Suspected Fort Hood Shooter Called “Camel Jockey” By Military Colleagues
November 6th, 2009, 11:30 AM EST
Nidal Malik Hasan was harassed by his fellow soldiers and was called names like “camel jockey.” Ironically, Hasan was suffering from the same kind of stress he was trained to treat.
Hasan is an American citizen of Palestinian descent and after the 9/11 attacks, his cousin says he was the target of constant harassment from others in the military. His tormentors called him a “camel jockey,” said his cousin, Nader Hasan. He wanted out of the Army, so he paid back his military student loans and hired an attorney.
Nader Hasan believes that what ultimately set his cousin off was his imminent deployment to Iraq.
Obama just ordered Flags at Half-Staff through Labor Day. Nice.
jasperjava Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
Labor Day? That’s ten months away. I hope you meant “Thansgiving”.
November 6th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Hasan has been emotionally disturbed since 9/11. He is an American, but after 9/11 was harassed by his own countrymen and lumped into the “terrorist” category bc of his heritage. This breakdown was a long time coming, and I’m disgusted that a DOCTOR did not receive or have the resources to proper psychological help.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Cheryl, tell me someone who wasn’t harassed bc of his or her heritage in America (except white people). America is full of bigots and racists, we shouldn’t be making excuses for these heinous crimes.
jasperjava Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
I don’t think Cheryl is making excuses. It’s just that you’d think a shrink would get psychological help before he snapped like that.
Noting the kind of pressures the shooter was under (including his impending tour in Iraq, or his treatment on the base) helps us understand his motives, which helps explain the crime. It’s not making excuses.
It would be different if someone were to say that he was RIGHT to resort to violence because of his experiences.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
Point taken but at the same time if we give this guy all this attention, it only glamorizes the act of violence and ensures another mass-murder shooting will occur in the very near future. There really isn’t much to discuss with this individual. He lost a battle to some mental disease or demons (some would say) thereby losing touch with reality he committed actions without thinking of the consequences involved.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
spoke too soon, another shooting in an office building in Orlando, Fl. today…….I heard no one was killed fortunately but five injured.
burqa Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 12:34 am
I agree with jasper.
Understanding the reasons someone does something does not exonerate them from the crime.
There will be part of it we may never know, but it is like warfare where a central tenet is we have to know the enemy as well as we know ourselves.
That does not mean we give in to them. Quite the contrary, when we really know the enemy we are then able to defeat him…
November 6th, 2009 at 11:38 am
I don’t know for sure, but I thought 8 years was the longest they could keep you unless you re-enlisted. It seems this guy should have had the opportunity to get out at some point since 9/11 happened. Sounds like he was already in the military on 9/11, and that was over 8 years ago.
CherylCarroll Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
The military paid for him to get his doctorate, so he had to stay in longer.
placefield Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Officers are a lifetime enlistment. You can be called back up at any time. Enlisted men, yes there is a limit.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
“Ironically, Hasan was suffering from the same kind of stress he was trained to treat.”
That’s sad. Here’s a guy who probably helped care for a lot of people…probably affected an innumerable patients in a positive fashion…and then this happens.
jasperjava Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Wow, Flap. That’s a remarkably insightful, thoughtful, and sensitive answer.
Your journeys into Liberaland must be doing you good.
For my part, I think that he had some issues that he should have dealt with before something like this happened. I think he was affected by torn loyalties to his country and its armed forces, which he served for years, and what he saw as aggression against Arabs and Muslims, people who share his ethnic and religious background and which forms a significant part of his identity.
He may have just been a coward who feared deployment into a war zone.
flap Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
“Your journeys into Liberaland must be doing you good.”
Hehehe, nice one, JJ.
I doubt he was a coward, at least before the shooting. I’d call him a coward for taking his aggression out on his fellow citizens. That’s like McVeigh blowing up OKC because he didn’t like what was done in Waco.
MorrisMinor Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:22 pm
That is rubbish, he never was in combat and even people who really do suffer from PTSD don’t go around killing fellow soldiers.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
He could have resigned. Are you telling me that someone harrassed a “Major”? Look I retired in 92 from the service, and even back then there were tools in place that dealt very harshly with racists.
I knew of some pretty crazy stunts committed to keep from going on deployment. I recall a sailor sabatoging a vital engine room component of an aircraft carrier, hoping it would delay their deployment.It worked, and the carrier it was supposed to relieve (which I was assigned to), had to stay out an extra 45 days. Hopefully that Bozo is still breaking rocks in levenworth.
There is not one single excuse, reason or possible justification for murder..None..zero..nadda. I hope they patch this traitor up and turn his sorry ass over to a room containing with the survivors of the soldiers he murdered.
I don’t like war, I especially don’t like this one. But this vermin was provided a very expensive education, a high rank, good pay and benefits by a nation he swore to defend. Then when he was told to go do his duty he turned into a murderous monster. And now someone wants to pull out the race card as a defense? Disgusting.
placefield Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
“He could have resigned”
But the Army would have had to accept his resignation. Certain jobs they are not likely to do that, I am not sure if it is still true but for a while physiologists were a seriously understaffed position in the military.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
what about a dishonorable discharge? That’s better than being in a cell for the rest of your life.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
he could’ve just pretended to be gay, right? I would’ve done that rather than committ murder.
placefield Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
That may have worked. It is not that easy to get out of the service when you are an officer and in a understaffed job. But yes there are many options short of a killing spree.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Plus, it’s not like he was going into combat, so he had some serious unaddressed issues. An officer serving as a psychiatrists would see hardly any combat. The more the military ignores the high rates of PTSD among soldiers, the more killing sprees we’ll see. It reminds me of the guy who came home back in ‘04 and ended up stabbing a fellow soldier he served with out in the woods in Georgia or some other southern state. The army complete misdiagnosed this guy, told him to go out and drink a few beers and he’d feel better. Well the guy he stabbed to death would diasgree with that diagnosis. Sad
jasperjava Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
I wouldn’t be surprised if the stress of treating PTSD in other soldiers make you go a little crazy yourself.
I’ll call it PTSD by proxy, and my article for the American Journal of Psychiatry will be coming out soon.
Debby Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
I certainly hope someone is checking on the Soldiers this psychiatrist was treating. If he had that kind of Anger occuring over a long period of time,he could of done further damage to someone already in a vulnerable mental condition or suffering from PTSD.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Debby I’ll add to your point that this week the suicide rate for the military passed the suicide rate for the U.S. civilian general population, so the military is not stepping the plate to try to tackle these difficult issues.
Debby Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
crh3e…I think they are trying to step up to the plate but they are still learning.I think a big lesson would be, make sure your mental health workers are mentally healthy but that is not always easy to identify and a psychiatrist,if anyone, would know how to hide it. I don’t buy the racism defense,if that is what route they chose to go down. He was given a high Rank and trusted with mentally vulnerable patients.. A phychiatrist, working in his area, would know that the people he is treating would aim some of their agrer at him, no matter what Race or Religion he was and then factor in working with PTSD. Well he himself may be the trigger if he reminds them of the enemy. Even the dumbest psychiatrist would know that. Treating PTSD is helping those suffering by helping them recognize their triggers.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 7:47 pm
Gotcha, my beef is with those in the military, especially in the higher ranks, that don’t even believe in such thing as PTSD. Their denial prompts them to tell suffering soldiers to “drink it off.” Some civilians in the defense dept feel the same way no doubt IMO, it’s why hardly anything is mentioned of PTSD until one of these violent episodes occurs. These people see PTSD as a cop-out or an excuse. First we need to have an understanding that PTSD actually is real before we can ever hope to help treat it.
Debby Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
I agree, absolutely! That would be the worst advice anyone could give a soldier suffering from PTSD. Alcohol coupled with PTSD could be deadly. It may well be, the people giving such advice find a alcohol a great stress reliever and rely on it themselves. And then there are some that have such strong coping abilities themselves, they simply cannot understand how someone else does not have those same coping mechanism. My understanding is, the Military, as a whole, has been taking great steps in addressing the PTSD issue, now. Am I wrong?
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
You’re not wrong on that, but I dunno about “great steps” in addressing PTSD, I might say just “steps.” The military is doing a better job than it used to with PTSD, but that isn’t saying much. I remember George Carlin suggested going back to calling PTSD “shellshock” because he thought PTSD sounds too complex and has too many syllables whereas “shellshock” is right to the point and only has two syllables. He said the military did alright with treating “shellshock” until the name of the disorder started to change and take on many syllables. Shellshock to combat fatigue to operational exhaustion to posttraumatic stress disorder.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 8:27 pm
He said the adding of words and syllables dehumanized the condition, thereby making it seem irrelevant. Vietnam is when PTSD became the new label, and that is when we saw the worst as far as mental health therapy for vets (and homelessness too BTW).
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
Shellshock came to us during WWI, combat fatigue during WWII, operational exhaustion during Korean War (which sounds like something that happens to your car BTW), and PTSD with Vietnam. We did very well with treating soldiers right who came back from WWI and WWII, but started to get worse after that. There is a correlation between the degree of care and the relabeling of shellshock.
Debby Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
And as they say, “There is a high rate of Burnout for those working in the Mental Health Field.” I can’t recall the stats on that. The label shellshock may be more acceptable to Warriors. PTSD does have a gentler tone. I know Vietnam Vets that were treated for PTSD and they have talked to me about that. They are doing fine today and for many years now. I’m so glad!
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
That’s good to hear. Personally I know a Vietnam Vet who now receives disability for PTSD, but it took him a long time to even be diagnosed with PTSD. He was misdiagnosed with so many other conditions, such as schizophrenia, Asperger’s Syndrome, etc. before he found out he had PTSD. I think we want to be in denial of such a thing as PTSD because we feel it’s a sign of weakness. However, upon studying the disorder one realizes it’s simply a result from having too much adrenaline in our system at one time in relation to stress. That adrenaline causes us to have vivid memories of the event, a replaying of it if you will. Ironically, our body is trying to help us remember what to do to survive a certain event. The bad part is that we cannot program our mind to turn off the memories when experiencing certain triggers that set off the memories even if we are not in any immediate danger. That’s the catch-22 of PTSD if you will.
burqa Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 1:43 am
Debby and crh, you’re right on about the booze. It makes problems worse, particularly depression.
Crh, you’re especially right with your last post.
Shell shock, PTSD, whatever it gets called, through history we have done a poor job of caring for our veterans who came back from wars. It is only recently that they have been encouraged to get help and there is a strain of thought, particularly among men that it is a sign or confession of weakness.
From Iraq, over 100,000 military personnel have needed psychological treatment and there are many who have not been helped who need it.
Psychological treatment needs to be more socially acceptable.
There is a scene in the movie “Patton” taken from real life where a soldier who was physically healthy but could no longer handle the stress of combat was slapped in the face by Patton. Many people today believe Patton was right and defend it.
An outstanding book by a fine warrior in World War II who broke under the stress is Robert Leckie’s “Helmet for My Pillow.” He was a fine writer and his books are required reading for World War II Marine Corps history. Leckie had fought on Guadalcanal, New Britain and on Pelilieu he broke and it will make the strongest of you cry.
Paperbacks are widely available.
burqa Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 12:38 am
Could have resigned?
I have heard he tried to get out, but could not.
That may be eroneous, I don’t know. What I DO know is it takes time for these things to shake out and to settle in on hard opinions and reject possibilities is not wise.
We may find out there is some group we never heard of involved in this, who knows?
Let’s not pretend to be experts when things are at such a preliminary stage…
John Galt Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 12:43 am
Let’s not pretend to be experts when things are at such a preliminary stage…
True. But it is sounding more and more like this guy had a problem going into a war zone where Americans were killing Muslims.
Is it terrorism? I don’t think so.
Did he do it because he was a little kooky and jumped the shark of his religion? I think so.
burqa Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 12:56 am
I agree pretty much. In our soundbite culture we tend to look for simple answers. Think of all the times we hear a sporting event supposedly hinging on one play.
People are so complex there were probably multiple factors of varying degree.
Islam, like Christianity, has many sects and interpretations and it may well be that some violent rhetoric cloaked in religion confirmed an evil impulse in him. Other things may have been factors, too.
Notice how people across the political spectrum seek to magnify certin facts to fit their ideology. We all do it to a degree because that is easier than actually changing.
In this guy’s case, I would not be surprised if he did not find certain religious things to justify what he did. With the cache of religion, it gives it more authority.
If the guy wanted to, he could have probably found the same religious justification in other faiths, it’s just this is the one he knew better…
John Galt Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 12:58 am
he could have probably found the same religious justification in other faiths, it’s just this is the one he knew better…
Yup.
Christian kooks.
Muslim kooks.
Jewish kooks.
All kinds of kooks.
burqa Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 1:45 am
John, it’s really nice to find agreement.
(burqa tips his giant martini glass toward John and takes a big swig)
November 6th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
By the way, I think these guys suffered a lot worse as far as racism goes. Think about it http://www.the442.org/
November 6th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
“And now someone wants to pull out the race card as a defense? Disgusting.”
I think we’re still in the “trying to comprehend it” stage, and as much as it might upset or offend you it’s possible that racism could be a factor, especially in light of the FACT that America is infested with lots and lots of racist cockroaches and some of them happen to be in the military.
flap Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
We’re also infested with waaaaaaaaaay too many liberal rottweilers.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Has the military confirmed the reports by his cousin that he was harassed? If not, it’s speculation and heresay. There are also reports that this attack had NOTHING to do with harassment, but rather his personal beliefs. Whatever the case, this was a senseless, unprovoked attack on some of American’s finest. And it’s inexcusable.
piffle Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
This is the same press that couldn’t determine the number of shooters, incorrectly said this guy was dead, got his country fo origin wrong all over the place, and refused to release his name over the airwaves when they realized it wasn’t Timothy McVeigh. But yes, anything that might immediately place someone in post-modern realm of absolution of personal responsibliity like possible racial slurs are immediately produced, because no one ever commits acts of violence because of religious hatred of an institution.
I wonder if the people who shot Tiller were called towelheads and told to go fight evil cruel illegal wars, I guess among these people taht would make it OK. Oh wait, Tiller was a “hero,” the people at Fort Hood are just trained coldblooded killers who weren’t smart enough to not stay out of Iraq like John Kerry and Jack Murtha.
flap Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
“Tiller was a “hero”"
My blood pressure just jumped up 40 mmHg, piffle…
OH, and one of the funniest damn lines Alan ever muttered was when Bill Maher was on H&C, and obviously Bill and Hannity started arguing about something (I think Dubya’s apparent delayed response to the 9/11 attacks in the school classroom).
At the end of the interview, Bill Maher said, “Thank you for getting my blood pressure up.” And as a throwaway line, Alan said, “Maybe you have low blood pressure, it could be healthy.” Oh, man, I know it’s probably a dumb line but it caused Maher to chuckle and I had a great laugh.
Alan, go back to HANNITY & COLMES! I know that ship has sailed, but those were the days. I mean, I view Sean as a demigod, but 9PM on FNC has never been the same since you left. Not even remotely close.
burqa Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
“This is the same press that couldn’t determine the number of shooters, incorrectly said this guy was dead, got his country fo origin wrong all over the place, and refused to release his name over the airwaves when they realized it wasn’t Timothy McVeigh…”
Which is why we should not jump to conclusions about the story, but wait for it to develop.
That same press you criticize now will be the same sources you will use to find out the facts of the story in time.
They frequently qualify preliminary reports and to omit those qualifications when you refer to those reports is intellectually dishonest, piffle….
placefield Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Most of should know that the press right now is just tripping over itself right now trying to outdo each other. The fact checking won’t happen for a couple of days at the soonest. They may even loose interest before that happens.
burqa Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Yeah, the press has to get ratings, but they also have to be aware if they get the story wrong it will cost them ratings later.
I see no reason to jump to conclusions.
We should grieve for those we lost and allow the story to develop.
Sometimes these things take all sorts of twists and turns.
People forget that at the time of 9/11, lots of people were convinced Chandra Levy had been murdered by Gary Condit.
Others jumped to conclusions when the Duke lacrosse team was alleged to have gang-raped a stripper.
Still others jumped to conclusions when the allegations about the staff of the McMartin school came out about sexual abuse of children.
By now, people should have learned to not jump to conclusions, but still they do….
placefield Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
I agree, we have no need to have this info now. I would much prefer if we received it in a week or two and it was accurate. But what to fill the 24 hour news cycle.
jasperjava Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
to omit those qualifications when you refer to those reports is intellectually dishonest, piffle….
Intellectual dishonesty is Piffle’s stock-in-trade.
MorrisMinor Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:19 pm
Piffle,
you are engaging in mindless media bashing. The story just broke so the news can be excused for getting stuff mixed up. Breaking news is not dry, well researched history book written years later with the help of editors, proof readers and research assistants
November 6th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Next time you want to leave the military, find someone of the same sex and give em a big kiss. You’ll be booted out faster than you can run I bet.
burqa Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 12:59 am
On the same theme, it is worth tracking down the story told by Iggy Pop on how he got out of it after he was drafted….
November 6th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Why does Colmes ask why Muslim criminals who SELF-IDENTIFY their criminal acts as being inspired by their religion are identified as being muslim? Sorry but muslims, christians, athiests, etc. who commit crimes that have nothing to do with their beliefs are NEVER identified by their religion. It is ONLY when muslims commit crimes that THEY THEMSELVES say are inspired by their religion that they are so identified. And yes, when Christians bomb abortion clinics or shoot doctors they are RIGHTLY identified as Christians just the same as muslims who commit crimes in the name of Islam are identified as muslim
burqa Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
You’re contradicting yourself there, Ibrahim.
Lighten up.
I am a Christian who does not believe bombing abortion clinics is “rightly” a Christian thing to do.
Just as you do not want to see all Muslims lumped into one basket, please do not do the same to Christians or those of other faiths.
Stereotypes like that reflect lazy, uncritical thinking.
jasperjava Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
I think Ibrahim is saying that the networks are right to identify abortion clinic bombers as Christians, because their far-right extremist Christianity is the ideological motivation for their crime.
In the same vein, Muslims who commit crimes as part of a holy jihad should also be identified as Muslims in news reports, because that’s relevant to the case.
In this particular case, the shooter’s background may well have played a part in his motivation. I think it’s fair to make note of it, without necessarily coming to the conclusion that it was the sole or even the prime factor.
ibrahimB Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 5:29 am
Yes, that is what I meant. When someone commits a crime that they themselves say is motivated by their religion, they should be identified by religion.
This of course does not mean that just because a Christian kills an abortionist for reasons that he himself says are Christian that he truly understands the meaning of Christianity and still less that other Christians would not be horrified by his action.
The same applies to Muslims who kill in the name of Islam. How can you not identify them as Muslim? But that OBVIOUSLY does not mean that other muslims don’t find the act horrific.
flap Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Ibrahim, do you honestly think Alan is anti-Muslim?! He pretty much denounced everyone who called in and spoke against or stereotyped Islam, bro.
November 6th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Well those military can be salty. Not that I condone such language..
burqa Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 1:00 am
I likes my women on the salty side with a good slathering of harissa…..
November 6th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Please spare me, so we are supposed to excuse him cause he got some flack years ago? The concept that he suffers from PTSD when he never saw combat and was heading for a safe hospital in a non combat slot. He is just another free lance jihadist
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:21 pm
no one is trying to excuse this man……I hope he gets his day in court and a life sentence too (I feel the death penalty is an easy way out for murderers). The only thing I need to tell you based on your comment is that people can acquire PTSD without being in combat. For instance, rape victims, firefighters, police, nurses, etc…..it’s stress and adrenaline that create PTSD. Also, I can’t diagnose this man as having PTSD at the same time. I don’t have enough information to do that.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:22 pm
and I can’t dianose people anyway without a degree of medicine and practice as a psychiatrist.
MorrisMinor Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:26 pm
“and I can’t dianose people anyway without a degree of medicine and practice as a psychiatrist.”
yet you advance the diagnosis for a person you never even met or spoke to in person. Fact is, he was never in any sort of dangerous stessful positions.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
yet you put words in my mouth that I never said
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
Fact is, you don’t have enough information to know that this man was never in any stressful positions unless you are God
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
you say he was “never” in any sort of dangerous stressful positions…..I’m impressed you know everything about somebody you never met or spoke to in person. Genius
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
hey genius explain how somebody “advances” a diagnosis when they say they cannot diagnose that condition.
crh3e Reply:
November 6th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
you did bring up PTSD BTW, so I could accuse you of the “advancing” the diagnosis too
jasperjava Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 1:14 am
Give him a few more kicks, crh3e.
MorrisMinor obviously has all the answers, and knows everything about everybody. Not a lot of self-reflection, however. He doesn’t know that he’s a self-righteous a**hole.
burqa Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 1:24 am
“The only thing I need to tell you based on your comment is that people can acquire PTSD without being in combat. For instance, rape victims, firefighters, police, nurses, etc…..it’s stress and adrenaline that create PTSD. Also, I can’t diagnose this man as having PTSD at the same time. I don’t have enough information to do that…”
You are right, crh.
dia-gnosis in ancient Greek, in the genitive case means knowledge gained through first-hand experience.
It may not be technically PTSD, but there is great stress in the medical profession. I believe research would find they have higher rates of alcoholism, divorce and maybe even suicide than the average in the population. The hours are horrendous. Dealing with people all day is bad enough, but medical and law enforcmen personnel are dealing with people all day who are pissed off, in pain of various sorts or are just having a bad time.
Being around people like that all day every day takes its toll and requires a lot of people who are rather fallible anyway.
In this particular case we just don’t know and need to wait. Thoe who pretend to know or who think they can rule this or that out because of their pre-conceived ideology are suspect….
Debby Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
i did not see a relationship with a conversation about PTSD in the Military,our different views on how the Military address those issues, and advancing a diagnosis. Each time, I thought about the Fort Hood shootings, I was overwelmed with emotion and worry. Crh3e took the conversation out of the emotion realm and into the mental, which gave me a period of emotional detachment so I could focus on the safety elements of my job. I am grateful. I think the differences in the shootings, listed below by Robert Taylor, is, these shootings directly affect a greater population. Most people would find any of these shooting horrific. Yet there are many more people directly affected because they may have families or friends who have or are serving, in the lengthy war. What makes this tragedy interesting, if one can step back from the emotional, is its uniqueness. This man is a psychiatrist, an American soldier, treating other American soldiers affected by war with people the psychiatrist shares certain beliefs and culture. He himself could not cope with the deployment so many of his patients had experienced because of fear?, conflict with personal beliefs ?, mental illness?, anger?, or a tumor on the adrenal gland?(just had to throw that in). He resorted to the worst possible solution and we all wonder why. We will never know motive until professional evaluation and investigations are complete. Speculating at this point is merely a coping mechanism in and of intself, as long as we don’t draw conclusions and believe they are accurate!
November 6th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Colmes is (unwittingly) anti-muslim. He said something like “if you take any old book as being literal truth then you will have problems… any religion that does this will have problems” But we muslims do not have the same relation to books that christians or jews do to the bible. It is essential to islam that the Quran is the literal word of God given to the Prophet by the Angel Gabriel. It is the true inerrant holy message from God. So Colmes, in his ignorance, said something that singles out Islam uniquely as being wrong-headed.
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
though I see your point…and the wide swath of chritianity is hard to point out…there are many christians who believe that it is essential that the bible is the literal word of God…so I don’t think he was singling out Islam, wittingly or unwittingly.
burqa Reply:
November 7th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
Fundamentalists of many faiths believe that…
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
nicely said.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:20 am
PTSD, Religous reason, ideology,blah blah balh. Has it occured to anyone that maybe ..just maybe this peice of crap is simply another asshole with a gun who woke up mad at the world?
November 7th, 2009 at 8:08 am
An American acquaintance who is very conservative but with a very good BS detector compiled this list:
Here is a glance at some of the worst U.S. mass shootings in recent years:
Nov. 5, 2009: The Army says 13 people were killed and 30 wounded in a shooting rampage at its Fort Hood base in Texas. The suspected lone gunman has been identified as Army psychiatrist Major Nidal Malik Hasan, one of the 30 injured.
April 3, 2009: A 41-year-old man opened fire at an immigrant community center in Binghamton, N.Y., killing 11 immigrants and two workers. Jiverly Wong, a Vietnamese immigrant and a former student at the center, killed himself as police rushed to the scene.
Feb. 14, 2008: Former student Steven Kazmierczak, 27, opened fire in a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, fatally shooting five students and wounding 18 others before committing suicide.
Dec. 5, 2007: 19-year-old Robert A. Hawkins opened fire with a rifle in Omaha, Neb., at a Von Maur store in the Westroads Mall, killing eight people before taking his own life. Five more people were wounded, two critically.
April 16, 2007: Cho Seung-Hui, 23, fatally shot 32 people in a dorm and a classroom at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, then killed himself in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.
Feb. 12, 2007: 18-year-old Sulejman Talovic killed five and wounded four at the Trolley Square mall in Salt Lake City, Utah. He was then shot and killed by police.
Oct. 2, 2006: Charles Carl Roberts IV, 32, shot to death five girls at West Nickel Mines Amish School in Pennsylvania, then killed himself.
March 21, 2005: 16-year-old student Jeffrey Weise killed nine people, including his grandfather and his grandfather’s companion at home, and then five fellow students, a teacher and a security guard at Red Lake High School in Red Lake, Minnesota, before killing himself. Seven students were wounded.
March 12, 2005: Terry Ratzmann, 44, gunned down members of his congregation as they worshipped at the Brookfield Sheraton in Brookfield, Wisconsin, slaying seven and wounding four before killing himself.
July 29, 1999: Former day trader Mark Barton, 44, killed nine people in shootings at two Atlanta, Georgia, brokerage offices, then committed suicide.
April 20, 1999: Students Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, opened fire at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, killing 12 classmates and a teacher and wounding 26 others before committing suicide in the school’s library.
March 24, 1998: Andrew Golden, 11, and Mitchell Johnson, 13, killed four girls and a teacher at a Jonesboro, Arkansas, middle school. 10 others were wounded in the shooting.
October 16, 1991: George Hennard, 35, smashed his pickup truck through a Luby’s Cafeteria window in Killeen, Texas, and fired on the lunchtime crowd with a high-powered pistol, killing 22 people. At least 20 others were wounded.
lots of Muslim terrorist mass shooters, no?
luv2lift48 Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 8:13 am
Well said Mr. Taylor. We need to divorce ourselves from whatever race, or religion this shooter is, and address the crime he committed.
burqa Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Nice list there, Mr. Taylor.
Obviously, white American males have to be at the top of the list for public strip searches including anal cavity inspections.
They should be rounded up and shipped off to Gitmo until we can be sure they are not a threat….
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
I think most mass shootings like this fall into the same category, and it doesn’t have anything to do with what religion, race, or ideology you associate with.
Severe depression and sense of hopelessness are probably the most common element amongst all of these.
November 7th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
I don’t care how much he “might” have been harrassed. There is ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE for what this muslim did to our troops in Ft. Hood. He is just another muslim terrorist who murdered innicent, unarmed citizens of the United States.
burqa Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Daddio, I don’t think either of us can call this an act of terrorism or murder, nor do I think it makes all that much difference at the moment.
He is not only a Muslim murderer,
he is also a male murderer.
He is also a bald-headed murderer.
He is also an American murderer.
He is also an American Army officer murderer.
His religion may have played a role in what he did and it may not have. If he did what it appears, then if I am on his jury and am convinced of his guilt, his religious beliefs or other motives will not matter to me.
I am about to post some interesting quotes on suicide bombers.
Watch this space………..
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
chill daddio…chill.
November 8th, 2009 at 9:15 am
Ok, gang, the following quotes I am going to post all come from Robert Pape’s, DYING TO WIN The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism, by Robert A. Pape, (Random House, 2005).
What Pape did was research and do statistical analysis on every suicide bombing he could identify from about 1980 to 2003. Many of them were followed by biographical portraits of the bomber in local media. Pape also examined videos made by suicide terrorists as well as other sources in order to be able to put together an accurate study. His results are very interesting and the basis for his conclusions are quite strong because so many of them have so much in common….
November 8th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
“first, although religious motives may matter and although Islamic groups receive the most attention in Western media, modern suicide terrorism is not limited to Islamic fundamentalism… the explicitly antireligious Tamil Tigers have committed 76 of the 315 suicide attacks, more than any group;….
….Even among Muslims, secular groups account for over a third of suicide attacks. The Kurdish PKK, which has used suicide bombers as part of its strategy to achieve Kurdish autonomy, is guided by the secular Marxist-Leninist ideology of its leader, Abdullah Ocalan, rather than by Islam. Even in the conflicts most characterized by Islamic fundamentalism, groups with secular ideologies account for an important number of suicide attacks. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a Marxist-Leninist group, and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, with allegiance to Yasser Arafat’s Fatah movement, together account for thirty-one of ninety-two suicide attacks against Israel, while communist and socialist groups, such as the secular Lebanese National Resistance Front, the Lebanese Communist Party, and the Syrian National Socialist Party, account for twenty-seven of thirty-six attacks in Lebanon in the 1980s.
Overall, Islamic fundamentalism is associated with about half of the suicide terrorist attacks that have occurred from 1980 to 2003….” – Dying to Win, page 16 – 17
burqa Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
“The strategic logic of suicide terrorism is aimed at political coercion. The vast majority of suicide terrorist attacks are not isolated or random acts by individual fanatics, but rather occur in clusters as part of a larger campaign by an organized group to achieve a specific [b]political[/b] goal. Moreover, the main goals of suicide terrorist groups are profoundly of this world. Suicide terrorist campaigns are primarily nationalistic, not religious, nor are they particularly Islamic….. every group mounting a suicide campaign over the past two decades has had as a major objective – or as its central objective – coercing a foreign state that has military forces in what the terrorists see as their homeland to take those forces out….” – Dying to Win, page 21
“Few suicide attackers are social misfits, criminally insane, or professional losers. Most fit a nearly opposite profile: typically they are psychologically normal, have better than average economic prospects for their communities, and are deeply integrated into social networks and emotionally attached to their national communities. They see themselves as sacrificing their lives for their nation’s good.
The bottom line, then, is that suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation. Isolated incidents in other circumstances do occur. Religion plays a role. However, modern suicide terrorism is best understood as an extreme strategy for national liberation against democracies with troops that pose an imminent threat to control the territory the terrorists view as their homeland.” – Dying to Win, page 23
burqa Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
“No previous analysis of suicide terrorism has been able to draw on a complete survey of suicide terrorist attacks worldwide. This drawback, together with the fact that many such attacks, including all those against Americans, have been committed by Muslims have led many in the United States to assume that Islamic fundamentalism must be the main underlying cause. This, in turn, has fueled a belief that anti-American terrorism can be stopped only by wholesale transformation of Muslim societies, a belief that helped create public support of the invasion of Iraq. Comprehensive study of the phenomenon of suicide terrorism, however, shows the presumed connection to Islamic fundamentalism is misleading.
My study surveys all 315 suicide terrorist attacks around the globe from 1980 to 2003. The data show that there is not the close connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism that many people think. Rather, what all suicide terrorist campaigns have in common is a specific secular and strategic goal: to compel democracies to withdraw military forces from the terrorists’ national homeland. Religion is rarely the root cause, although it is often used as a tool by terrorist organizations in recruiting and in other efforts in service of the broader strategic objective.”
Three general patterns in the data support the conclusion that suicide terrorism is mainly a strategic phenomenon. These three properties are consistent with the above strategic logic but not with irrational behavior or religious fanaticism:
1. Timing. Nearly all suicide attacks occur in organized, coherent campaigns, not as isolated or randomly timed incidents.
2. Nationalist goals. Suicide terrorist campaigns are directed at gaining control of what the terrorists see as their national homeland, and specifically at ejecting foreign forces from that territory.
3. Target selection. All suicide terrorist campaigns in the last two decades have been aimed at democracies, which make more suitable targets from the terrorists’ point of view. Nationalist movements that face non-democratic opponents have not resorted to suicide attack as a means of coercion.” – Dying to Win, page 38 – 39
burqa Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
“The Kurds, who straddle Turkey and Iraq, illustrate the point that suicide terrorist campaigns are more likely to be targeted against democracies than authoritarian regimes. Although Iraq has been far more brutal toward its Kurdish population than has Turkey, violet Kurdish groups have used suicide attacks exclusively against democratic Turkey and not against the authoritarian regime in Iraq. There are plenty of national groups living under authoritarian regimes with grievances that could possibly inspire suicide terrorism, but none have.
Thus, the fact that rebels have resorted to this strategy only when they face the more suitable type of target counts against arguments that suicide terrorism is a non-strategic response, motivated mainly by fanaticism or irrational hatreds.” – Dying to Win, page 45
“The association between foreign occupation and suicide terrorism does not mean that religion plays no role; it does suggest that the widely shared view that suicide terrorism emanates from Islamic fundamentalism – or religious hatred in general – is wrongheaded. Since national and religious identities often overlap, distinguishing the main motive for particular suicide terrorist campaigns may seem excessively difficult. However, these two motives will not always lead terrorists to attack the same enemies. Attacking certain enemies would make sense for national objectives, but not religious ones, while attacking others would make sense for religious but not national reasons.
Hamas and al-Qaeda are crucial cases. Both groups espouse Islamic fundamentalist ideologies. Both charge Christian and Jews with crimes against Muslims. And both seek to overturn what they view as foreign military occupations – Hamas, to end Israeli occupation of Palestinian land; al-Qaeda, to drive out what it sees as the American occupation of the Arabian Peninsula since 1990 as well as of Afghanistan since 2001 and Iraq since 2003.
Comparison of target selection for Hamas and al-Qaeda shows that combating foreign military occupation is more central than religious motives for both groups. If religious hostility were paramount, one would expect both Hamas and al-Qaeda to attack both Christians and Jews. Similarly, if revenge for perceived injuries were a central motive, one would expect both groups to attack both the United States and Israel. However, each group in fact concentrates its effort against the opponent that actually has troops stationed on what it sees as it homeland territory. Hamas concentrates almost all of its effort against Israel and has not attacked the United States or American citizens outside of Israel and Palestine. Al-Qaeda’s main effort has been against the United States and against American allies that have deployed troops in Afghanistan and Iraq; al-Qaeda has never attacked Israel and has rarely attacked Jewish targets elsewhere. Although Hamas complains that the United States supports Israel’s occupation of Palestine, and al-Qaeda says that Israel and Jews control American foreign policy, neither group actually expends significant effort to attack opponents who do not have troops occupying their homeland.” – Dying to Win, page 46-47
burqa Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
(Pape, speaking of the first intifada)
“We do not know exactly why the Palestinian rebellion against Israeli occupation began when it did. Few observers at the time expected an uprising in 1987, especially since, by this time, Palestinians had been under Israeli rule for twenty years….
…However, we do know that Islamic fundamentalism did not play a role in the initiation of the rebellion. The first intifada was largely a spontaneous uprising of independent grassroots activists and was quickly supported by the main Palestinian nationalist organization, Fatah, a secular movement. The most important Islamic organization that has played a role in Palestinian politics and in suicide terrorism, Hamas, did not yet exist in 1987.
One factor that probably did contribute significantly to the rise and persistence of the Palestinian rebellion was the increasing encroachment of Jewish settlers on Palestinian land. As Chart 1 shows, during the first thirteen years of the occupation (1967 to 1980), only about 12,000 Jewish settlers resided in the Occupied Territories. From 1980 to 1995, this number increased more than tenfold, to 146,000, and by a further 50 percent from 1995 to 2002, to 226,000. The growth of Jewish settlement not only consumed more land and water, but also required progressive expansion of the Israeli military presence in the West Bank and Gaza, including more checkpoints that made it difficult for Palestinians to travel or even carry on ordinary business. The second intifada appears to be a response to the failure of the Oslo peace process to lead to full Israeli withdrawal from the Occupied Territories….”
“Although two Islamist organizations, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, have conducted the majority of Palestinian suicide attacks (79 out of 110 attacks between 1994 and 2003), there is strong evidence that Islamic fundamentalism has not been the driving force behind Palestinian suicide terrorism. The most important evidence is the trajectory of Palestinian public support for suicide operations, because this is necessary to their persistence over time. However, as Table 7 shows, public opinion polls show that suicide operations have consistently commanded much more support than Hamas or even all Islamist groups combined. Support for suicide terrorism was roughly flat during the 1990s, and rose sharply with the start of the second intifada. Support for Hamas and other Islamist groups also remained steady during the 1990s and rose at the start of the second intifada. Support for Hamas and other Islamist groups also remained steady during the 1990s and rose at the start of the second intifada, although not as dramatically as support for suicide terrorism. The rise in support for Hamas and Islamic Jihad cannot be the main cause of the rise in support of suicide terrorism, because the latter is a much broader phenomenon. Indeed, support for the Islamist groups is more likely an effect of the rising popularity of suicide terrorism than a cause of it.” – Dying to Win, page 47
burqa Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
“However, to ascribe al-Qaeda’s suicide campaign to religion alone would not be accurate. The targets that al-Qaeda has attacked, and the strategic logic articulated by Osama bin Laden to explain how suicide operations are expected to help achieve al-Qaeda’s goals, both suggest that al-Qaeda’s principal motive is to end foreign military occupation of the Arabian Peninsula and other Muslim regions. The United States and its allies who have been under al-Qaeda’s fire do export democratic, liberal, capitalist, and (arguably) Christian values to the Muslim world. The critical question is a counterfactual one: would these religious or ideological provocations suffice if the United States and European allies did not also station troops in the Middle East?
The evidence suggests the answer is no. The taproot od al-Qaeda’s animosity to its enemies is what they do, not who they are.” – page51.
“The United States has been exporting cultural values that are anathema to Islamic fundamentalism for several decades, but bin Laden and the al-Qaeda organization did not turn toward attacking the United States until after 1990, when the United Sttaes sent trops to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Bahrain.” – Dying to Win, page 52
“To be sure, bin Laden may have his own personal reasons for pursuing this campaign against the United States. One may speculate that he is ultimately motivated by revenge for how the United States abandoned Muslim fighters in Afghanistan after the victory against the Soviet Union in 1988, or that he is driven by a peculiar brand of Yemeni religious nationalism related to the Wahhabi strand of Islam. However, even id bin Laden has such private motives, they do not form the basis of his public appeals to gain support within his own community. When bin Laden appeals for support, he focuses on American military policies that have led to the occupation of Muslim countries. Bin Laden surely hates the United States, but it is his public opposition to American military policies that ultimately matters.
Although Europeans do not pose as great a cultural threat to Muslim society as does the United States, European societies have also been a source of economic, social, and religious pressure on traditional Muslim values for decades. Until recently, however, al-Qaeda has not selected European countries or citizens for attack, nor did bin Laden’s public statements mention any grievances against them. This changed following the arrival of European troops in Afghanistan in 2001 and in Iraq in 2003. From 2002 to 2003, Europeans became al-Qaeda’s most frequent target: ten of fifteen suicide attacks during this period were directed mainly at European or Australian citizens, although these people were in Muslim countries. In every one of the ten cases, the victims came from countries that had troops in Afghanistan or Iraq.” – Dying to Win, page 54-55
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
do you have a link to this or are you determined to copy the entire thing here on Alan’s site?
burqa Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
No link, and that’s all.
I felt it would be nice to give y’all some ammo to use in the future.
Terrorism is a subject I have researched intensively and extensively in order that my opinion be based on solid information.
Guido, do you have anything to say about what Pape’s research found? Or are his conclusions something you’d rather not discuss?
GuidoVanHorn Reply:
November 8th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
I haven’t finished reading it all, but I don’t find anything that I can really disagree with. I’ve never really blamed Islam for terrorism. though Islam, I believe, has been used as a contributing factor in some terrorism including the 9/11 tragedy.
as for Fort Hood it appears more and more to be a personal thing rather than associated with some larger group or Jihad of whatever sort.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:44 pm