I think state of mind and intent will be the big issues. How those are defined will be determined by what jurisdiction he is tried in, assuming he emerges from his coma.
Printable View
Don't ever mess with girls from Carolina with guns. You'll lose. Hopefully, she'll recover from her wounds soon. My mom told me that Hoggard High School is recognizing her tonight at the varsity football game.
Officer who shot suspect is a firearms expert
Quote:
The police officer who brought down a gunman after he went on a shooting rampage at the Fort Hood Army base was on the way to have her car repaired when she heard a report over a police radio that someone was shooting people in a center where soldiers are processed before they are deployed abroad, authorities said on Friday.
As she pulled up to the center, the officer, Kimberly Munley, spotted the gunman, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, brandishing a pistol and chasing a wounded soldier outside the building, said Chuck Medley, the director of emergency services at the base.
Sergeant Munley bolted from her car and shot at Major Hasan. He turned toward her and began to fire. She ran toward him, continuing to fire, and both she and the gunmen went down with several bullet wounds, Mr. Medley said...
Sergeant Munley comes from North Carolina, where her father owns a hardware store in Carolina Beach and is a former mayor. She attended Hoggard County High School.
Just caught the tail end of a tv report and Col. Jack Jacobs was talking about how the number of wounds and bullets don't seem to add up? He then remarked some injuries may have been due to friendly fire? Anybody else heard anything like this?
I heard the term "friendly fire" used on the radio. I think it was referring to the possibility that the police officer's hail of bullets could have struck individuals other than the shooter. Unfortunate, if true, but excusable.
if he wanted out of the Army, was simply to refuse the deployment order; at which point he would be charged under the UCMJ for refusal of a lawful order and the process would have gone from there - probably ending up in some sort of compromise plea bargain[*]. In any event, no killings.
No, much more than that was involved here. You don't take down the equivalent of 1-1/2 platoons without very strong convictions about your "right" to do so. In the abstract, that "right" could be irrational or rational. In the fact, it was either one or the other.
Perhaps, we have a problem with the concept that a native-born American (a field grade officer at that) can rationally reject loyalty to the US for what that person considers a higher loyalty ? So, the impetus to find the "real underlying motive", with MAJ Hasan using religion as an external justification as cover for that "motive" ?
In listening to that argument, I think of the SovComs finding that executions and gulagings were not the best way to handle dissidents. They eventually felt that mental hospitals were the better way - given the wonders of the Soviet system, anyone rejecting those wonders had to be insane. That in the end did not change the reality that their dissidents were not nutjobs.
We have had much higher ranking traitors than MAJ Hasan - e.g., Alger Hiss in the US; Kim Philby in the UK. Between them, they killed more people (albeit indirectly) than did MAJ Hasan.
Maybe the CID and FBI investigations will prove that he was a nutjob. If so, then we will be looking at the UCMJ provisions governing mental capacity. BTW: UCMJ has exclusive jurisdiction.
Let's see where the facts lead us.
And, another BTW: no legal justification should exist for the murders - except for classic legal insanity (e.g., he thought he was shooting Martian invaders).
---------------------------
[*] This exact situation came up at K.I. Sawyer during the Vietnam War - refusal by an INCONUS officer to deploy to Vietnam.
Caption: A first responder to a lone gunman's attack at Fort Hood Nov. 5 renders honors at retreat after aiding his fellow soldiers. U.S. Army photo.
Maybe a lot more to this. I just watched Anderson Cooper do a telephone interview with a Sgt. Todd of the Ft. Hood PD who also responded with Sgt. Munley, he also stated he engaged the suspect with his service weapon and saw the suspect go down and then advanced to the suspect and made sure he was no longer a threat. Who's bullets from who's weapon actually hit the suspect is still to be determined.
Also saw a press conference at FT. Hood where an Army Colonel reported that the suspect fired over 100 rounds.
Secret Service Manual for Threat Assessment Investigations read and you will see a lot of similarities to the Ft. Hood Shooting. To me it is the bible and during my LE career I had cause to interact with some of the folks that wrote it and they are grade A just like the material. SWC own Randy Borum was/is one of them. Randy where you at man?
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/170612.pdf
but, a lawyer can advise his client not only of the legal option (here obey the order), but also the maximum consequences, the minimum consequences and the probable consequences of not taking the legal option. It's up to the client to make his choice - call me (the lawyer) after you make your decision.Quote:
from Schmedlap
I don't think that a lawyer can advise his client to deliberately break the law.
I have no idea of who represented MAJ Hasan and am not inclined to find out by calling some of my "lawyer buddies" or anyone else. That lawyer is not likely to say what he did or did not advise his client.
Going to the guts of the matter, a claim of CO status could also have been made based on his religious belief that non-Muslim forces should not place a foot down in Muslim lands - lots of Sharia authority for that. And, that would be a good time to advise the client of the consequences of refusing the order if the CO defense failed.
Guys, MAJ Hasan's classmate on Anderson Cooper (CNN 360, a few hours ago) told of Hasan's powerpoint presentations about Islamic doctrine, etc., in classes having nothing to do with Islam. I'm curious whether they found the AQ Reader among his possessions. Anyway, this guy's extreme Salafist views were not something recent but go back to Walter Reed classes. I expect that like statements are going to multiply as more and more people take their 15 minutes at the mic.
My 2 cents based on what is available right now, which isn't much. Something to consider, in my, admittedly anecdotal, experience a good many of those who go into the mental health profession do so because they have, or think that they have some type of problem which they think that they will learn how to fix. An anesthesiologist that I worked with once told me that the two medical specialties with the highest rates of drug abuse were anesthesia and psychiatry. All the reports about him seem to lend some credence to this. He had few friends and felt as if he "didn't fit in." All of the reports about him seem to point to him being very socially awkward and rather cold. None of this proves anything but I am leaning toward Omareli's theory. The more I hear about this guy, the more he sounds like McVeigh. McVeigh was not turned into a ticking time bomb by the ideology he encountered, rather he was already a ticking time bomb in search of an ideology.
On another note, I am really starting to dislike the less than subtle undertones of the reporting of this case. The USA Today, for instance, mentioned several times how many soldiers at Fort Hood had served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan even though that has absolutely nothing to do with Hasan, who never even served one tour. On NPR a guest host who was filling in for Diane Riehm asked some expert that she was interviewing if he thought that this would effect President Obama's decision on how many troops to send to Afghanistan, because clearly our soldiers are way overstressed, again, even though Hasan had never deployed. All this kind of rhetoric lends undeserved credence to the idea that some have that every soldier is a ticking time bomb. It never ceases to amaze me how many people already believe that every servicemember who has been to Iraq or Afghanistan is emotionally destroyed. This is not helping.
SFC W
but here are Selected Works of Randy Borum.
From Preventing Targeted Violence Against Judicial Officials and Courts:
Much fuller explanation in article. And some key observations:Quote:
Assassination myths and ECSP findings
There are three beliefs about assassination that have been widely held and perpetuated in the popular culture: (1) there is a profile of “the assassin,” (2) assassinations are the result of mental illness or derangement, and (3) those who make threats pose the greatest risk. These beliefs, however, were largely unsupported by data from the ECSP and do not withstand critical thinking about assassination behaviors. Because these beliefs are untrue, they are now known to be myths.
More in the article.Quote:
Key observations on assassinations and attacks
A number of key observations about assassins and their behaviors have emerged from the ECSP. The first is that targeted violence is the end result of an understandable, and often discernible, process of thinking and behavior. Assassinations, attacks, and near-attacks, almost without exception, were neither impulsive nor spontaneous acts. The notion of attacking a public official or public figure did not leap into the mind of a person standing, for example, at a political rally attended by the president. Assassins were not impelled into immediate violent action by sudden new thoughts that popped into their heads. Rather, ideas of assassination developed over weeks and months, even years. For some would-be attackers, such thinking organizes their lives, providing a sense of meaning and purpose or an ending point when they believe their emotional pain will cease. For others, thinking about assassination is compartmentalized.
Some potential assassins engage in ongoing internal discussions about their attacks while maintaining outward appearances of normality and regularity. In every case, however, assassination was the end result of an understandable process involving the attacker’s pattern of thoughts, decisions, behaviors, and actions that preceded the attack (Fein and Vossekuil 1998, 1999).
jmm99, that is right a lot of what this guy did happened in my own situation when I was ambushed at my house. The guy had started giving away his personal belongings and moving out some of his furniture just like Nasan a lot of other behvioral indicators are present to. In my case he had a shotgun, a .44 magnum, and a colt .380 mustang and he just opened up on me while I was walking to my front door of my house with my wife. I posted an article about it from a Police Magazine a few years back, it is on SWC somewhere I guess. All this happened after a 6 month stalking episode so a lot of what happend at Ft. Hood is pretty close to how these incidents happen. The Pathway to murder is the pathway to murder. As awful as it is there just isn't really that much mystery to them IMO.
You remind me of the dialogue from "the usual suspects" where Verbal Kent says "to a policeman, things are not that complicated..." or words to that effect.
The immediate outbreak of Oprah style mumbojumbo on every network (including FOX where one cannot think it is motivated by fear of Islamophobia) shows that this goes beyond political correctness ...This is a culture wide phenomenon and its decadent and disturbing.
EVERY event seems to be followed by instant groupthink about "stress" and the emotional toll of tours of duty without even the most cursory attempt at some kind of logical connection. As an immigrant who supposedly moved here by choice, this is one of the things that sets my teeth on edge....is this terminal decline? I certainly hope not. But its shockingly common and almost automatic.
The LE and lawyers analysis from Schmedlap, Slap, JMM, and others is quickly overcoming my social scientist background. Words mean things and motive seems the appropriate term to capture perceived grievances, disgruntled emotions, and ideology as I'm considering this case and suicide bombers in general.
I had a sociologist brief a provactive lecture that the 21st century is going to be the century of the empowered individual. Not really anything new (John Brown comes to mind), but with the advances in technology in media, he suggested that we will see a rise in aggravated sensational murders in a twisted way to make a statement or influence policy.
I would suggest that we minimize this dude as a traitor and murderer. If we overeact and tighten security measures on bases, start broadcasting that soldiers are victims, or change policy in A'stan/Iraq, then he wins.
The best thing we can do is mourn the victims, praise the first responders as heroes, and get back to our normal lives.
Mike
Omarali,
I have been considering your comments over the last several days, and I can only think of the damage that Major has done for American Muslims and Islamophobia in general. Last night, clips of radical Islamists in NYC were shown over and over praising this idiot.
My suggestion to Islamic leaders would be to have an IO message clearly stating to it's followers what a selfish and unIslamic act that major did.
I certainly hope that his actions are minimized. I heard an articulate Army Major (who happened to be Muslim) on NPR yesterday rightly state that Islam had been in America since we first introduced slavery and Muslims had been fighting in the Army ever since the Revolutionary War.
Thank You, I take that as a compliment, because things are not that complicated. If you remember the end of the movie where they go through the whole process and discussion of Kaiser Soze (Kevin Spacey) he used a lot of lies and mumbo jumbo to cover up the fact that he was just a plain old criminal. A little smarter than most but still just a criminal.
Major Nasan hijacked a religion to justify his criminal action, just like David Karesh did in Waco Texas but that was Christianity not Islam, nothing but a vehicle of justification for a criminal act.
Mike: I hesitated to comment in the forum because I'm not sure what words are really best.
I have a few questions.
1. What is the correct leadership response? Isn't it possible that the Soldiers who were in the room and were shot at might need or want some time or help to heal emotionally before deploying to Iraq, or just Soldiering on?
2. How will the Army investigate itself about the career track of the shooter? Was the investment of tax dollars in his training and education worth the risk of keeping him in if there were any signs of trouble?
I grieve what's happened at Hood. It's obviously shocked a lot of people that a brother could kill his own. To be honest, I went through the grieving stages a while ago when these mass shootings started, especially at places like schools where classmates can kill people they sit side by side with on a daily basis. The response is usually more security, when I believe it's about individuals listening and paying more attention to their gut instincts. How can that be taught so people aren't just filed through the system if there are red flags?
One thing that has struck me as a civilian with no prior military experience is the assumption from military personnel, especially if they've lived most of their lives on Army posts, that civilians aren't used to being shot at or that we're so different we don't know how to be empathetic about their combat experience, for those in the military who have combat experience.
not necessarily "minimize" - and definitely do not "maximize".
Mike, you gave the example of an Army O-4 (a Muslim officer).
Last nite, I listened to a Navy (ret.) O-4 (also a Muslim officer), who has formed an organization aimed at separation of Mosque and State (as he put it). More broadly, he sees American values not only in accord with Islamic values, but as providing the best way for Muslims to practice their religiion freely.
And, we have another Navy O-4 (a Muslim officer), Youssef Aboul-Enein, who co-authored Islamic Rulings on Warfare, which you will find discussed in this post.
Tim McVeigh and MAJ Hasan are good comparatives (credit: Uboat509). Whether the man hijacked the ideology or whether the ideology hijacked the man becomes a chicken-egg question. At some point, the two began working together and, in those two individuals, resulted in lethal mixes. Can lethal mixes be predicted and prevented ? I doubt it. Thousands of people read the Turner Diaries. Very few acted them out and none went so far as Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols.
Michelle,
First, you should grieve. It's healthy. This was a tragedy, and it's sad. My heart broke when I heard about it. For many of us, it is frustrating b/c we can't do anything (lack of control).
Second, take my responses with a grain of salt. It's just the way my brain works. For the moment, with this specific case, JMM, Schmedlap, and Slap are more appropriate. I tend to analyze and consider many things at once (ie suicide bombers and this dude). There will be many times that I have to say I was wrong:confused:.
Most definitely yes, and from what I understand, we have already sent crisis response teams to Fort Hood. A combination of medical assistance, collective community grievance, and soldiering on is highly effective. For example, look at the differences in the gov'ts response to the Oklahoma City bombing and Hurricane Katrina. Over time, the resiliance of the people of OK can be perceived as a direct correlation to the initial response. It's the same response we take with combat stress teams in Iraq/A'stan. At one point, I observed a company collectively quit and refuse mission after they suffered severe casualties to include the company commander. After the crisis teams were brought in, and the unit was giving time to grieve, they were able to continue mission.
If I was king, I'd be closely examining his chain-of command. There would probably be a lot of people fired.
and something that i'm working on towards a paper on martyrdom. As uncomfortable as this stuff is, Wilf and the Good Book constantly remind us that there is nothing new under the sun.
Remember me, I pray thee, and strengthen me. I pray thee, only this once, O God, that I may be at once avenged of my enemies for my two eyes. Let me die with the infidels!
The military officer planned his final attack. During the last days, he took careful consideration and meticulous care in preparation for his decisive action. He would free his people. He was extremely bright, calculating, and highly successful. To some, he was considered awkward and aloof. He was deeply thoughtful, spiritual, and religious, and he knew that God had left him at times in his life as he struggled with women, power, and life. In those final days, he abstained from impurities, cleansed himself, and prayed for discretion and discernment. His motive was pure. The grievances of his people from the infidels was unbearable. His anger, frustration, disenchantment demanded action. God demanded revenge. That morning, he struck killing his enemies and sacrificing his own life for the greater good.
In the Jewish and Christian faith, his name is Samson, and he is celebrated as an epic hero of Herculian proportions. To the Philistines, he was a terrorist. It has nothing to do with religion, ideology, or the so called post-modern world.
Time for some music. Going way back to Sam Cooke and The Souls Stirrers-If I Could Just Touch The Hem Of His Garment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFnF1yn6jfI
Army Releases List of Fort Hood Shooting Fatalities
One comment is that many of the victims were mental health care specialists. As the LE officials are studying targeting, it will be interesting to figure out if they determine the attack to be a target of opportunity, high-payoff target, or targeted assassinations.
I'm not a LE guy, but we tried to conduct the same types of investigations in Iraq in order to try to understand the enemies decision making process in order to counter these threats in the future.
Mike
Mike, it is really the same thing you did in Iraq LE just uses different words.
Gimme a minute to find something.
Short paper on Threat Assessment, preferably you do BEFORE the attack in order to prevent it and targeting is a big consideration, Taget shifting is very strong attack related behavior. That is why my Ring 5 has primary and secondary targets.
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/threat.pdf
http://www.bbcamerica.com/content/115/index.jsp
This used to be my favorite. Wire In The Blood on BBC America but it must have been cancelled:(
davidbfpo, is this show still on the air in the UK?
When I first started arguing about these things on the internet I used to insist that no one has hijacked Islam or misused Islam. Islam (and Christianity and Judaism and whatever) are not persons or single objects, they are social and historical phenomenons which have evolved and developed over time and by now there are as many Islams and Christianities as there are Muslims and Christians. To say its been "hijacked" is to assume that there is a "correct" version which Mr. X is misusing. But there is no reference version. There are only versions. And so on.
Now, I dont take that line as much, not because I no longer believe in it but because I can see that it is itself an expression of a certain secular philosophical viewpoint that everyone simply does not share. I still regard it as "correct" but I am less dogmatic about it in debate. I think its better to focus on fair-mindedness. I see Christians whose firmly held beliefs would place them far away from my worldview, yet who are so scrupulously fair-minded I am awed. I want to try to be fair and want others to be the same and I think things can be worked out. Or not. In which case, "the law will takes its course"..not just the law on a small scale, but law as in "natural law".
Finally, a couple of quotes:
Everything is placed in pledge, and a net is spread over all the living. The store is open, the storekeeper extends credit, the account-book lies open, the hand writes, and all who wish to borrow may come and borrow. The collection-officers make their rounds every day and exact payment from man, with his knowledge and without his knowledge. Their case is well founded, the judgement is a judgement of truth, and ultimately, all is prepared for the feast. (Rabbi Akiva)
But a more pessimistic take:
Could man be drunk for ever
With liquor, love, or fights,
Lief should I rouse at morning
And lief lie down at nights.
But men at whiles are sober
And think by fits and starts,
And if they think, they fasten
Their hands upon their hearts (Housman)
Since most Americans are reportedly conservative in their views, how did we as a people let these unethical wackos take over our media? If the overwhelming market share is truly conservative and it is a business driven by profit, then it seems to me that we could unite (maybe on twitter) to boycott stations and/or shows that continuously misrepresent the truth. Opposing ideas are encouraged, but what was mentioned above isn't an opposing idea, it is completely misleading. We need a national movement to bring common sense and honesty back to the media.Quote:
On another note, I am really starting to dislike the less than subtle undertones of the reporting of this case. The USA Today, for instance, mentioned several times how many soldiers at Fort Hood had served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan even though that has absolutely nothing to do with Hasan, who never even served one tour. On NPR a guest host who was filling in for Diane Riehm asked some expert that she was interviewing if he thought that this would effect President Obama's decision on how many troops to send to Afghanistan, because clearly our soldiers are way overstressed, again, even though Hasan had never deployed. All this kind of rhetoric lends undeserved credence to the idea that some have that every soldier is a ticking time bomb. It never ceases to amaze me how many people already believe that every servicemember who has been to Iraq or Afghanistan is emotionally destroyed.
Omarali,
Every religion has its share of radicals that hijack or distort the message for their own personal plight (anger, pride, greed, whatever). Where I'm from, my people used to burn crosses and lynch men and women based on race. Today, extreme radicals attack abortion clinics.
I heard a good sermon today about Stephen's frustration with "friendly fire." The analysis concluded,
Bottom line is one of the wonderful things about our country is religious freedom, and we cannot let hate, fear-mongering, or radicals take that away.Quote:
Therefore he broke off, and by the Spirit of wisdom, courage, and power, sharply rebuked his persecutors. When plain arguments and truths provoke the opposers of the gospel, they should be shown their guilt and danger. They, like their fathers, were stubborn and wilful. There is that in our sinful hearts, which always resists the Holy Ghost, a flesh that lusts against the Spirit, and wars against his motions; but in the hearts of God's elect, when the fulness of time comes, this resistance is overcome. The gospel was offered now, not by angels, but from the Holy Ghost; yet they did not embrace it, for they were resolved not to comply with God, either in his law or in his gospel. Their guilt stung them to the heart, and they sought relief in murdering their reprover, instead of sorrow and supplication for mercy.
Mike
Bill, would you regard FOX as a generally honest network, brimming with common sense?
In my opinion, the rot runs deeper than conservative or liberal. I dont want to start an endless argument, but I can think of many areas where Rush Limbaugh is not an honest reporter and shamelessly spins the news to suit a particular agenda...and I do think his agenda is NOT Christian or conservative, at least not in the sense in which either Christianity or conservatism have been understood by many of their most fervent and sincere adherents (of course, my own point about there being no reference version, only versions, comes in the way of my making too much about how this or that person is not "really Christian"..).
I find it funny that you seem to correlate political conservatism with ethical behavior or journalism.Quote:
Since most Americans are reportedly conservative in their views, how did we as a people let these unethical wackos take over our media? If the overwhelming market share is truly conservative and it is a business driven by profit, then it seems to me that we could unite (maybe on twitter) to boycott stations and/or shows that continuously misrepresent the truth. Opposing ideas are encouraged, but what was mentioned above isn't an opposing idea, it is completely misleading. We need a national movement to bring common sense and honesty back to the media.
Also the idea that PTSD had nothing to do with this shooting incident is likely true, it does not appear to be the same with this case, which oddly has not been commented on at all in the media in the wake of the recent shooting.
I do not agree poor marksmanship is excusable.
There is a widely accepted practice of limited and sporadic live-fire and situational training for law enforcement.
To volunteer for a profession where it is known there is a high probability of returning fire in close proximity to civilians brings with it the obligation (both of the department and of the officers) to train and prepare for it.
Fair comments, actually I dislike Fox News spin as much as I dislike the spin on MSNBC and CBS. Instead of debating left and right wing politics I need to do a better job at framing my actual argument.Quote:
Bill, would you regard FOX as a generally honest network, brimming with common sense?
In my opinion, the rot runs deeper than conservative or liberal.
Based on the way I wrote that post I guess you wouldn't have much choice but to make that correlation, but that wasn't my intent. My point is why don't see public backlash against bad reporting (liberal or conservative?). In this case recent polls indicate that most Americans are conservative (what does that really mean?), so why do leftist shows tend to garner most of the market? Seems to be a disconnect there.Quote:
I find it funny that you seem to correlate political conservatism with ethical behavior or journalism
In Iran and Indonesia we have seen recent social movements against the government/media on twitter and facebook. Social movements that in the U.S. could allow the market to mandate more honest reporting, undo excessive political correctness laws (such as tossing a kid out of school because he brings a pocket knife to school), pushing books into our grade schools that promote certain types of behavior, etc. The majority react in shock to this type of Nazi like thought control, but they don't organize to counter it.
Because the target audience for those programs is largely composed of people who are willfully ignorant or dishonest. Lots of left-leaning individuals are happy to have a blatantly biased left-leaning "news" source. Lots of right-leaning individuals are happy to have a blatantly biased right-leaning "news" source. Most of the people who don't have strong left or right views just watch their local news to stay abreast of weather, local construction, sports scores, and other non-alarmist issues.
There was a great quote in a recent Wall Street Journal opinion piece criticizing Glenn Beck (but it is applicable to all jerk-offs on the left and right, on radio and cable news, on network news and in the pages of various rags)...
Quote:
These are postulates that it is only possible to believe after you have utterly closed yourself off to conventional ways of knowing, after you have decided that the reporting and analysis and scholarship on these subjects are not worth reading, and that you will choose ideological fairy tales over reality...
... a new kind of ignorance, a coming high-tech dark age in which people can choose to blow off professional standards of inquiry; in which they can wall themselves off with cable TV and friendly Web sites, dismiss what displeases as ... bias...
This is Sgt Todd's account (officer with Sgt Munley) of the incident:
http://www.policeone.com/active-shoo...-Hood-shooter/
For the record:
Rush Limbaugh is not a part of Fox News. (Rush's agenda is Rush.)
Please define really Christian.
Whatever they are talking about on TV/Radio, they are talking about money.
The Bible speaks to money more than any other topic.
Whatever turns out to be Hasan's core motivation, there should zero tolerance for those who "sleep in the bunk house, but won't ride for the brand."
No backlash?
see
Freerepublic
Lucianne
From the Right
Democrat Underground
Daily Kos
From the Left
You'll find plenty of backlash.
Also the Blogasphere (both left center and right.
I would also point out there's a reason why subscription rates, advertising revenues for all major newspapers (with the exception of the WSJ) are falling like a rock.
People are voting with their feet
BillQuote:
Since most Americans are reportedly conservative in their views, how did we as a people let these unethical wackos take over our media?
Here's some interesting articles sent from a group that conducts micro-conflict resolution with Jews and Palestinians that address your questions. This research is important for small wars as well. It shows that the people rising up is not solely based on the perception of security.
Quote:
Why do good people do nothing, in the presence of that which breaks their hearts, violates their souls, threatens the planet and our children's children? And why do some people step forward to dazzle us with awesome vision and heroism? Weakness in numbers
DIFFUSION OF RESPONSIBILITY
October 29, 2009, National Public Radio hosted Harvard's Professor Mahzarin Banaji to explain why good people have bystander behavior -- passively observing unspeakable violence and other tragedies.
What Bystanders Do When They Witness Violence
STORY
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ryId=114287592
AUDIO
http://www.npr.org/templates/player/...92&m=114287588
DIFFUSION OF RESPONSIBILITY occurs in larger groups of people when responsibility is not explicitly assigned. With more people present -- caught in group-think -- one is less likely to identify that there is a problem or feel a sense of responsibility to respond. With more people in a group, the individual becomes less responsiblle. Women and men are equally passive or brave in responding to emergencies, showed researchers Latane and Darley.
Their study revealed a 75% chance one observer would respond to a crisis dropping to a 10% likelihood of intervening with six onlookers gathered around.
Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility B. Latane and J.M Darley
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377–383. 1968.
http://www.wadsworth.com/psychology_...s/ps/ps19.html
ILLUSION OF COURAGE
People falsely imagine that others have more courage and are less vulnerable to social embarrassment. This ILLUSION OF COURAGE in others strongly diminishes individual social responsibility. Also related fear of embarrassment is a potent determinant of in non-intervention in emergency situations. Sadly, inaction is often perceived as the safer personal choice of bystanders to tragedy.
THE ILLUSION OF COURAGE IN SOCIAL PREDICTIONS:
Underestimating the impact of fear of embarrassment on other people
Leaf Van Boven a,¤, George Loewenstein b, David Dunning c
Published in Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 96 (2005) 130–141
http://sds.hss.cmu.edu/media/pdfs/lo...nOfCourage.pdf
We are learning about our human fears and courage.
1. In large groups, individuals are less likely to feel responsible.
2. Smaller groups encourage individual participation and creative initiative.
3. People who are bystanders project onto others exaggerated courage and less fear of social embarrassment.
Great courage is required for a person to step forward from the group -- beyond embarrassment and old, collective thinking. Beneath embarrassment is terrifying fear of exclusion -- social or even physical death. This begins to explain why good people do nothing, and why people find it easier to disengage, blame, and kill -- including risking their physical lives in battle -- than to step out of their clan to engage an adversary face to face. Let us each overcome the "diffusion of responsibility."
I think I tried to hint that based on my own previous comments, I couldnt really take this "really Christian or not" argument too far.
True, Rush is not on Fox. I should have picked on O'Riley or (god forbid) Glenn Beck.
I agree one thousand percent with your last comment. All murders are murders, but this particular outrage is ESPECIALLY outrageous because the bastard put on a uniform, served with these people and then turned around and killed them in cold blood. That is just heinous, dishonorable, totally f-ed up and utterly unexcusable. I am generally not in favor of the death penalty, but in this case, that would be the minimum punishment.
In 1998, MAJ Hasan's dad died with funeral services held at the funeral home. In May 2001, his mother died with funeral services held at the Dar Al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church. See this post for the parents' obits. Nothing much in this, in and of itself - the family had found a mosque.
What is of more potential import is that Anwar al-Awlaki became the imam of that mosque in Jan 2001. He was a very young Yemeni immigrant to the US and is well educated in secular studies as well as Islamic studies. He holds a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Colorado State University, an M.A. in Education Leadership from San Diego State University and was working on a Doctorate degree in Human Resource Development at George Washington University. During his tenure as imam, two of the 9/11 conspirators were members of the congregation; and he was well acquainted with one of them in both San Diego and Virginia. After 9/11, he was investigated by the FBI, but no charges re: 9/11 or any other jihadist activities were brought against him. He then departed for Yemen, where he now lives.
Today, he issued a tribute to MAJ Hasan, Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing, in which he explains at length why MAJ Hasan should have done exactly what he did. Imam al-Awlaki has written extensively about jihad and has summarized his views in a pamphlet, 44 Ways to Support Jihad.
As I've said, we must keep this event in perspective - and recognize that we are dealing with an American Muslim minority. That fact, al-Awlaki was forced to admit in these two paragraphs (JMM emphasis added):
and so it goes in the media from our enemies' side of the ledger.Quote:
The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former. The Muslim organizations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal’s operation.
The fact that fighting against the US army is an Islamic duty today cannot be disputed. No scholar with a grain of Islamic knowledge can defy the clear cut proofs that Muslims today have the right -rather the duty- to fight against American tyranny. Nidal has killed soldiers who were about to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in order to kill Muslims. The American Muslims who condemned his actions have committed treason against the Muslim Ummah and have fallen into hypocrisy.
FRom:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6907136.ece
I prefer the following viewpoint:Quote:
Asked his views on the killings at Fort Hood, he said: “Killing military members is all right. If you are killing people who are fighting against Muslims then that’s okay.”
Mr Zeeshan Hashmi said most Muslims would react to the atrocity with horror, but also with concern that it would be used to sow division.Quote:
If an individual walks into a facility where people are unarmed and opens fire indiscriminately, that’s an act of terrorism.
Mr Hashmi is the brother of the Jabron Hashmi, from Birmingham, who was the first UK Muslim soldier to be killed in Afghanistan.Quote:
“People will feel they’ve got to justify their existence all over again and that’s not fair. Remember Columbine? That was terrible too, but it didn’t make us distrust all schoolchildren, did it?”
davidbfpo
Three years on from 9/11, almost half of Americans favored curtailing American Muslim civil liberties to some extent. Doesn't tell us much about undecideds on this matter, but as a matter of political practicality Hasan could hardly do much more damage than Islamic jihadists have already done.
Problem is there is no leadership per se, particularly in the foreign-born Muslim community, and what national organizations there are have tainted reputations stemming from ties between their staffs, affiliates and terrorist organizations. Moreover, Islam world-wide today has a heavy investment in a number of matters of a political nature; analogous to the pro-life movement but tarnished by activists with a far worse capability and reputation for malevolent violence. I fear that we've seen the politics here crystallize to the point where we've a zero-sum game between the West and the landscape of Muslim aspiration.Quote:
My suggestion to Islamic leaders would be to have an IO message clearly stating to it's followers what a selfish and unIslamic act that major did.
Excellent point, and it leads into the on-going debate between centralized/de-centralized efforts in COIN. Studying through gangs and insurgencies, even when the national level efforts are failing, local leaders can influence their people on the village level. In this case, local imams or respected leaders in the community must emphasize to population that these actions are murder and illegal.
I don't think we're there yet (at least I hope not). We haven't seen the masses protesting in the street or significant anti-Muslim violence.
The slides mentioned in today's WP article, Fort Hood suspect warned of threats within the ranks, are here - The Koranic World View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military.
Please note the last slide (p.50).
For all the Soldiers, Police, Family and Friends at Ft. Hood who weren't afraid to face the devil.
Go Rest High On That Mountain by Vince Gill
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRyKg5xMaXA&feature=fvw