The Washington Post reports on a new line of investigation into US Army Major Nidal Hasan, accused of killing 13 and wounding 30 others during a shooting spree at Ft. Hood, Texas.
The article notes that some have alleged that Hasan was led to extremism by the imam at a Washington, DC area mosque he attended after his mother’s death in 2001. That imam, Anwar al-Aulaqi, left the US in 2002 and has been living in Yemen since 2004. He is now noted to be a supporter of Al-Qaeda with global influence through his online rhetoric. Investigators will be examining Hasan’s computers to see what, if any, influence al-Aulaqi may have had over him.
Authorities scrutinize links between Fort Hood suspect,
imam said to back al-Qaeda
Spencer S. Hsu and Carrie JohnsonFederal investigators are examining possible links between Fort Hood shooting suspect Maj. Nidal M. Hasan and an American-born imam who U.S. authorities say has become a supporter and leading promoter of al-Qaeda since leaving a Northern Virginia mosque, officials said.
Hasan attended the Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church in 2001, when its spiritual leader was Anwar al-Aulaqi, a figure who crossed paths with al-Qaeda associates, including two Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers, one senior U.S. official said.
… A challenge for investigators is sorting out a potential thicket of psychological, ideological or religious motivations behind Hasan’s alleged actions. Hasan’s possible contact with extremists such as Aulaqi would complicate matters, suggesting that U.S. authorities may have missed chances to prevent the cleric from instigating this incident and others. But if it turns out that Hasan acted in the throes of an emotional breakdown, his questionable ties could be misinterpreted in ways that damage U.S. outreach to the Muslim world or provoke an overreaction that divides Americans.
…
The article, worth reading in its entirety, notes that thousands of people attended al-Aulaqi’s mosque in Northern Virginia. That is not enough to conclude that anyone who attended the mosque during his tenure should now be considered a security threat.
If Maj. Hasan was influenced by al-Aulaqi, particularly during the recent past, then it will require taking another look at his motivations and will likely lead to somewhat different conclusions. It is still my belief, however, that when faced with two, irreconcilable mandates, Hasan found what seemed a solution for him. It was a bad decision, resolving nothing, but leading to the deaths of innocent people.
UPDATE: American ABC News reports, without much supporting information, that Hasan might have tried to contact al-Aulaqi some time prior to his attack:
It also notes that al-Aulaqi commended Hasan’s attack in a recent web posting.
There’s also a report that the major, as did some of the 9/11 hijackers, visited a strip-joint in the month preceding his actions:
People are wondering what that’s about, if there’s some dispensation for would-be killers to take part in decidedly sinful acts prior to a terrorist act (itself sinful, but that’s another argument).
UPDATE: Over at Volokh.com, there’s an interesting post stating that psychological breakdown is not incompatible with terrorism. In fact, it concludes, Maj. Hasan’s actions were entirely in line with the behavior of certain Islam-inspired terrorists:
UPDATE: Over at The New York Times, a piece on how Muslims in the US Army face difficult problems to start with:
UPDATE: Here’s a piece from Forbes Magazine that’s thought provoking, to say the least. I may take this up as a separate post later on:
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
John…
If you have access, what are the other newspapers and tv news reports internationally saying about Hasan? Does Europe, Canada or Australia have a different take on the situation. I’d be curious to know.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
I’ll do a post on what I can find. Most of the reporting is exactly that: facts and figures. It’ll take me some time to find and read through editorials and opinion pieces, but I’ll do it.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
I appreciate that and will be looking forward to that post. Thank you.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
This is an excellent blog! I work with international students and our largest cultural group is our Saudi population. I have been looking for a resource like this for a LONG time! I look forward to fully exploring this site and following it over time. Any information you have about how to help Saudis adjust to our education system and US academic expectations would be much appreciated! Thank you for all of your good work.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
I’m pleased to be of service.
As far as helping Saudi students to adjust, I don’t know what to suggest. Constantly reminding them (as if they couldn’t see for themselves) that the rest of the world is very different from the KSA is about the only thing I could recommend, of course with the addendum that just because it isn’t the Saudi way doesn’t make it wrong/bad/sinful necessarily.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
Hasan was a man who asked to be let out of his committment. One wonders what the US Army was thinking when they refused that request. In Brooklyn NY it may not be an odd thing to see men wearing what look like Pakistani style men clothes, but to see a US soldier off duty wearing this style of dress is very unusual.
That is no justification for the killings but reasonable people would certainly think the killings might have been preventable.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
I read the full research article to which Volokh refers:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/30045097.pdf
Volokh leaves out 2 essentials:
1) the 4 characteristics are hypotheses only, on which to base further research
2) they apply to all terrorists, not just “Islamic terrorist” as they imply, and since the beginning of human activity. Menahim Began, Nelson Mandela, and others are specifically named.
I also read the full NYT article which is decent.
Ah, and then there is the Forbes article to which I reply:
Sacco and Vanzetti; and, nice way to creat a police state within the military open to the usual abuses.
Regarding the rest of the articles: what the FBI finding that there is no organized terrorist link is not good enough for you? Or, doesn’t it sell well enough?
My brief survey of the French Press in the centre L and centre R (Le Nouvel Obs, le Monde, Le Figaro, l’Agence France Presse) indicates they are going with the stress hypothesis mainly, ie that the combination of harassment and imminent deployment in wars with high civilian Muslim casualties was what made Major Hassan behave as he did. They also report the increasing numbers of suicides stateside on army base camps, and the stress of long, multiple deployments with little respite. Sounds about right to me.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
PS the Spanish press is commenting true to political affiliation:
ABC–right, franquist, militaristic–the suicide bomber hypothesis; all over it
El Pais–left, republican, socialist–the stressed hypothesis, and lists all the other Americans who go somewhere and shoot a bunch of people when they “snap”; not giving it a lot of attention
November:09:2009 - 10:07
I honestly believe that being a “real” Muslim and serving in the US armed forces at this time in life (these years) is in itself an irreconcilable mandate! Honestly I believe that and any Muslim in the army who says otherwise is only trying to fool himself. I am not saying that American Muslims in the army are bad. NO! I am just saying they must all be facing a dilemna on many levels.
I would take that as far to say that Muslim on Muslim conflict is a very tricky one no matter where in the world its in…
November:09:2009 - 10:07
Sparky, I have a relation who is an American Muslim of Moroccan-American descent. He grew up in Morocco, but came to the US as a young adult. He joined the Army and went to Iraq as in interpreter for two years. He’s now stateside and still in the Army. He seems to be doing quite well.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
I am sure there are success stories especially if the American Muslims in the armed services believe (are totally gunhoe convinced) in the American cause for actions.
I suppose it depends on their upbringing as well. This major was raised by two Palestians. I think that might make a difference amongst other factors.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
Interesting read about “Fort Hood warned of threat in ranks”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33819877/ns/us_news-washington_post
November:09:2009 - 10:07
This is the much discussed presentation on jihad by Major Hasan. NB it is well done standard academic fare:
http://www.pdfdownload.org/pdf2html/pdf2html.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatlasshrugs2000.typepad.com%2FMAJHasanSlides.pdf&images=yes
NB the Recommendation that concludes the presentation: “Department of Defense should allow Muslim Soldiers the option of being released as “Conscientious objectors” to increase troop morale and decrease adverse incidents”.
Amen/Ameen
November:09:2009 - 10:07
Thanks for linking the powerpoint. I read through it quickly and obviously there are misplaced (outplaced) slides which make it obvious. It is obvious that this is not purely an educational or a proposal presentation but rather has elements of hardcore dawa which is bizarre at a place of employment.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
Sparky–thanks for your comment. I went through the slides carefully again (3rd time at least) and just see a standard and rather well done academic presentation. He is giving the religious background necessary to accomplish what he announced in the title, and draw his conclusions.
Lookslike you had I will disagree (agreeably as usual) on this one.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
I think that without hearing what he actually said, there’s no way to know what he meant by those slides. I can take any of them and make them threatening or benevolent, or certainly ambiguous. Those are just bullet points, not a lecture.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
John–I would agree except that the title slide and the Recommendation one are fairly non-debatable. He did use the ones in the middle to argue that Muslim Americans in the military should be allowed conscientious objector status. In the wake of what happened, at least in part by not allowing it to him as one honourable option over deployement to Afghanistan, it seems like a good idea to me.
Did German and Italian Americans fight in the European theatre in WWII? Aoparently not. However, if you have more info than I do on that, I would be happy to learn more. My Italian Canadian older uncles served but in Canada, eg. RCAF patrolling the Canadian Atlantic for U-boats.
Re: Conscientious Objector Status in the US currently (form wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscientious_objector
“In the United States, there are two main criteria for classification as a conscientious objector. First, the objector must be opposed to war in any form, Gillette v. United States, 401 U.S. 437. Second, the objection must be sincere, Witmer v. United States, 348 U.S. 375. That he must show that this opposition is based upon religious training and belief was no longer a criterion after cases broadened it to include non-religious moral belief, United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 and Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333. COs willing to perform non-combatant military functions are classed 1-A-O by the U.S.; those unwilling to serve at all are 1-O.”
So there is precedence, and also in the UN Human Rights Code and in Nuremberg Principle IV.
This also explains some of the emphasis on religion in Major Hasan’s presentation.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
German- and Italian-Americans did fight in Europe during WWII. The exception was with Japanese-American soldiers. They were permitted to fight only in Europe, not Asia, as it was feared that ‘blood’ would be thicker than citizenship. This, of course, was at a time when Japanese-Americans were removed from their homes on the West Coast and moved to internment camps on the interior. Racism? Absolutely.
The experience of German-Americans was less salubrious during WWI. Then, many German-Americans found it useful to Anglicize their names to avoid problems.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
Oby, I checked Dutch and German newspapers for you, they mention the shooting, the number of people injured or dead, that Hasan was very troubled about being send to Iraq, a muslim country.
A German newspaper mentions that Hasan wrote about 10 to 20 mails to the radical Imam in Yemen: Anwar al Awlaki.
They mention that the mails were examined, and were considered quite innocent so Maj. Hasan was not considered a danger.
They also mention Aulaqi’s comment on his own website.
And then some speculations as why the major was so unhappy and what drove him to the killingspree.
On the whole the German newspapers are more in-depth as the Dutch ones. As usual.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
John–thanks for the added information. At least in Canada Italians who arrived after 1922 and anyone who was a member of an Italian social club, as well as known fascist supporters were under close surveillance throughout WWII, and had to report in monthly to the RCMP, or weekly if there was more “cause” for concern. There were paid informants in the community, like the barber. Some were arrested and a small minority held in custody for the duration. They also had a curfew. I do know some German Canadians were detained as well but know less about that.
Towns with names like Berlin changed them, probably during WWI. German Canadians also anglicized their names–as did the “Windsors” for that matter.
Alas, Canada also dispossessed the Japanese Canadians and put them in prison camps. At the end of the war they were generally displaced throughout the country and began again from 0.
However, Quakers are well known conscientious objectors, as were the Doukhobors who are known for their public nude parading as a form of passive resistance, including to conscription.
I am surprised that Major Hasan was not allowed to invoke conscientious objector status, at least to stay in service in the US. In hindsight it seems a much more useful solution all round.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
In the US, certain German and Italian groups were under surveillance and some were shut down as security risks. Some Germans, Italians, and others were also arrested. German military infiltrators found in the US were summarily executed. For the more assimilated ethnic individuals, though, there wasn’t a great deal of trouble. Most of the problematically named town in the US had changed those names during WWI, so there wasn’t a lot to be done. There are still US cities named Berlin, Hanover, Dresden, etc., though. Not everyone went jingoistically crazy.
November:09:2009 - 10:07
“jingoistically crazy” is a great expression. The former Berlin, Ontario is now Waterloo–hmmm.
Some of the Italians were true fascisti, including a very prominent media personality in Montreal, who didn’t bother hiding it. Italian and German claims for reparations like those made to the Japanese have fallen on unsympathetic ears, mostly because they were reasonably treated officially during the war.
I have family who were required to report in weekly because they were on a social club list whose head was a fascist supporter. Their descendants are ashamed to this day, even knowing they were innocent of wrongdoing.
There was a documentary on the Italian Canadians in WWII done about 10 years ago, a professor who has written a history, and an MP who wants her father’s reputation restored and reparations made. To which my older relatives say, “The ones who were taken were guilty and they didn’t round up all the ones they should have”. The rest of the Canadian Italian community seems to feel the same way, hence little chance of blowing up any perceived slight into a massive ethnic grievance.
The Japanese did deserve reparations, but the Chinese who came voluntarily and paid the head tax don’t fall into the same category, although they are agitating too, or were until the economy took a nose dive.