye. Maybe he is just listening to the voices in his head. The office shooter typically goes to a location where he knows the victims and shoots those people.

What is a terrorist? The government defines it as ...

(d) Definitions

As used in this section—

(1) the term “international terrorism” means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than 1 country;

(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;

Hasan went to a public place and attacked people he did not know personally. He struck out against a group (soldiers deploying or returning from deployment)as a form of politically motivated violence.

Most of your arguments site that Hasan was not a member in a recognized terrorist group. Tim McVeigh was never linked to any group other than loose affiliations with Aryan groups - kind of like Hasan. But he was absolutely a terrorist. He was also striking back at "the government" by attacking the Murrah Federal building.

I don't think that Hasan's failure to attend group meetings, have a PLO Union card or dress in an IRA T-shirt means that he was not a terrorist.

Like you said, that is just my opinion.

[tac airlifter]

Secondly, he is very judgmental like he's some fucking expert on the topic. Sorry, no matter how people are trying to label it, the Ft Hood shooting was "another office shooting," except this one was perpetrated by a Muslim and it happened on a military base.

Sorry, I don't care if Hasan exchanged emails with UBL himself, this was not a coordinated, terrorist attack as some are making it out to be. It was a lone shooter who is/was a nutjob. He may have had radical thoughts, and he may have conversed with others that thought the same; but he was not supplied weapons, funded by or received operational guidance or assistance by any terrorist group. Had he not been a Muslim, this would have blown over by now.

I also agree with pretty much all your points except about Hassan himself. Especially the fact that Peters just smells like a passed over LtCol who is pissed at everything and looking for public revenge.

But you are incorrect that this would be blown over if he had not been Muslim. If he had been a white supremacist this would be a major news story and would have led to all manner of additional CBT's. If this had been a homophobe angry at the imminent dismissal of DADT this would be headlines everywhere with long term repercussions in the military. The government treats crimes committed with an ideological bent as more dangerous than simply a dude whose wife dumped him and went nuts. The reason ideology is more dangerous is that it's contagious.

And the military was wrong not to recognize this freak. This guy was a terrorist, the FBI has even said so now and they have access to the classified report.

A terrorist attack doesn't have to be coordinated to be effective. Hassan was influenced by his religion to commit this act, shouted "allah akbar" while doing it and the federal authorities have concluded this was terrorism. Ralph's personality issues aside, why do you disagree with this labeled terrorism?

Edited to add: didn't see your post below when I wrote mine, and you answered the question about why you don't see this as terrorism. I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

Edited January 30, 2010 by tac airlifter

[M2]

SuperWSO

You said an officer shooter is someone who "responding to a perceived injustice," isn't that what Hasan is claiming, that he was responding to the treatment of Muslims by US forces? As for the "voices in his head," I think that more aptly describes Hasan versus a suicide bomber who has been identified, indoctrinated and specifically chosen for his mission. Hasan did all this by his own choosing; he was not prompted or directed by a terrorist group.

You also stated that "the office shooter typically goes to a location where he knows the victims and shoots those people," and again I think this perfectly describes the incident at Ft Hood. This isn't the Luby's massacre that occurred in Killeen when George Jo Hennard drove his pickup truck into a Luby's Cafeteria and shot 23 people to death while wounding another 20, subsequently committing suicide by shooting himself. Hasan specifically targeted those he felt were responsible for the injustice he felt.

You listed a definition of “terrorism” as a premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents. Once again, this does not accurately describe Hasan; his targets were not noncombatants nor were his actions politically motivated. I compare him more towards Scott Roeder, the abortion killer who did not know the right way to address his grievances so he committed an act as despicable as the one he abhorred.

I don't think McVeigh is a good comparison as his actions were politically motivated (he was responding to the government's action at Waco two years prior). He was known to distribute anti-government literature and denounced government agents as "fascist tyrants" and "storm troopers." He definitely displayed more indicators of his possible future actions that Hasan, who at most was a lackluster officer and psychiatrist. While an intern at Walter Reed, he required counseling and extra supervision; and despite press reports to the contrary, he did get a poor OER before being transferred to Fort Hood in July 2009.

Hasan claimed that he had been harassed because of his ethnicity, which caused his disenchantment. He pursued several avenues to be released from military service, to no avail. The shootings appear to be the final option to his sick mind, or in other words, the guy snapped because he was being put in a position that he could not deal with (deploying to Afghanistan). He may have tried to seek some justification through his religious beliefs, but in the end I still contend his acts were personal and not religious radicalism or terrorist in nature. If it were the latter, than to what end? What were his goals and objectives in his acts? Was he considering the long-term impact of his actions, or was he simply looking for his own "last stand" as do most office shooters. Again, I believe it was the latter.

Lastly, had this been a pre-planned terrorist act, then where is the follow-up? No group claimed responsibility for Hasan's actions (although several did applaud him, a sign that they were not directly involved). Suicide bombers and IEDs, two clearly acts of terrorism, are effective because they actually cause lasting fear in the intended targets. One of the long-term failures of the 9/11 attacks is that although they initially induced panic in American society, that fear has pretty much subsided and people are no longer afraid of flying as they were for the months following the attacks. The lasting effect has been more one of inconvenience (longer time getting through airport security) then fear of becoming the victim of a suicide hijacker. Personally, whereas the 11 September attacks could be considered successful in their planning, execution and impact; they are a failure as not only has al Qaida has been unable to follow-up on them to keep the terror level high, but they also resulted in the fight being taken to their backyard (the Middle East) and all the death and destruction has occurred on their soil. Despite all the criticisms levied on the Bush Administration, you cannot deny the fact that it successfully moved this battle from our shores to theirs.

But I will admit that Hasan does represent a potential threat we must not ignore, one from within. Just because I don't believe his were terrorist actions, I do believe that those who seek to conduct such acts will try to replicate what he did. This, more than anything else, is what we need to plan for.

Cheers! M2

[JS]

Just curious for any bums out there - do you have any type of disability insurance for your bum pay? I am not talking about basic Tricare health insurance or VA disability after retirement, I am talking about protection for your income (assuming you make a living as a guard/reserve bum).

Just thinking with kids and such now a part of life, what would happen if I got into a car wreck on my civilian time away from the unit and was unable to fly (and thus work as a bum) for say, six months? At my unit, bum life is good as far as pay and the flexibility to take time off whenever, but I hadn't really thought through where my paychecks would come from if I were unable to bum at the unit.

[hindsight2020]

Just curious for any bums out there - do you have any type of disability insurance for your bum pay? I am not talking about basic Tricare health insurance or VA disability after retirement, I am talking about protection for your income (assuming you make a living as a guard/reserve bum).

Just thinking with kids and such now a part of life, what would happen if I got into a car wreck on my civilian time away from the unit and was unable to fly (and thus work as a bum) for say, six months? At my unit, bum life is good as far as pay and the flexibility to take time off whenever, but I hadn't really thought through where my paychecks would come from if I were unable to bum at the unit.

Oh brother where do I begin with my soapbox....I'm a trougher in my unit and the answer to your question is you'd be f00ked. As a bum you are the Air Force's mexican illegal worker, off the books and cash only. Greatest "part-time" full time job in the world until you get sick. I choose not to have children at this point in my life (testing my wife's patience and commitment to this marriage every yard of the way), though I don't see how that would alter your equation since you would have the same economic hardship if the bum money pot went away tomorrow regardless of your health status. Remember, unlike full-timers, they don't owe us a paycheck, all they owe ya is 96 IDT (if that) and 14 AT; good luck feeding the family on that lawnmower money of course. You can't get insurance for that probability [bum pot running dry] either. I don't even think you could even get unemployment from the state, since technically you've always been and would still be a TR and thus "gainfully employed", though we know the latter is bullchit. That said, having a bunch of young military aircrew on public assistance and food stamps like a freggin' regional airline pilot probably doesn't do the AFRES/Guard a whole lot of PR service now does it? Not what kids are thinking about when they read the brochure and all. Remember, the difference between young enlisted TRs and young officer TRs is that the former considers it a temporary condition 'til they finish college and get gainful employment and/or commission. But for the young officer TR that's the end of the road, college is behind ya, that line of work was supposed to be the source of gainful employment. We're "smart" enough to operate military aircraft, but I got no employment options that match my AD peers' income on the outside to save my life, and civilian employers give ya the finger when you even suggest doing mil duty inside the hours of M-F 8-5 as a junior employee. It just doesn't add up.

Bumming/troughing is not for the faint of heart. Troughing with kids in the mix is outright self-imposed hardship, and few pursue it for longer than a couple years. Most of the cats I know who troughed with kids either ended up looking for 365/yr MPA opportunities outside the unit, got lucky and got full-time positions before the wife divorced them, or got jobs on the outside and started min running the unit and/or gave the unit the one-finger salute. I'd say if the risk of being unemployed as a bum puts your family on the street, man I'd just try to get a job that would entitle you to unemployment/disability compensation. I know if I had to deal with kids and my wife couldn't swing the bulk of the household cost (in my case she makes a little less than what I make as a trougher) we'd be up the creek. That or don't shelter your kids from the harshness of this life that puts mommy and daddy in the position of not having access to a high-falutin' cheddar job.

I'm honestly pulling for ya; we're the zambonis of this organization,polishing the turd deals for a couple RPAs, taking all the chit deals the senior field graders don't want to touch. We gap-fill for the TRs who no longer deem the very job that gave them a leg up in life and career as worth the hassle anymore, for other than retirement points. We're the ones that get treated like active duty fodder on 70% of AD pay. We're the ones volunteering at our own economic expense and/or out of economic hardship. We're the ones above whom they're trying to build the TFI sellout of the Guard/Reserve, since the TRs are like "EFF THIS GIG". I know if the post office offered me a GS-12 today I'd quit this gig on the spot and go deliver mail for a living and go look for a non-TFI tac flying job for play (IDT) money, min run and min qweep. That'd be the life... Good luck to ya, may the ART/AGR Gods land us a job before our families collapse from the economic pressures that the bumming lifestyle carries.