How was it that the military trained and employed this man in psychiatry and did not perceive his deep problems? I think that part of psychiatric training involves subjecting the would-be psychiatrist to psychological analysis. Why did this man slip through the system? His job was to treat others, in an environment full of experts in the field of psychiatry. Why did he remain an insider if he was the sort of person who could do what he eventually did? These are serious questions, not adequately answered by the idea that people “snap.”
I want to know why what was wrong with Hasan was not detected? Was he given a pass because he was Muslim? Is there a fear of suspecting or offending Muslims in the military that keeps people who should see signs of dysfunction from acknowledging what they see or doing anything about it? On the other hand, if it really is the case that people in the military are harassing Muslims, that too should not be ignored. There should be rigorous equality for Muslims. It shouldn’t even be necessary to point out what is obvious: Muslims in the military shouldn’t experience special treatment either of a positive or a negative kind.
I think that about sums it up, and what I've been saying for two days. Political correctness killed these men. The warning signs where there, but no one would do anything, lest they be called bigots by the liberals.
This, I think, is going to be where this story has legs: How exactly did this guy end up in a position to gun down 43 people when his file was teeming with red flags? Stay tuned.
I agree with this 100%.
This vermin was in the military going back to Clinton.
Why wasn't something done about him?
One thing's for sure- we'll never know. It'll be whitewashed and soon we'll forget about it.
Location: No living man am I! You look upon a woman!
Posts: 17,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillBrown
I agree with this 100%.
This vermin was in the military going back to Clinton.
Why wasn't something done about him?
One thing's for sure- we'll never know. It'll be whitewashed and soon we'll forget about it.
Political Correctness killed these people. I mean we have gone from interning the Japanese just for being Japanese (under a Democrat) to ignoring Jihadists no matter how many red flags there are, BECAUSE they are jihadists(under a Democrat again, can't be intolerant, can we?)
I think it was more about him being an officer. As an officer he was not counseled as often or closely. If he had been enlisted, he would be counseled at least monthly by his very attentive NCO. Officers are not as closely mentored or counseled. If he was enlisted some supervisor would have sat him down and addressed his comments. There could have been some degree of PC fear. But it was more likely because of his being an officer.
Political Correctness killed these people. I mean we have gone from interning the Japanese just for being Japanese (under a Democrat) to ignoring Jihadists no matter how many red flags there are, BECAUSE they are jihadists(under a Democrat again, can't be intolerant, can we?)
He was also ignored under Bush.
We need to forget the partisanship when it comes to this subject.
With all the radical remarks and internet postings this guy made, that were known to the military, why wasn't he discharged?
How many others are still in there, just like him?
I think that about sums it up, and what I've been saying for two days. Political correctness killed these men. The warning signs where there, but no one would do anything, lest they be called bigots by the liberals.
Sums what up?
Did you hear the newscaster say this event was in January, not November? An easy mistake if you don't get past the headline.
Did you hear the guest say the main speaker was the Israeli Ambassador to the U.S.? A speaker not present at the GWU HSPI "transition" recommendation conference.
Did you see that he was also just an audience member at this gathering?
How does any of this support your contention that "political correctness" killed those soldiers? I'm surprised you haven't put up the video of Hasan at the convenience store in traditional garb as proof of something.
It seems the meat of your argument is that people were afraid of liberal backlash. Is that real prevalent in a military we constantly hear is overwhelmingly conservative?
What you're suggesting is that good conservative people ignored obvious signs of radical intent because they feared being called bigots.
I don't believe that's true. There is no evidence that political correctness played any part in this tragic event. Why jump to the conclusion that he received a pass because he was a Muslim. Why not because he was a doctor? Or because he was an officer? Why jump to any conclusion at all. Wait for the investigation to takes it's course. People who actually know may then shed some light not only on Hasan's motives, but why, and to what extent, earlier signs may have been missed.
__________________
I have no control over what you post. Apparently you don't either. ~ Anonymous
Did you hear the newscaster say this event was in January, not November? An easy mistake if you don't get past the headline.
Did you hear the guest say the main speaker was the Israeli Ambassador to the U.S.? A speaker not present at the GWU HSPI "transition" recommendation conference.
Did you see that he was also just an audience member at this gathering?
How does any of this support your contention that "political correctness" killed those soldiers? I'm surprised you haven't put up the video of Hasan at the convenience store in traditional garb as proof of something.
It seems the meat of your argument is that people were afraid of liberal backlash. Is that real prevalent in a military we constantly hear is overwhelmingly conservative?
What you're suggesting is that good conservative people ignored obvious signs of radical intent because they feared being called bigots.
I don't believe that's true. There is no evidence that political correctness played any part in this tragic event. Why jump to the conclusion that he received a pass because he was a Muslim. Why not because he was a doctor? Or because he was an officer? Why jump to any conclusion at all. Wait for the investigation to takes it's course. People who actually know may then shed some light not only on Hasan's motives, but why, and to what extent, earlier signs may have been missed.
I see that you're a Vietnam vet. You have my respect. I was in a few years earlier than you but I didn't go to Vietnam.
I have to disagree with the last part of your post.
The signs on this guy were obvious.
He had publicly, as well as privately stated, that Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan had every right to kill American soldiers.
He had posted in praise of suicide bombers on an internet blog.
This is just for starters.
The military knew of these things and did nothing.
For the sake of argument, let's say he was left alone because he was Muslim, and there was a fear of being accused of some kind of bias if he had been dealt with.
I personally believe that was the case.
Or let's say it was because he was a doctor or an officer.
In any of these cases the military is not going to admit this. The final report, if it is made public, will be a jumble of double talk that exonerates the military and the government in general.
This incident should be a lesson. It won't be. Nothing will change as a result of it...IMO
I see that you're a Vietnam vet. You have my respect. I was in a few years earlier than you but I didn't go to Vietnam.
I have to disagree with the last part of your post.
The signs on this guy were obvious.
He had publicly, as well as privately stated, that Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan had every right to kill American soldiers.
He had posted in praise of suicide bombers on an internet blog.
This is just for starters.
The military knew of these things and did nothing.
For the sake of argument, let's say he was left alone because he was Muslim, and there was a fear of being accused of some kind of bias if he had been dealt with.
I personally believe that was the case.
Or let's say it was because he was a doctor or an officer.
In any of these cases the military is not going to admit this. The final report, if it is made public, will be a jumble of double talk that exonerates the military and the government in general.
This incident should be a lesson. It won't be. Nothing will change as a result of it...IMO
I haven't been "glued" to the media on this event so more concrete information may have come out making this obvious.
Has anyone besides Colonel Lee come forward to corroberate those conversations? From what I've heard, the Colonel (and I have since viewed that interview btw) seems to be the major source (no pun intended) of the reported statements of Hasan. I'm not doubting the word of the Colonel, only that he reported one conversation from first hand knowledge, the others he heard about. Plus he didn't make clear that any of these conversations had been reported up the chain of command by himself or anyone else.
It may be that these were seen as isolated conversations at the time, that are only being drawn together in light of the shootings.
As to his internet comments. While that too seems to be a 'fact' now, it was reported that at the time these comments could not be directly attributed to Major Hasan. Also, I thought that this was being looked at by law enforcement outside the military.
20/20 hindsight may show a pattern that was not easily discernible at the time. I think it's still early in the investigation to draw conclusions, particularly about what was known; when did 'they' know it; and when should it have been 'obvious' that action was needed.
************************
Physically I was not in Viet Nam either. It's a convoluted story of duty stations, service records, and mission assignments that made me a part of Project End-Sweep, but to avoid confusion, and not credit myself for what others risked, I list myself as a Viet Nam Era vet.
__________________
I have no control over what you post. Apparently you don't either. ~ Anonymous
Video: Footage shows Hasan in November at … Homeland Security event
Linear Mode
