First came questions about whether anyone missed emotional signals that suspected Fort Hood shooter, Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, was close to cracking. Now U.S. media say Congress wants to know if he was also veering toward Islamist militancy. 
A preliminary review of Hasan’s computer has revealed no evidence of any connection to terror groups or conspirators, according to a report by CBS News.
But lawmakers have asked the CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies to preserve documents on Hasan. That’s according to ABC News, which says the spooks believe he may have been trying to contact U.S.-born imam Anwar al Awlaki, who is based in Yemen and supports holy war against the West.
It’s not clear whether the U.S. military knew one of its officers was under intelligence surveillance, ABC said.
U.S. law enforcement and military investigators are also looking into associations between Hasan and the Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Virginia, in early 2001, about the same time Awlaki and two of the Sept. 11 hijackers were there, the Los Angeles Times reported. The mosque is one of the biggest in the United States and thousands of people go there for prayer services and other events.
Witnesses at Fort Hood told investigators that Hasan yelled “Allahu Akbar” — Arabic for “God is Greatest” — before killing 13 people and wounding another 30 last week. The 39-year-old psychiatrist was shot four times by police and remains hospitalized. 
It is unclear what motivated Hasan and the Army’s chief of staff, General George Casey, is afraid the shooting spree could cause a backlash against Muslims in the military.
But Sen. Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut independent who is a hard-liner on security issues, sees the Fort Hood melee as a possible act of terrorism.
“We don’t know enough to say now. But there are very, very strong warning signs here that Dr. Hasan had become an Islamist extremist and, therefore, that this was a terrorist act,” Lieberman told Fox News over the weekend. 
Lieberman, chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, wants the Pentagon to launch an independent probe of whether defense officials missed early signs of stress and statements that might have expressed Islamist sentiment.
Photo Credits: Reuters/Ho New (Hasan); Reuters/Jessica Rinaldi (Fort Hood); Reuters/Vivek Prakash (Lieberman)
Trackback
21 comments so far
Previous | 2 | 1 | Next
Yada.
Yada.
Yada.
Hindsight is always 20/20.
Foresight though isn’t, because it involves more than just having eyes. It requires having eyes that want to see. And ears that want to hear.
Since Candidate Obama first hawked the Iraq-to-Afghanistan switch-er-roo long con in the 2008 presidential debates, informed foresight should have told all that our military involvement in President Obama’s 2009 Afghanistan was no-win for those that would directly pay for it with their taxpayer money or worse yet, our service personnel with their lives.
So now hindsight wants to kick in after the Ft. Hood massacre by psycho whack-job muslim terrorist Nidal Malik Hasan. Well isn’t that just great.
As it’s currently shaking out though, this is like hitting something while driving along, wondering gee, what did I just hit, with eyes focused solely on the rear view mirror — as you continue driving along at uninterrupted forward speed and direction.
Who knew what and when and what they did or didn’t do re Hasan serves a useful purpose but isn’t going to change hindsight into foresight.
When you are doing something you shouldn’t be doing, in a place you shouldn’t be, you just can’t possibly get good enough at it — in this case identify psycho whack-job muslim terrorists before they do what a psycho whack-job muslim terrorist will do — to turn a no-win policy into anything other than a no-win policy.
Whether someone offs themselves exclusively by jumping off a bridge, or tries to force a suicide-by-cop, or in this case traitorously take out as many of their brothers and sisters in uniform as possible with them as part of solving their own existential dilemma, such reach that behavioral point by letting themselves get inextricably boxed in to that no-win behavior mode.
President Obama is likewise so boxed in, politically. Candidate Obama rode a team of duplicitous horses to election victory. Lead horse on that team was the Iraq-to-Afghanistan war of his necessity. If that weasel now makes with additional troops to Afghanistan, forget trying to understand Nidal Malik Hasan in hindsight and focus on foresight — to see President Obama is a Nidal Malik Hasan in the making, a thousand times over, AS WE SPEAK, IN REAL-TIME.
So why wasn’t Nidal Malik Hasan spotted as a bad apple and so handled? Short answer: The same reason that President Obama’s no-win Afghanistan war of his necessity isn’t CURRENTLY seen for what it is.
- Posted by dom youngross