Tag Archives: Terrorist

News

Fort Hood terrorist tried to prosecute his patients for war crimes

1 Comment

Story from ABCNews. (H/T Bluegrass Pundit via Blazing Cat Fur, Verum Serum)

Excerpt:

Major Nidal Malik Hasan’s military superiors repeatedly ignored or rebuffed his efforts to open criminal prosecutions of soldiers he claimed had confessed to “war crimes” during psychiatric counseling, according to investigative reports circulated among federal law enforcement officials…

Investigators believe Hasan’s frustration over the failure of the Army to pursue what he regarded as criminal acts by U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan may have helped to trigger the shootings.

“The Army may not want to admit it, and you may not hear much about it, but it was very big for him,” said one of the federal investigators on the task force collecting evidence of the crime.

His last effort to get the attention of military investigators came on Nov. 2, three days before his alleged shooting spree, according to the reports.

Colonel Anthony Febbo at Fort Hood reportedly told investigators he was twice contacted by Hasan, on Nov. 2 and a week earlier in October, about the question of whether he could legally provide information on “war crimes” he had learned in the course of psychiatric counseling he provided soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Col. Febbo told ABC News he could not comment because of the on-going investigation.

His supervisor in the Department of Psychiatry, Captain Naomi Surman, told investigators that Hasan raised similar issues with her in conversations in October, according to documents reviewed by ABC News.

Captain Surman told investigators that Hasan had formally contacted military prosecutors to report patients he was evaluating, according to people briefed on the exchange. She said Hasan signed his e-mails with “Praise Be to Allah.” Legal analysts say psychiatrists are strictly bound by the rules of patient confidentiality except in cases where they might become aware of crimes about to be committed.

Here is my previous post about political correctness and national security.

News

Has political correctness made the FBI impotent against real terrorist threats?

1 Comment

I am a huge fan of FBI, or at least I was, until I read this story from the Weekly Standard. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

On Monday, ABC News first reported that Fort Hood shooter Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had reached out to al Qaeda associates prior to his attack. There were good reasons to speculate that one of these al Qaeda figures is Anwar al Awlaki — an al Qaeda recruiter who acted as a “spiritual advisor” to two of the 9/11 hijackers. Awlaki preached at a mosque Hasan attended in 2001 and praised Hasan’s attack on his web site Monday morning.

It turns out that informed speculation was correct, according to the Associated Press and the New York Times. Beginning in December of last year, authorities found that Hasan communicated with Awlaki “10 to 20 times.” But no formal investigation was ever launched. Why?

Well, because the FBI thought that talking to an Al-Quaeda recruiter isn’t really such a big deal.

The WS article notes that the FBI investigated Awlaki TWICE:

…Awlaki and his mosques had substantive ties to three of the 9/11 hijackers and the terrorist who was responsible for coordinating their activities.

[…]The FBI investigated Awlaki again after the September 11 attacks and found there was a lot of “smoke,” but told the 9/11 Commission and the Congressional Joint Inquiry that they did not have enough evidence to detain him.

[…]Now we have a third failure. Despite the fact that Hasan had reached out to Awlaki, who had been investigated twice before because of his ties to al Qaeda, “no formal investigation” into the Hasan-Awlaki connection was ever launched.

Remember the DHS report about the threat of terrorism from conservatives? If you favored immigration law enforcement, small government, personal responsibility, responsible firearm ownership, and right to life, then the DHS report said that you were a potential terrorist. Refresh your memory here. But what does DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano do when actual terrorism occurs?

According to the Associated Press: (H/T Dinocrat via ECM)

The U.S. Homeland Security secretary says she is working to prevent a possible wave of anti-Muslim sentiment after the shootings at Fort Hood in Texas. Janet Napolitano says her agency is working with groups across the United States to try to deflect any backlash against American Muslims following Thursday’s rampage by Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a Muslim who reportedly expressed growing dismay over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The shootings left 13 people dead and 29 wounded.

Actually, if you count the unborn child that one woman who died was carrying, it’s FOURTEEN dead.

Is it any wonder that Michele Bachmann has called on Napolitano to resign?

Can Democrats be trusted to keep America safe from threats? They seem to think that actual terrorists are victims, and that conservatives are the real terrorists.

Commentary

Did post-traumatic stress disorder cause the Fort Hood murderer to snap?

Leave a comment

Well, he never actually was in combat – he’s a psychologist!

Check out this post from an American soldier who experienced PTSD himself after having most of his arm blown off by an IED. WARNING! This post contains a lot of profanity as you might expect! (I removed the curse words and substituted by favorite words instead in the excerpt below)

Excerpt:

You want to know what [beasting] PTSD is like? I’ll tell you. You have nightmares that go on for weeks. Mine would always be the same. Wherever the window was in the room in which I was sleeping I would see a bright white flash. I would wake up screaming to my wife “Get up! Get the [ROAR!] up! An IED just went off!” Sometimes I would just wake up screaming in agony as I relived the moment where my right arm was ripped from my body by an Iranian shape charge. (I may not know what childbirth feels like, but I know what it’s like to go an hour with my am ripped off without painkillers (I’m allergic to morphine).) PTSD makes you paranoid as [monstery]. “Why is that person staring at me? Are they a threat? Where is the nearest exit? Why are these people so close to me? Why is no one pulling security? What was that noise? Where is the nearest cover? I need to get out of here.” You lie wide awake in bed at night wondering if it’s safe to go to sleep or if you should get up and start pulling security.

[…]I still get nervous and hold my breath every time I drive by a piece of trash or tire debris on the shoulder or median.  I avoid guardrails and broken down cars on the side of the road.  On a couple different occasions I yelled out “tire!” to warn my wife (who was driving) of a potential IED in the road. There was nothing there (no tire, no nothing).  One late night while driving home completely exhausted on our small two lane country roads at slow speed I locked up all four tires on my car to keep from hitting a cardboard box in the middle of the road.  At that moment I would have bet the contents of my bank account it was an IED.  That’s what [toadying] PTSD is like.  At no point in time have I ever felt the desire or need to grab a weapon and go shoot someone or something up.  At no point in time have I ever grabbed a weapon and broken a law because I felt the need to protect myself.  PTSD urges you mitigate the risk of events that happened in your life.  But if you’ve never had anything traumatic happen in your life, you can’t [snarking] have PTSD.

Why do left-wingers always make excuses for the bad decisions of evil people, then rush in with social programs provided by the good people’s hard-work? What causes them to minimize personal responsibility and moral judgment? Why do they think it is virtuous to ignore and malign the victims of crime, terrorism and taxation?

If you don’t know why, be sure and watch this video with Jewish comedian Evan Sayet, who explains the whole thing. In one sense, this whole health care fiasco is nothing but an attempt by the left to equalize the health care outcomes of those who make prudent decisions with those who do not. I.e. – those who do not use drugs should pay for the drug needles of others, so that both have equal outcomes.