The Hasan Case

Stratfor:

Your analysis on The Hasan Case: Overt Clues and Tactical Challenges, (Nov. 11) is excellent and fundamental in understanding the nature of the threat facing the West and in particular America.

But what I find most puzzling as a Canadian is that the U.S. media has gone to incredible lengths to avoid characterizing Hasan’s rampage as an act of terrorism.

Your publication of the jihadist call to arms by conducting small, simple attacks was completely ignored by the media; they missed the obvious timing of the Hasan attack.

Sadly, ignoring a threat will not make it go away. In my humble opinion, if it walks like a duck, looks like as duck and quacks like a duck, then it is most probably a duck. This was a terrorist attack on American soil.

Although there will likely never again be attacks on the scale of 9/11, there will be more of these small attacks on so-called soft targets. We have seen them already — from the Bosnian Muslim teen shooting up a Utah mall to the Kosovo Albanians who planned the Fort Dix attacks. These are all acts of terror and should be investigated as such.

-Nicholas Tintor
Toronto, Ontario
Canada



Stratfor:

The U.S. Army teaches that there is a marked difference between acts of terrorism and criminal acts based on one, simple formula: motivation.

Criminal acts in every known example are committed for personal gain. Be it money, drugs, domestic violence, shoplifting or even speeding, the actors wished to acquire or accomplish something for their own benefit.

Acts of terrorism are driven by ideology and perceived maltreatment. In some, possibly rare instances, an act like that by Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood, MAY have had some personal drive in that he very well may have desired to become a “hero” and a martyr in the eyes of Islam, though again, the root cause for this would be based on religious ideology.

The fact that there is even a question as to Terrorism vs. Criminal in the eyes of the Federal Government shows that a pre-9/11 mentality still exists and the perverse sense of political value or “correctness” abounds in the halls of American governance to the point that it will only further harm our great nation.

From an intelligence perspective, this points to a future ridden with lapses and failures in America’s ability to appropriately prevent, and to a large extent, respond to willful acts of violence committed in the name of a God.

Don’t forget, until late 2001, the U.S. federal government could not even agree on a definition of “terrorism.”

-Jeffrey Saupp
Lewisville, Texas
United States



Stratfor:

I think you are letting the Army, the FBI and the Obama Administration off far, far too easy. President Obama and General Casey seem to be the only two individuals in the entire nation who are still uncertain as to this jihadist’s “motive.”

-Richard Stacy
Denver, Colorado
United States



Stratfor:

I am not buying the logic that the core issue here is whether or not the contacting of an Islamic radical was criminal or not. The lead was passed within the U.S. government’s anti-terrorism group to a Department of Defense criminal investigator who correctly or incorrectly dismissed the threat posed by the lead based on his assessment of criminal activity. The contacting of a foreign Islamic militant who openly espouses killing of Americans is, in and of itself, is a violation of U.S. security regulations with respect to individuals with security clearances. Hasan’s foreign contact should have been reported through the chain-of- command to his commander. Lt. Gen. Cone, in consultation with his G-2, Counter-Intelligence Staff Officer, Personnel Security Officer and the CID, could have immediately suspended Maj. Hasan’s security clearance subject to a local AR 15-6 investigation. Lt. Gen. Cone is responsible for force protection of assets in his command, not a DoD criminal investigator. A minimally competent investigation would have uncovered other comments and actions that would probably have resulted in adverse command action on Maj. Hasan’s security clearance and possibly led to charges being brought for conduct unbecoming an officer. As things turned out, Lt. Gen. Cone didn’t get the chance to exercise his responsibility because he was kept in the dark.

Hasan’s anti-war comments to colleagues and patients, and attempts to legitimize suicide bombers should have been brought to the attention of the chain-of-command at Bethesda and Walter Reed Army Medical Center. A security investigation should have resulted from this knowledge.

-Frank Marshall
Navarre, Florida
United States



Stratfor:

This is a very objective straightforward account of information available to the public domain. It also gives good insight into the big question, why this was able to happen.

What the American public desires most now is what is going to be done to prevent this ever happening again. We know why it happened, that is simple — we are too politically correct as a culture. We pride ourselves on diversity and not offending anyone’s beliefs to the point some people take PETA seriously when they threaten to sue U.S. Air Capt. Chelsey Sullenberger for the murder of 17 birds killed during the crash of flight 1549.

But the recent execution of the D.C. sniper proves one thing; our system does work, laboriously and with too much attention given to accused rights and not enough given to victims rights, nonetheless it does eventually often work.
I encourage Stratfor to follow this and other similar cases in the U.S. closely as well as the growing anguish the average citizen is starting to feel that our government and society’s priorities that have reached an Orwellian state.

-William Gentry
Apex, North Carolina
United States



Stratfor:

Please, you are beginning to sound like NPR or MSNBC. I know you want to maintain the perception of objectivity. But, it is not a great leap to call the Hasan attack what it most likely is; an example of a prototypical “lone wolf” jihadist terrorist attack. Your apologist explanation regarding the difficulties government agencies have in pre-empting such an attack misses the fact that the terrorist killing of 13 Americans was on an Army base perpetrated by an Army officer under observation. But he was given a pass due to a pathological institutional concern for “political correctness” for religious or ethnic sensitivity.

-William McCarthy
San Clemente, California
United States



Stratfor:

This appears to be yet another instance where political correctness outweighed the obvious need to take pre-emptive action and 13 people have paid for that “correctness” with their lives. What a shame that citizens of this country are unable to protect themselves and those around them for fear of being labeled as “incorrect.”

-Gary Thuro
Frederick, Maryland
United States



Stratfor:

This case is one more in a truckload of examples of why gun control is a total failure. These “gun free zones” do nothing but provide “wackos” like Hasan with a target-rich environment with little interference while he goes on killing innocent, unarmed people. Virginia Tech, the 9/11 airline situations, the many school massacres, the Texas restaurant massacre, all happened in areas where guns were not allowed. Americans have become so lazy, cowardly and irresponsible that they have bought into this idea that the government is there to do everything for them including personal protection. The police cannot be everywhere instantly, nor is it their job. Their job is to catch the criminals after a crime has been committed.

Many pseudo-pacifists say they do not believe in guns, but if someone is threatening them they call the police who will come with guns. WAKE UP America and get up off your lazy sissified butts and protect yourself. Work to get rid of the stupid gun free zones and let people who cherish the Second Amendment protect themselves and those around them. You might be lucky enough to be next to one of these armed citizens in a time of trouble and find them saving your life someday. If there must be some “gun free” zones, then demand that these areas are adequately protected by armed guards. Will we stop all the deaths from terrorists? Of course not, but we will certainly cut the number of deaths significantly and discourage some from even trying to commit mass murder. Just quit interfering with our Constitutional rights and we will be fine.

-James McBride
Mount Vernon, Ohio
United States



Stratfor:

It would seem that there was a mechanism in place for the FBI to do a rather thorough investigation once Hasan’s activities became known. An investigation for an interim security clearance one level above his existing level could have been initiated. Secret and Top Secret clearances require an FBI investigation that would involve interviews with friends, relatives and associates. This could have been done without raising suspicion or sullying the reputation of the individual.

-Tom Livingston
Alamosa, Colorado
United States