Army Psychiatrist kills 11 at Ft. Hood

[tulane06]

I'm not a fan of being PC and have no problem admitting that the Muslim world needs to work towarding changing the way their peers think and act. I expect any Muslim worth a damn to be ashamed and mournful of this man's actions.

But at the same time, as a medical student and someone getting ready to swear in within the month, I also feel ashamed and mournful. I just disagree with how eager people seem to be to throw him into the "crazy Muslim" category and pretend he's just another one of "them" that's against "us". He may have been a crazy Muslim, but he was also a crazy physician and a crazy soldier.

He shouted God is great. So? I would expect a Christian to wear a cross or say a prayer before he went on a rampage. It was a suicide run? I'd be amazed if most mass-killings weren't intended to be suicide runs.

In the end, his religious beliefs colored his actions and possibily contributed to furthering his mental issues via social interactions. Deep seated mental illness was the root cause of them, though. That's far different from someone who's upbringing and fundamental beliefs have caused them to attack a life-long enemy. This person didn't make it through a decade of military institutions preaching about beheading infidels.

My point is simply that he was a peer, whether we want to admit or not, and unfortunately he lost it (and probably misplaced it a long time ago). We can sit here and say he's just a crazy Muslim and isolate him from ourselves or we can admit that there is something deeply wrong with this person and ask why no action was ever taken to help a clearly mentally-ill person.

He was mentally ill, being Muslim in the military probably contributed his problems, no action was taken despite numerous warning signs, and now we've all got to face the fact that a fellow physician and service member just killed eleven people while wearing a uniform and stethoscope...

I think a lot of us would like to believe that this man was severely mentally ill or psychotic, because that would absolve him and specifically his religious beliefs of any responsibility in his act. While I don't deny he may have had some psychological problems, his documented history of fanatical religious statements point towards some sort of extremist belief system that influenced his actions. I don't think he can be considered "severely mentally ill" any more than the guys in Pakistan blowing up markets can be.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[244913]

This politically correct B.S. really pisses me off.

This forum sounds like CNN with all the equivocation, the eagerness to blame the Army for turning a peace-loving Muslim into a murderous monster. Or, even worse, falling back on the old detached clinical perspective- "he was isolated." "He was depressed."

Sounds to me like he knew exactly what he was doing, and had the energy to get off the couch, too.

For God's Sake, admit that he is an Islamic terrorist. And that Islam is not a "religion of peace" as the politicos and bureaucrats would have you believe.

That small step is a good starting point in realizing the threat militant Islam poses to Western Civilization (what is left of it).

61N

 

[Mr. Freeze]

I see/hear "crazy" muslim or muslim "wacko" way too often. Don't be so dismissive. It minimizes the dedication, motivation, and resolve it takes to be so committed to a belief system that you are willing to go to any lengths to propagate it.

+1 on calling a spade a spade. Take the blinders off.

 

[hornblower]

Most accurate commentary on the matter thus far:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCY1lsJg8zs

 

[orbitsurgMD]

This politically correct B.S. really pisses me off.

This forum sounds like CNN with all the equivocation, the eagerness to blame the Army for turning a peace-loving Muslim into a murderous monster. Or, even worse, falling back on the old detached clinical perspective- "he was isolated." "He was depressed."

Sounds to me like he knew exactly what he was doing, and had the energy to get off the couch, too.

For God's Sake, admit that he is an Islamic terrorist. And that Islam is not a "religion of peace" as the politicos and bureaucrats would have you believe.

That small step is a good starting point in realizing the threat militant Islam poses to Western Civilization (what is left of it).

61N

I think you are overdrawing the Islamic part of this. Unless there is evidence uncovered that he conspired to do this with others, as did the Mumbai shooters, for example, then the best you can say is that he was influenced by islamic extremist ideas.

The reports of him more and more suggest a typical mass-shooter. An angry, alienated, frustrated, ruminating, depressed, paranoid individual for whom his particular identity as a Muslim was a big part of why he was the way he was. The fact that he screamed "God is Great" in Arabic really doesn't change a thing.

You are making big generalizations about Islam, and incorrect ones. The vast majority of the persons living in Islamic cultures do live peacefully, and are not extremists or jihadists and do coexist peacefully with those of other faiths. The Islamic world is not represented by al Qaeda, or by radical Shiite imams and their followers or by the Taliban. Those are the fringe just as Fred Phelps, Paul Hill and David Koresh are fringe.

"Western Civilization" has far more serious things to worry about than just radical Islam, not that radical Islam is a good thing; it isn't.

As for the depressed part, that is pretty common among mass shooters; more than 50% of the perpetrators have a history of severe depression. Don't take my word on it; that is from the FBI's analysis of these crimes.

 

[DocArmy]

http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/

Islam does not necessarily mean "peace," it also means "submission." A good muslim is submissive to the will of Allah. So, the danger lies in what is being taught to "good muslims" about dealing with the modern world.

At the end of the movie mentioned in the website above (sorry I don't have a link to the movie itself), the researchers estimate that only 1% of muslims are radical. However, 1% of 1.5 billion people means that there are 15 million rabid, blood thirsty crazies out there. And the moderate influence in Islam does not seem to be trying real hard to bring them back to reality (as demonstrated by the mass celebrations in the middle east on 911).

Now as for the major (who was on the Lt. Col promotion list!?!?) I would have thought that when he gave his grand rounds talk that there would have been huge repercussions. Or when he started debating the justification for the war with his patients. Those seem like giant, red flags to me. My question is, why didn't they do something about this guy? I understand the long service obligation, but in the civilian world he would have been fired for this crap. What is the military equivalent? Was there not a psychiatry billet in Greenland or Siberia?

 

[notdeadyet]

For God's Sake, admit that he is an Islamic terrorist. And that Islam is not a "religion of peace" as the politicos and bureaucrats would have you believe.

Ah, yes. Prejudice giving the Army one black eye after another.

If the Dude was shouting about Christ and how he wants peace in the Iraq and starting blasting, no one would be calling him a "Christian terrorist." I don't often hear folks who target and assassinate abortion-providing doctors as "Christian terrorists."

People get killed in misguided religious zealousness in all faiths (though Buddhists seem to have a pretty good track record). Extremist Muslims are pretty rabid, but our domestic Extremist Christians are pretty rabid too. It ain't a Muslim thing, it's the radical fringe of any religion.

That small step is a good starting point in realizing the threat militant Islam poses to Western Civilization (what is left of it).

Nah. Close-mindedness and pointing frightened fingers at the Danger of the Different is a much bigger threat to Western Civilization than a few fringe types.

I agree with you on the depression issue, though. The guy may have had a history of depression, but he was having an altogether different animal going on on the day of the shooting. Like you said, he was awfully motivated and organized for someone in a depressive episode.

 

[grotto]

Great reconstruction of his life story today in the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/us/09reconstruct.html?hp

 

[orbitsurgMD]

Most accurate commentary on the matter thus far:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCY1lsJg8zs

A shallow, self-promoting analysis completely lacking in depth by a no-name "expert." I am not sure what you think is so "accurate" about this so-called analysis; I seems like nothing more than a third-stringer bloviator's sound bite, just the thing that Fox news fills its quality broadcasting hours with.

"Lt. Col., Army (Retired)." No doubt.

 

[TheGoose]

what did you expect from that member? his other posts don't really show a balanced opinion

 

[hornblower]

More evidence has surfaced that Islam fueled Nadil Malik Hasan's murderous rampage...

1. Nadil Malik Hasan's former imam has been linked to three 9/11 hijackers. In a recent blog post, the imam praised Hasan as a hero of Islam.

2. The CIA was aware months ago that Hasan attempted to contact Al-Qaeda operatives.

In a blog posting early Monday titled "Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing," Awlaki calls Hassan a "hero" and a "man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people."

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had attempted to connect with Anwar al Awlaki, a radical mosque leader who runs an English language anti-American web site that promotes jihad

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat..._to_contact_al_qaeda_and_us_intelligence.html

 

[orbitsurgMD]

This politically correct B.S. really pisses me off.

This forum sounds like CNN with all the equivocation, the eagerness to blame the Army for turning a peace-loving Muslim into a murderous monster. Or, even worse, falling back on the old detached clinical perspective- "he was isolated." "He was depressed."

Sounds to me like he knew exactly what he was doing, and had the energy to get off the couch, too.

For God's Sake, admit that he is an Islamic terrorist. And that Islam is not a "religion of peace" as the politicos and bureaucrats would have you believe.

That small step is a good starting point in realizing the threat militant Islam poses to Western Civilization (what is left of it).

61N

Dylan Klebold knew what he was doing at Columbine. Seung-Hui Cho knew what he was doing at Virginia Tech. George Hennard knew what he was doing at Luby's Cafeteria. Mass shooters know what they are doing. They plan their acts well in advance. They rehearse. They also often give warnings that are only recognized as such in retrospect. The fact that they knew what they were doing is besides the point.

Most mass shooters are not incapacitated by mental illness. They obviously can act. Most are suicidal, and most are depressed, and most have a long history of issues of interpersonal conflicts, of perceived injustices having been inflicted on them, of isolation and alienation and of powerlessness to turn the trajectory of their lives in a direction different to what they perceive as their destruction. There is usually some kind of triggering event in their lives that sets off the train of events that may have been planned in advance. Sometimes it is a significant loss, a family death, a job loss, and sometimes it is something that others would not think significant but that the killer regards as the final insult. We can only speculate what that is in this case, but I would not at all be surprised to learn the deployment to Afghanistan was just that for this person.

I don't buy the "compassion fatigue" theories that media have speculated.

Calling this a "terrorist" act does nothing to explain what happened, except that it mis-characterizes the intent as one meant to provoke "terror" and whatever other ends terrorists supposedly seek. This doctor committed his crime at his workplace, where he was being made to do something he deeply did not want to do and where he had seething and long-standing grievances.

 

[Mr. Freeze]

People get killed in misguided religious zealousness in all faiths (though Buddhists seem to have a pretty good track record). Extremist Muslims are pretty rabid, but our domestic Extremist Christians are pretty rabid too. It ain't a Muslim thing, it's the radical fringe of any religion.

I'm no historian, and certainly no theologian, but I can't think of any rabid Christians that have flown planes into civilian targets.

Religion of peace indeed.

Where he was being MADE to do something? Most in here, if legit, owe the military in some capacity or have paid off debts already. No one held a gun to our heads. Everyone who swears an oath must know that at some point, your time to pay up will be upon you. He had 8 years to figure out he didn't want to be part of a military at war with his people.

I agree Islam is likely not the only issue here. Just don't be so quick to discount the distinct possibility that it could be.

 

[pgg]

This doctor committed his crime at his workplace, where he was being made to do something he deeply did not want to do and where he had seething and long-standing grievances.

He's in the Army, so I guess you could say any location on the base was his "workplace" ... but that's a generous interpretation. His workplace was the hospital or psychiatry clinic, not the deployment center.

 

[orbitsurgMD]

He's in the Army, so I guess you could say any location on the base was his "workplace" ... but that's a generous interpretation. His workplace was the hospital or psychiatry clinic, not the deployment center.

According to some reliable news reports, he did pre-deployment screenings at that center which had other non-psychiatric clinical activities in support of deployment medical readiness.

 

[RegularNihilist]

Religion vs mental illness - how come his religious affiliations couldn't simply be a symptom of his underlying problems? Isolation, depression, problems with not performing, as quoted, bullying, negative feedback, and going on a jihad spree is a fine way of saying: f-word the world. Japanese do it by camping at their parents house, only to go out by night. Muslims in the US do it by riddling the infidels with bullets. That's just life.

 

[DocArmy]

So, the NY Times article mentioned that he was a "very caring individual who once nursed a baby bird back to health by putting it in his mouth and letting it eat masticated food." And when the bird died, he "mourned for months and held a funeral and buried it, and then visited the grave."

That is NOT a caring individual. That is a FREAKING PSYCHO. Anybody that busted up over a pet bird is off his rocker. Just another crazy warning sign.

It's good to love your pets, but you don't LOVE your pets, you know?

 

[Perrotfish]

shallow, self-promoting analysis completely lacking in depth by a no-name "expert." I am not sure what you think is so "accurate" about this so-called analysis; I seems like nothing more than a third-stringer bloviator's sound bite, just the thing that Fox news fills its quality broadcasting hours with.

"Lt. Col., Army (Retired)." No doubt

Very few things about the response to this have disgusted me quite as much as the parade of retired officers rushing to their local TV station to get their 15 minutes. If you actually know something go to the police, if not then go home shut the Fug up.

It's good to love your pets, but you don't LOVE your pets, you know?

I bawled when my dog died, and I'm not the kind of guy that does that often. Honestly it felt just as bad as losing human family. You've really never cared about a pet?

 

[notdeadyet]

I bawled when my dog died, and I'm not the kind of guy that does that often. Honestly it felt just as bad as losing human family. You've really never cared about a pet?

Agreed, but there's a difference between crying when your dog dies and vomiting up food for a baby bird you found and morning for months after its death. I'm an animal lover, but that's kinda creepy.

 

[Perrotfish]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,573469,00.html

We now apparently also have AD officers talking to the media.

 

[DocArmy]

I bawled when my dog died, and I'm not the kind of guy that does that often. Honestly it felt just as bad as losing human family. You've really never cared about a pet?

I get a dog. An animal that you can interact with and cuddle with etc, but you're not chewing up prime rib and spitting it into your dogs mouth. But you're right. Pets can be an important part of someone's life. I do think that it shows that he was lacking in human contact and placing a great deal of emphasis on that connection.

You're right on two points for sure, I haven't had a pet, and I may have spoken to quickly (it was the three beers I had at lunch to celebrate the neuro exam being over).

 

[Perrotfish]

I get a dog. An animal that you can interact with and cuddle with etc, but you're not chewing up prime rib and spitting it into your dogs mouth. But you're right. Pets can be an important part of someone's life. I do think that it shows that he was lacking in human contact and placing a great deal of emphasis on that connection.

You're right on two points for sure, I haven't had a pet, and I may have spoken to quickly (it was the three beers I had at lunch to celebrate the neuro exam being over).

And I'll admit the chewing he birds food for it was definitely strange. If nothing else, he couldn't buy a f-ing blender or something?

 

[Mr. Freeze]

Is anyone else curious why photos of this guy, granted he wouldn't HAVE to wear them, is lacking everything besides National Defense Medal (think that is one he is wearing, I can't seem to find a pic now...)

It doesn't surprise me necessarily, but given his 12 years, would've expected a little more. Surely had enough enlisted time to rate a GCM. IDK....

 

[pgg]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,573469,00.html

We now apparently also have AD officers talking to the media.

I wonder if LtCol Val "Lookit Me" Finnell will be the subject of any disciplinary action for going to the media like this.

Despite the disturbingly attention whorish nature of that LtCol's exclusive interview with Fox News, the statements made in that article just reinforce my assessment that Hasan is every bit the Jihadist and no more "crazy" than the guys who crashed VBIEDs into my Marines.

 

[Mirror Form]

I think you are overdrawing the Islamic part of this. Unless there is evidence uncovered that he conspired to do this with others, as did the Mumbai shooters, for example, then the best you can say is that he was influenced by islamic extremist ideas.

The reports of him more and more suggest a typical mass-shooter. An angry, alienated, frustrated, ruminating, depressed, paranoid individual for whom his particular identity as a Muslim was a big part of why he was the way he was. The fact that he screamed "God is Great" in Arabic really doesn't change a thing.

But yelling "God is Great" in Arabic DOES change things. How many other "typical mass-shooters" were yelling "PRAISE JESUS" or "GOD IS DEAD" while they were shooting people?

Yes, this shooter was to some degree crazy. Yes Islam was clearly a strong motivating factor for his actions. Yes, Islam has been a strong motivating factor for other suicide bombers and market bombers in the recent past which is why that religion has EARNED a reputation. It's amazing seeing all these educated PC brainwashed people claw at every possible reason why Islam can't be blamed in any way, shape, or form.

BTW, I became very good friends with several deeply religious muslims during medical school. At first they trumpeted the PC line. But as you get to know them better, you find out that most of the truly religious muslims in the community (at least the one I was exposed to) did not care about 9/11, and strangely seem to think suicide bombers are fine. The ones I knew were good people, but their culture has a lot of catching up to do.

 

[Perrotfish]

But yelling "God is Great" in Arabic DOES change things. How many other "typical mass-shooters" were yelling "PRAISE JESUS" or "GOD IS DEAD" while they were shooting people?

The only other mass shooting where I can remember people saying anything at all was the Columbine shooting, and yes they did say a lot of athiest-ie things while they were doing it. (Asking people 'do you believe in God' before killing them, etc.)

 

[dru2002]

The only other mass shooting where I can remember people saying anything at all was the Columbine shooting, and yes they did say a lot of athiest-ie things while they were doing it. (Asking people 'do you believe in God' before killing them, etc.)

I was just about to say that.

EDIT: So I did some checking and apparently the Do you believe in god? and then shooting them never happened.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-04-13-columbine-myths_N.htm

 

[notdeadyet]

.

 

[orbitsurgMD]

But yelling "God is Great" in Arabic DOES change things. How many other "typical mass-shooters" were yelling "PRAISE JESUS" or "GOD IS DEAD" while they were shooting people?

Yes, this shooter was to some degree crazy. Yes Islam was clearly a strong motivating factor for his actions. Yes, Islam has been a strong motivating factor for other suicide bombers and market bombers in the recent past which is why that religion has EARNED a reputation. It's amazing seeing all these educated PC brainwashed people claw at every possible reason why Islam can't be blamed in any way, shape, or form.

BTW, I became very good friends with several deeply religious muslims during medical school. At first they trumpeted the PC line. But as you get to know them better, you find out that most of the truly religious muslims in the community (at least the one I was exposed to) did not care about 9/11, and strangely seem to think suicide bombers are fine. The ones I knew were good people, but their culture has a lot of catching up to do.

I won't try to defend the indefensible. There are a lot of worrisome problems in the Islamic communities around the world. And yes, I agree that Islamic militancy in this day is probably the most worrisome of the religiously motivated violence common in the world today. Particularly worrisome is that the extremists seem to have little hesitation to kill prominent Islamic moderates where the voice of moderation is in contest with violent extremists.

If the guy thought he was going to die during his rampage, and escape didn't appear to be part of this plan, nor was stealth, and he was devout, then screaming something relevant to his religion during what he probably might have thought were his last seconds of life might have been expected.

He appears to have been a long-term ruminator over what he seems to have perceived as his religious "predicament": working for an employer that would not discharge him who was also going to make him (in his twisted reasoning) bear arms against Muslims that would (again, twisting reasoning) result in his being subject to being damned. He appears to have been a long-term opponent of the war and said as much. He even tried to quit. I still wonder why he didn't just quit and go UA.

I think someone has to answer why this doctor wasn't processed for discharge when complaints were made about his behavior at USUHS by virtue of conduct incompatible with military duty. He should have had his security clearance pulled and been separated.

[I wonder what would have happened back in the day to an officer who decided Karl Marx was right and felt compelled to join the Communist Party USA and started attending meetings and whatnot.]

I don't think anyone will dispute that the guy was strongly influenced by his religion--the particular extremist variety of that religion.

I have not heard anyone show credible evidence that he was involved in any conspiratorial behavior. If he were, then I would call him a terrorist infiltrator, traitor and murderer.

Right now, the only thing for sure is that he is a mass-shooter and mass-killer.

The question that I am sure will come from his defense is whether there were issues of diminished capacity that in some way reduces his culpability. Showing that to be the case will be the only thing to keep him off death row for premeditated murder. The forensic psychiatrists will have their hands full.

 

[Upgrayedd]

I won't try to defend the indefensible. There are a lot of worrisome problems in the Islamic communities around the world. And yes, I agree that Islamic militancy in this day is probably hte most worrisome of the religiously motivated violence common in the world today. Particularly worrisome is that the extremists seem to have little hesitation to kill prominent Islamic moderates where the voice of moderation is in contest with violent extremists.

If the guy thought he was going to die during his rampage, and escape didn't appear to be part of this plan, nor was stealth, and he was devout, then screaming something relevant to his religion during what he probably might have thought were his last seconds of life might have been expected.

He appears to have been a long-term ruminator over what he seems to have perceived as his religious "predicament": working for an employer that would not discharge him who was also going to make him (in his twisted reasoning) bear arms against Muslims that would (again, twisting reasoning) result in his being subject to being damned. He appears to have been a long-term opponent of the war and said as much. He even tried to quit. I still wonder why he didn't just quit and go UA.

I think someone has to answer why this doctor wasn't processed for discharge when complaints were made about his behavior at USUHS by virtue of conduct incompatible with military duty. He should have had his security clearance pulled and been separated.

[I wonder what would have happened back in the day to an officer who decided Karl Marx was right and felt compelled to join the Communist Party USA and started attending meetings and whatnot.]

I don't think anyone will dispute that the guy was strongly influenced by his religion--the particular extremist variety of that religion.

I have not heard anyone show credible evidence that he was involved in any conspiratorial behavior. If he were, then I would call him a terrorist infiltrator, traitor and murderer.

Right now, the only thing for sure is that he is a mass-shooter and mass-killer.

The question that I am sure will come from his defense is whether there were issues of diminished capacity that in some way reduces his culpability. Showing that to be the case will be the only thing to keep him off death row for premeditated murder. The forensic psychiatrists will have their hands full.

This is the best summation of the situation to date IMO.

Thanks for constantly being the voice of reason throughout this whole discussion Orbitsurg.

As for the people who have crawled out of the woodwork and are posting in milmed for the first time in size 32 font, well, I feel like I can speak for the majority of users when I say that no one is taking you seriously.

 

[DocArmy]

I think someone has to answer why this doctor wasn't processed for discharge when complaints were made about his behavior at USUHS by virtue of conduct incompatible with military duty. He should have had his security clearance pulled and been separated.

Yeah. Why didn't that happen? To quote the great Jamie Foxx, he "signed a contract, which means that there is no speech which is free."

I have not heard anyone show credible evidence that he was involved in any conspiratorial behavior. If he were, then I would call him a terrorist infiltrator, traitor and murderer.

He still is those last 2. I don't care if the Army killed his dog and made him eat MRE bacon.

The question that I am sure will come from his defense is whether there were issues of diminished capacity that in some way reduces his culpability. Showing that to be the case will be the only thing to keep him off death row for premeditated murder. The forensic psychiatrists will have their hands full.

He is going to be courtmartialed, correct? Considering we're at war, and he attacked soldiers preparing to deploy, he could get the death penalty, right? Does the military still use the death penalty? (If not, let the civilians try him. This is Texas, after all and he'd get what's coming to him.)

 

[dru2002]

He is going to be courtmartialed, correct? Considering we're at war, and he attacked soldiers preparing to deploy, he could get the death penalty, right? Does the military still use the death penalty? (If not, let the civilians try him. This is Texas, after all and he'd get what's coming to him.)

Under the UCMJ the maximum punishment for premediated murder is execution (in times of peace or war).

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl118.htm

Don't know how accurate the source is but appears the military hasn't carried out an execution since 1961.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/us-military-death-penalty

Wikipedia agrees with that source but it is circular logic as the wikipedia source is the above link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_individuals_executed_by_the_United_States_military

Personally, I'm not a big believer in the death penalty but cases like this make me question that belief.

 

[pgg]

You have wingnut Christians. You have wingnut Muslims. Put the wingnut Christians in a corner and they'll do some frightening things too. Look at the anti-abortion whackjobs and what they've been capable of, murdering doctors and such.

Strangely, you don't hear folks storming the airwaves talking about how Christianity is a violent religion and how Christians are a violent people. Muslims are different and that makes it so much easier to be afraid of them.

I'm an unbelieving godless atheist heathen, so I don't have a horse in the Muslim vs Christian race, except to the extent that I live in a mostly Christian nation that's at war in a couple of mostly Muslim nations.

And while you can find a bit of primitive savagery in the Old Testament for every bit of cruelty and violence in the Koran or Hadiths, an objective observer has to admit that the overal tenor of modern Islam is different than that of modern Christianity.

You can argue that these differences are more a consequence of economics, wars, global distribution of wealth, eeeeeeviiil western imperialism, backwards tribal culture, whatever ... but there are differences. Christianity is the primary religion of western secular 1st-world democracies; Islam is the primary religion in non-1st-world nations generally run by dictators.

Islam hasn't undergone any kind of internal reformation the way Christianity has over the centuries. Mainstream Christianity is far different than it was 500 years ago, but mainstream Islam simply is not.

And again, I'm neither a Christian nor a Muslim. I can respect and peacefully coexist with reasonable, law-abiding, peaceful members of either (I'm married to one) but I simply can not agree that both religions have an equally positive or negative effect on people, and that attacks such as the one at Ft Hood are simply a result of an individual being "crazy."

 

[Perrotfish]

Personally, I'm not a big believer in the death penalty but cases like this make me question that belief

I'm still hoping we don't degenerate to that. I strongly believe the only justification for taking human life is to preserve human life. In a first world country I think that limits execution to a handful of military and terrorist leaders who might potentially be a rallying point for evil even while incapacitated (think Saddam Hussein). When we execute anyone else it just seems like we've allowed them to degrade us.

 

[Coastie2Doc]

I'm an unbelieving godless atheist heathen, so I don't have a horse in the Muslim vs Christian race, except to the extent that I live in a mostly Christian nation that's at war in a couple of mostly Muslim nations.

And while you can find a bit of primitive savagery in the Old Testament for every bit of cruelty and violence in the Koran or Hadiths, an objective observer has to admit that the overal tenor of modern Islam is different than that of modern Christianity.

You can argue that these differences are more a consequence of economics, wars, global distribution of wealth, eeeeeeviiil western imperialism, backwards tribal culture, whatever ... but there are differences. Christianity is the primary religion of western secular 1st-world democracies; Islam is the primary religion in non-1st-world nations generally run by dictators.

Islam hasn't undergone any kind of internal reformation the way Christianity has over the centuries. Mainstream Christianity is far different than it was 500 years ago, but mainstream Islam simply is not.

And again, I'm neither a Christian nor a Muslim. I can respect and peacefully coexist with reasonable, law-abiding, peaceful members of either (I'm married to one) but I simply can not agree that both religions have an equally positive or negative effect on people, and that attacks such as the one at Ft Hood are simply a result of an individual being "crazy."

Ditto. Really wished we lived in a Freethinking world.

 

[crazybrancato]

"Officials involved at various times in the meetings about Hasan included John Bradley, Walter Reed's chief of psychiatry; Scott Moran, Walter Reed's psychiatric residency program director; Robert Ursano, chairman of the Uniformed Services University's psychiatry department; Charles Engel, the university's assistant chair of psychiatry, and David Benedek, an associate professor of psychiatry at the university."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091112/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_fort_hood_shooting

All these freekin people had concerns about him, and nothing was ever acted on??!!?! Now that's disgusting.

 

[MSS07]

"Officials involved at various times in the meetings about Hasan included John Bradley, Walter Reed's chief of psychiatry; Scott Moran, Walter Reed's psychiatric residency program director; Robert Ursano, chairman of the Uniformed Services University's psychiatry department; Charles Engel, the university's assistant chair of psychiatry, and David Benedek, an associate professor of psychiatry at the university."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091112/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_fort_hood_shooting

All these freekin people had concerns about him, and nothing was ever acted on??!!?! Now that's disgusting.

Because if he was fired he may have pulled the "its because I'm Muslim" card.

 

[crazybrancato]

Because if he was fired he may have pulled the "its because I'm Muslim" card.

True, i suppose.

I know I shouldn't feel this way . . . but this all makes me think psychiatry is a BS profession and should be left out of the realm of medicine. If two psych profs at a medical school and an entire psych dept at a major teaching and military facility (who observed this guy day in/out) couldn't note his eratic behavior and do something about--something, at least some kind of disciplinary action, make him redo his final presentation, jeez!--then i wonder what's the point of the profession!?

 

[Perrotfish]

True, i suppose.

I know I shouldn't feel this way . . . but this all makes me think psychiatry is a BS profession and should be left out of the realm of medicine. If two psych profs at a medical school and an entire psych dept at a major teaching and military facility (who observed this guy day in/out) couldn't note his eratic behavior and do something about--something, at least some kind of disciplinary action, make him redo his final presentation, jeez!--then i wonder what's the point of the profession!?

Do you think that part of the problem is that medical training is an unhealthy enough enviornment that it gets hard to pick out truely crazy behavior from the crazy behavior induced by the training? I know that in just in medical school my standard for what kind of behavior would be considered 'alarming' has changed drastically. Also

"Officials involved at various times in the meetings about Hasan included John Bradley, Walter Reed's chief of psychiatry; Scott Moran, Walter Reed's psychiatric residency program director; Robert Ursano, chairman of the Uniformed Services University's psychiatry department; Charles Engel, the university's assistant chair of psychiatry, and David Benedek, an associate professor of psychiatry at the university."

These are all psych faculty in a program where he was first a resident and then a fellow. Wouldn't everyone on this lest be expected to discuss pretty much anyone doing a residency there?

 

[notdeadyet]

I know I shouldn't feel this way . . . but this all makes me think psychiatry is a BS profession and should be left out of the realm of medicine. If two psych profs at a medical school and an entire psych dept at a major teaching and military facility (who observed this guy day in/out) couldn't note his eratic behavior and do something about--something, at least some kind of disciplinary action, make him redo his final presentation, jeez!--then i wonder what's the point of the profession!?

This has much less to do with psychiatry and much more to do with academic medicine.

 

[grotto]

This has much less to do with psychiatry and much more to do with academic medicine.

(Cliche alert) Hindsight is 20/20 - I don't think we can go about searching for someone to blame either in his department at Darnall or back at USU or at WRAMC.

That being said, my problem in trying to evaluate this situation is my ignorance of academic medicine and preconceptions from being a line officer. In my old community, it would have been much easier to spot someone who was having issues - I have seen a few conscientious objectors in my day, and have been at a few admin separation boards for sailors who were trying to find a way out.

Of course, I'm just a line guy who is going to a military medical school - I am not there yet and beyond a few weeks shadowing at NNMC I don't have any experience in academic medicine. My assumption is that supervision outside of medicine is not really there - but I could obviously be wrong.

That being said, the way the press and probably most people see this is that this was an Army Major who did this - not a doctor. I think there is a public expectation that we keep better track of people in the military - that for every person there is some one who is spending time supervising that person - academically as well as morally and mentally. If this was just a civilian doctor from a random GME program people probably wouldn't be asking as many questions about his time in training, and if it was a random soldier or sailor there probably would have been more direct supervison and questionable behavior would have lead to different outcomes (it would have also been easier to just let him go - but I think the relationship between commitment to for medical education and this crime is somewhat hazy at the moment).

 

[mitchconnie]

(Cliche alert) Hindsight is 20/20 - I don't think we can go about searching for someone to blame either in his department at Darnall or back at USU or at WRAMC.

It may not be fair, but I'm pretty sure that there will be a highly politicized investigation, and a sacrificial lamb will be identified. Even if it's a systemic problem, a specific individual will be assigned to take the fall in order to preserve the status quo. That's just the way these things work.

As an academic excercise, let's all make a prediction about what rank officer will get canned. Or alternatively, which individuals will get thrown under the bus.

I'm betting on an O-5 program director at WRAMC/USUHS, and an O-6 department head at Ft. Hood. Early Vegas line for the Over/Under is O-5. No chance of an O-7 or above getting the heave-ho.

 

[grotto]

It may not be fair, but I'm pretty sure that there will be a highly politicized investigation, and a sacrificial lamb will be identified. Even if it's a systemic problem, a specific individual will be assigned to take the fall in order to preserve the status quo. That's just the way these things work.

As an academic excercise, let's all make a prediction about what rank officer will get canned. Or alternatively, which individuals will get thrown under the bus.

I'm betting on an O-5 program director at WRAMC/USUHS, and an O-6 department head at Ft. Hood. Early Vegas line for the Over/Under is O-5. No chance of an O-7 or above getting the heave-ho.

Maybe, but it probably won't be a public fall - it will be the tried and true power combo - fitrep of death to dead end job, followed by retirement.

 

[orbitsurgMD]

It may not be fair, but I'm pretty sure that there will be a highly politicized investigation, and a sacrificial lamb will be identified. Even if it's a systemic problem, a specific individual will be assigned to take the fall in order to preserve the status quo. That's just the way these things work.

As an academic excercise, let's all make a prediction about what rank officer will get canned. Or alternatively, which individuals will get thrown under the bus.

I'm betting on an O-5 program director at WRAMC/USUHS, and an O-6 department head at Ft. Hood. Early Vegas line for the Over/Under is O-5. No chance of an O-7 or above getting the heave-ho.

Before they can blame someone, they have to identify a problem that someone could have caught and should not have missed. A resident having difficulty with some aspects of his training or having a difficult personality just doesn't rise to that level in most cases. Those kinds of problems are common as dirt, not just in the military but also in civilian programs. Residents butt heads with each other and with selected attendings and with patients all the time. But letting bizarre and inappropriate behavior slide for one resident, because he is a Muslim, where if it were exhibited by anyone else not so identified would not be tolerated would demand an explanation. Hiding behind a rationale of toxic political correctness for fear of being accused of anti-Muslim bias is just not acceptable. Someone has to have the will to confront inappropriate behavior and to prohibit using religion as a defense.

In a civilian program, the option exists to not renew a resident's contract the following year. Leaving a spot open can make scheduling and rotations issues, to be sure, but it is easier by far than pulling a guy out of a military program. There, he still has a commission and a repayment service obligation and usually gets farmed out to a GMO billet somewhere to burn time until he gets out. Actually removing him from active duty requires a separation and, if they were going to initiate the separation, they would have to show some cause, investigation interviews with witness statements, formal psychiatric evaluations and the like.

The news reports say the Army denied Hasan ever sought counsel from military lawyers about consciencious objector status or applied for release. This seems at odds with other reports that he had tried to get out for years but was denied. If Maj. Malik did request a discharge and his COC quashed it, then there needs to be some explanation why, in light of the recent events.

I have no doubt the craven careerists will try to make someone take the blame for this, in the usual hopeless and asinine tradition of military witch hunting.

5 to 2 an O-6, 4 to 3 an O-5, 3 to 5 an O-7

 

[dru2002]

It appears we aren't even sure how the shooter was ultimately incapacitated. There is so much more to learn before we can make any reasonable conclusions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/u...l=1&adxnnlx=1258048867-dFRu6pXmsjWYGafHGdC/2Q

 

[IgD]

The whole event is so unfathomable. Residents are released from training programs all the time but they don't commit murder. Physicians and their families also make sacrifices for deployments they don't agree with because it is for a greater good. I feel sad for Army mental health. Rates of adverse events keep rising and this is the second major incident involving a murder in a year. As I recall the last was when a soldier gunned down a psychiatrist and social worker in Iraq. The other thing was some of the biggest names in Army Psychiatry worked with Maj Hasan and undoubtedly his actions are going to impact their credibility. It sounds like there was a chain reaction of events involving a number of different parties that contributed to the situation.

The other thing is what a total failure on the part of Maj Nasan. It's going to go down in history as one of the worst episodes of violence and impaired judgment for the military and medical fields. The guy violated his oath as an officer, the hippocratic oath and then violated the sacred tenants of mental health which is even more stringent. On top of all that, he made his religion look bad.

 

[IgD]

...I'm just a line guy who is going to a military medical school - I am not there yet and beyond a few weeks shadowing at NNMC I don't have any experience in academic medicine. My assumption is that supervision outside of medicine is not really there - but I could obviously be wrong.

That being said, the way the press and probably most people see this is that this was an Army Major who did this - not a doctor. I think there is a public expectation that we keep better track of people in the military - that for every person there is some one who is spending time supervising that person - academically as well as morally and mentally...

I think what you are talking about is leadership and my experience was there was a big difference between the leadership styles in Navy medicine compared with the Marine Corps. Regardless of where you work I would argue that you should know your employees, be approachable and be accountable for their welfare. Do you guys feel like that is the case in military medicine? I suspect that when all this Maj Hasan stuff is looked at some of the recommendations will have to do with improving leadership. I think improving leadership will go a long way towards improving recruiting and retention.

Obviously we don't have all the facts but I still can't believe Army medicine would take someone who is struggling, send him to a small command then try to push for deployment soon after fellowship.

 

[orbitsurgMD]

I think what you are talking about is leadership and my experience was there was a big difference between the leadership styles in Navy medicine compared with the Marine Corps. Regardless of where you work I would argue that you should know your employees, be approachable and be accountable for their welfare. Do you guys feel like that is the case in military medicine?

No. In fact, probably 80 percent of my time spent in milmed was practicing where I did not have either competent or responsible leadership from the medical department. In fact, most of the senior medical staff I encountered could not be counted upon to be supportive or knowledgeable and unfortunately, many were some of the worst examples of troubled, self-serving and work-avoiding physicians I have ever met. That was particularly discouraging as a GMO. I have particular scorn for some of the staff at the so-called "institutes" who I learned over time and experience were a bunch of lazy, responsibility-shirking poseurs. My experience of the aviation line officers was by contrast far more positive, and I consider myself fortunate to have known many of them. I really think that BUMED was one of the worst aspects of my overall Navy experience.

I suspect that when all this Maj Hasan stuff is looked at some of the recommendations will have to do with improving leadership. I think improving leadership will go a long way towards improving recruiting and retention.

I wonder. The weakest people have a way of sticking around. Adm. Donald Arthur particularly comes to mind. BUMED's problems are institutionalized ones, unfortunately.

Obviously we don't have all the facts but I still can't believe Army medicine would take someone who is struggling, send him to a small command then try to push for deployment soon after fellowship.

I recall from some of the stories that Ft. Hood was seen as a better location, since someone with questionable skills would not be crippling a whole department as would happen somewhere there were only one or two staff.

 

[RegularNihilist]

How many other "typical mass-shooters" were yelling "GOD IS DEAD" while they were shooting people?

Why, I do that all the time?

It's amazing seeing all these educated PC brainwashed people claw at every possible reason why Islam can't be blamed in any way, shape, or form.

I don't know how much the content of the koran, or religious environment of other Muslims contribute to religious violence, but there is no way to prove the real chain of cause and effect here. There were many reasons why he would go nuts.

BTW, I became very good friends with several deeply religious muslims during medical school. At first they trumpeted the PC line. But as you get to know them better, you find out that most of the truly religious muslims in the community (at least the one I was exposed to) did not care about 9/11, and strangely seem to think suicide bombers are fine. The ones I knew were good people, but their culture has a lot of catching up to do.

Are there any indications that Americans are growing less religious? Are there any indications that the prevalence of mentally ill is dropping? Are there any indications that Muslim suicide bombings are waning? And the Muslim population just keeps growing. Fatalism is the answer. Don't care. You can't do anything about it anyway.

 

[Gastrapathy]

Radical Islam exists. There are people who preach that infidels (nonbelievers) should be killed. This brand of Islam has clearly found an audience. There are a billion Muslims in the world. Lets assume that only 0.1% are radicalized. That's a cool million people who believe they can reach salvation by killing you. Sweet dreams.

To argue that Hasan was not a Muslim is the ultimate example of the "no true scotsman" fallacy. His interpretation of Islam clearly was part of why he chose to murder. The same forces that kept people from acting on their concerns about him are what are keeping people from analyzing this attack honestly. If Hasan had been a suicide bomber from TQ, no one would have that problem.