What Happened Yesterday?
(What it Might Have Been Like for Victims)
by David Blakeslee
I got up. I got dressed. I hugged my children. I called a friend. I went to work. I packed my bag for a prolonged business trip. I went to lunch. I then went to the doctor’s office for a final check on my health and then, to get my teeth cleaned.
I was traveling for my work to a place where it might be hard to get medical attention. I sat down in the waiting room. I found a magazine, Sports Illustrated, to read. I flipped the pages and I looked around the room. I saw some friends from other parts of the company, smiling and talking to each other. Every few minutes a person left the room and every few minutes a new person came in the room. It was a strange feeling, not knowing all of them, but being bound by similar work and a similar mission.
I glanced down at my magazine, the Raiders continue to lose and look terrible. The Phillies are behind in the World Series, I know better, they already lost.. Pop…Pop Pop…Pop…Pop. Scream, crash. Pop…Pop…Pop, Pop, Pop. I know the sound. I am on the ground. I look in the direction of the Pop sound, a man with two guns commands the attention of the room. He is dressed like me. He looks like me. I look to others dressed like me, some are groaning, some wailing, some are whimpering, curled up in the corner as he approaches. Pop…Pop…Pop. I am panicked now. While his attention is turned I jump and run farther from him and push a small table down as a barrier. I realize that most of my co-workers have huddled in the far corner with me. Some are escaping through another door and down a hallway. Pop…Pop…Pop…Scream. Whimper. Moan. I know I am alone. I know this uniform he is wearing says I should trust him…I lunge…Pop. Pop Pop Pop.
This is what it may have been like for many of the victims yesterday at Ft. Hood.
Many words will be written about the events of yesterday and the overwhelming majority will be about the middle-aged man who knew where to find a group of trusting colleagues and then systematically betrayed them and murdered them. Many “explanations” or hypotheses will be written. Here is one: a narcissist, narcissistically wounded, acts out his wound in the most terrifying and humiliating way on people completely unprepared to defend themselves and trained to trust him. And he enjoys it. For a brief few minutes his subjective feelings of being small and a “victim” are extinguished in a gratifying hail of bullets and moans and death. It goes just the way he planned and he enjoys it.
Narcissism is rampant in this culture.
It is time to make it’s victims real, three dimensional. To narrate their motivations, their lives, to interview their friends and family and to hear what obstacles they overcame and how much they loved their country. They are small, unimportant people in this culture of celebrity. But they are deeply loved, deeply loved. And right now, everyone they loved is feeling destroyed.
Utterly destroyed.
That is what narcissism can do.
(I spent the early years of my career at a small Air Force base as the base psychologist. It was humbling to see how hard everyone worked and how devoted to the mission they were. I learned there how many different kinds of people were better than me, stronger than me and kinder than me. For a medical officer to betray his troops is the worst kind of evil).
–David Blakeslee, Psy.D. is a psychologist in West Linn, Oregon.
Maybe… but I am not in the psyche trade. Another doctor in England had this to say:
And Vitals.com who profiles doctors had this one posting at 5:30pm EST the day of the shooting which happened at 4:30pm EST. For that reason they do believe it was a fair assessment of the doctor by a true patient. All succeeding comments were apparently made after his role in the shooting was known. The supposed patient wrote:
It’s sad that Dr Hasan could not see the truth in his own words to this patient.
I wouldn’t put it on narcissism. People like playing the blame-laying game, sometimes for ‘narcissistic’ reasons (how smart I am, I know what’s happening). This shows how deep society is entrenched in people’s minds, making them exhibit the ‘good behaving’ posture of the one who does the good thing and shows it publicly (but doesn’t show his other hidden thoughts). It makes one look like a hero, an anonymous one, “one of us”.
But actually I think this type of outburst from the part of a man who was trained to deal with impulse problems shows a structural problem at the level of society, namely individualism, which appears to work for many but not for all. You should ask yourself why so many things like this happen in America, but not in China or smaller communities from less developed countries, tribal ones. I’m not advocating for communism, btw. It’s because a person is not an atom called Hassan = Muslim, American, psychiatrist, unmarried, focused on his job, wanting out of the army, etc. Too many contradictions in one person who had to manage them all without betraying each part of his ‘identity’. From the distance, it doesn’t seem like this guy had a ‘home’ somewhere, but was clinging to a shred of identity which wasn’t even as pure as he wanted it to be (ie, identified as Palestinian alhough was born in USA). He was supposed to demonstrate in the middle of the community he was living that he stood for something, as an individual, but that was also denied to him because he believed in something which was not compatible with the goals of that community. I think one can see here one of the limits of individualism. Deep down, humans’ minds still work on autonomic reactions to perceived threats coming from individuals and they tend to single out people who don’t fall into line. At the same time, in an ‘advanced society’ like the USA an individual is expected to prove that he has an edge, that he has something that makes him stand out as an individual.
If Hasan went to Iraq it was likely that he would meet locals who would remind him that he had Arab blood in his veins and shame him for being in the USA forces. Back home, he was harrassed for that. For some reason, he felt that he was in a “no way out” situation and snapped.
David, you ascribe his behaviour to narcissism, but most people’s behaviour is self-centred and it doesn’t lead to killing. The best adjusted individuals, the most assertive ones I’ve seen don’t really give a rat on what other people think or what community wants. They are cunning enough to pretend they think about others because it’s the polite thing to do. Sometimes they do it because it can increase one’s chances to be successful (for their own goals). I think it’s the vulnerable individuals who try to play the same game, but lag behind others, in the ‘maladjusted’ form of narcissism, which is pathologised. When they cannot succeed like others and resort to violence, they are blamed by the community for not having sorted out their problems. It’s interesting, for that reason, that after something like that happens, you always hear on TV stuff like ‘it’s hard to understand, he was such a good man, shy even though a bit aloof.’ It seems that ‘good men’ are becoming a problem, but it’s difficult to understand how that happens.
@ Anonymous,
I understand your theory…but I don’t think many of the data points support it.
“Individualism” as an ever present pressure on the psyche in our culture acts as a catalyst for those of “weaker” or different constitutions to act out in a final and triumphant way that “verifies” the values of the culture (through omnipotent violence) while condemning the self for not being individualistically successful in a more socially conforming way (a “good” narcissist)?
Consider:
1. Individualistic strivings in your model have been met academically and professionally through advanced training and advancement in career.
2. Tribal needs have been met through religious identification, which although small in number, is present in a variety of communities throughout the world.
3. Tribal needs have been met through identification with his military profession. Apparently he also had a longstanding positive relationship with his extended family.
This is not the loner, defective self-esteem, grandiose delusion scenario…
He was a man with an esteemed medical and professional identity and a supportive religious community. A highly valued member in the military who was about to be sent overseas to interface effectively with fellow Muslims who were trying to deal with an occupying (and perhaps civilizing) Western military force.
He was one of a very few Army Psychiatrists uniquely qualified to make a positive difference…
This wasn’t sufficiently “individualistic” for him…neither did his membership in the medical, military or religious community sufficiently meet his tribal needs.
He sought a special status, and membership in a special community and acted that out ruthlessly and violently.
@ Anonymous,
I have heard this theory a number of times, but it does not fit the majority of “well adjusted” people I meet in my neighborhood, at work, and where I shop.
Most of us can sense the subtle exploiters in our world…we smile and humor them, and then move on to those who know how to care and connect.
Frustrate the narcissist, demand a normal, humbling activity from him (like keeping a promise to serve overseas on behalf of his tribal community) and he will expose himself in demands for special exclusions and privileges…further frustration will lead to compliance and a more mature identity; or to explosive, disqualifying rage.
I agree Hasan might have been a valuable team member as a counselor to Muslim soldiers, but I don’t think he would have been so limited had he deployed to Afghanistan. The needs in the combat theater are great, and all hands are overtaxed. He would have been working with all kinds of soldiers.
He had problems for years interacting with patients. He was ill-suited for his chosen profession. What is beginning to emerge is a picture of man whose mindset was becoming that of a terrorist. Mass casualties resulted, regardless of his motivation. The worst on American soil since 9/11. I shudder to think what this man may have been capable of in a war zone. Could the fragging have been more of a nightmare scenario?
By that I mean the worst with a possible Islam extremist link. The Virginia Tech massacre was different. Ironically, it was because of that horrible day and the lessons learned that more casualties were averted at Fort Hood. The police officer who took Hasan down did not wait for backup but engaged at the first opportunity.
I’m not so sure this was about Islam or Anything and much more about a man who was isolated, scared, frustrated and without guidance. That’s pretty much what I think about any of these “lone” gunmen.
We don’t know yet. That’s why there’s an investigation. But some early indicators are frighteningly familiar. Homicide (suicide) bombers are loners and desperate types, too.
Without guidance? How so? The Army paid for years of medical school, an internship and residency — the whole nine yards — for him. Even counseled him. He had as much guidance as any other officer. And he was deeply involved in his religious practices. The question may be what kind of guidance influenced him the most.
The media which gets everywhere has not found 1 close friend to interview. Many christians who attend church for years and who are considered devote have done horrible things, too. I’m just not convinced that this is a Muslim /Islam motivated thing primarily. No doubt he was devote but he could just have easily been of another faith system. No one shows up with him in the video tapes of him at the minimart. As far as the guidance – he may not have been able to freely express himself in the military “counseling” sessions. Hiding parts of yourself is not seeking guidance. I’m sure he was at odds with his feelings – or ambivalent. But I don’t think this is just a Muslim?islam issue – even if he says so. I know many muslims who are kind, faihful, devote – but are connected to others socially, have a secure support system, read and study the koran and come to some very different conclusions.
I have deliberately avoided the religious angle on this…not because it might not be viable, but because there is a simpler probable explanation.
An explanation that fits in a milder form for those who ridicule and marginalize those with SSA.
Narcissism…disgust.
When GLSEN focuses on religious views that oppose gay identification, they do so without assessing for narcissism, and so slander an entire religious community.
When those at FOTF and NARTH focuses on GLBT behavior without making a similar ssessment, they slander the entire community.
Here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6521758/Fort-Hood-shooting-Texas-army-killer-linked-to-September-11-terrorists.html
It is beyond terrifying to have someone who shares your training and your uniform to betray you.
Our focus should be on the victims and their loved ones.
More humanizing stories about the perpetrator
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/07/AR2009110703449.html?wpisrc=newsletter
Please let me know if you find articles about the victims.
As much as I am aching for the victims. Had we the capacity to feel for the perpetratror – perhaps we might have read the signals and offered a hand, some friendship, some company – snything to welcome him into humanity instead of looking at him as an outsider.
David, I think part of that is because the “religious community” often does a very poor job of communicating what it does stand for –and against. Too often, we hear condemnation, not reconciliation.
The Uganda bill is one example. I think it is unfair to lay the blame on gay rights groups for slandering relgious ones. Why do so many gays express either distrust or disgust? Has the religious community done all it can do to step up and speak out against human rights violations like this?
I hope that no one will misunderstand what I am saying, above.
I only mean to suggest that (1) gays have heard theGood News and hate it or (2) they haven’t really heard it.
On the topic: My prayers are with the familes and loved ones of this terrible tragedy.
Joe Liebermann has come right out and said the Army and others are hiding their heads in the sand about the signs pointing to Hasan’s growing extremism prior to his murderous tirade. Again, I say we cannot know fully yet, But I will say that the Army’s extreme political correctness is not a good thing, and hasn’t for a long time. Just what if in those 70,000 soldiers pumped into the system over the last 5 years there are sleeper terrorists? Why wouldn’t such an infiltration be an opportune move? I could see it as a new tactic. The Army is unwieldly and its bases and commands are especially ripe for such attacks.
This also reminds us that we have bigger fish to fry than Ugandan politicians. The problems needing our attention in the world are myriad. And Congress is right now trying to ram a bloated, horrific universal health care bill down our throats. We want America to go fix Uganda, but we can’t even fix our own country.
I don’t think that’s accurate. I have not heard of anyone suggesting that “America go fix Uganda” — only a call for Uganda to respect basic human rights and withdraw this bill. And it’s not just folks from the USA who are doing this. People around the world are speaking out.
We can strongly encrouage them, but we cannot fix them or do that for them. They will have to fix themselves. Just as we will have to fix ourselves.
Debbie,
You’re probably right. We should round up all Muslims and encamp them just to be on the safe side.
Or we could act like humans and take each person on their own merit and worth.
Please forgive my going off track. I realize it was disrespectful to bring in other issues during this profoundly sad time. Our little congregation offered its prayers this morning for all who were touched by this insanity. May God send His Comforter to them.
A grossly unfair overreaction to what I’ve said, Mary. Note the disclaimers.
Michael, you’ve been shouting through a megaphone for weeks now that American Christian leaders and Exodus, in particular, need to be saying and doing something to help defeat the bill and denounce Ssempa, Langa et al. It’s a big world with many issues, but it has shrunk in the minds of many who frequent this blog to being Uganda-centric.
I sincerely pray that the Ft. Hood incident (which we would probably not be discussing here had David not launched a post on it) is an isolated thing and not an extremism-driven terror incident. I shudder at the mere thought that this could be a new tactic or front in the war on terror. But we should make no bones about the many ways in which terror reigns in this world, regardless of motive. A deranged gunman is a terrorist, whether a Muslim extremist or not.
Narcissism is a defect in empathy…Christ calls us to be the antidote.
Narcissism can hide in the church, or in a human rights movement. It doesn’t care the color of your skin, your religious beliefs, your gender or your sexual identity.
It might be original sin.
@ Debbie and Michael,
The proposed Uganda legislation is the perfect vehicle for narcissism…some fear already that groups are organizing to implement the law via vigilantes.
A small, impoverished country like Uganda will have a difficult time protecting targeted people from vigilantes.
I’d say narcissism is part and parcel of original sin. It weaves its way all through the biblical narrative. Actually, Christ is the antidote. We reflect him poorly in too many instances. Adherents of faiths that are not Christian are rejecting Christ.
In a small local paper, we finally get a story about the survivors and victims and their families:
http://www.kdhnews.com/news/story.aspx?s=36977
The “anti-narcissism.”
Such stories have been coming out for days. The media is arguably one of the most narcissistic organizations around, by the way. Someone right now is planning on taking options on a movie and one or more books. Everybody is looking to one-up everybody else. It’s a mogul’s dream. Meanwhile, how safe are we?
and more:
Here is a small description of some of the dead:
Find it here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125750297355533413.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories
It is likely narcissistic rage…if you have ever been the brunt of it, you know how the word “snapped” doesn’t apply…methodical, relentless, dehumanizing.
Warren has been posting many threads about that issue and I have been making many comments about them. Debbie, as I said, I am very sorry for going off topic here.
Debbie,
Whether you come right out and say it or hint at it – you are showing a bias that seems unreasonable to me.
Not all Muslims are terrorists – even when they commit a horrible act such as this. Some people are very troubled and do horrible things in the name of God – it does not make them all terrorists – unless you are willing to take on that moniker yourself as the fraternal member of christians.
David,
Wonderful post. Thanks.
Mary,
To avoid confusion, maybe it would help if you defined what you believe the word “terrorism” denotes/connotes or what a “terrorist” is in common parlance.
The man may have acted alone (we don’t know yet, but until evidence suggesting otherwise comes in, I am assuming he was not part of a group of conspirators).
However, that his perception of his faith played a part in his behavior, either in great part or wholly, seems evident. That he was, to himself, a jihadist, seems evident. One needen’t be a part of a larger group to commit jihad.
I also wanted to thank David for this post. It was so powerfully written that I thought David might have been there, and I contacted Warren to make sure David was OK.
Sorry, a further point, Mary. You said,
What am I missing in what Debbie said? I see nothing in her words that suggest she believes “all Muslims are terrorists” or that she believe people professing a belief in other faiths are not also capable of such inhuman atrocities.
Carole,
Not willing to take on Debbie from two fronts. Read all of her posts. Suggestive and biased from an innocent bystander point of view. That’s all. My opinion. And defending some of my muslims friends who might be getting caught in the mudslinging over this incident.
Mary,
?????? I admit to being lost.
That’s fine. Every has a perspective. : )
oops – everyone has a perspective
@ Michael,
Sorry for the confusion…trying to make a empathic connection between the reader and the victims…
I was only there in spirit.
I was there in spirit with you. You write beautifully and with great impact. Thanks again.
Mary, I assure you I am not anti-Muslim. You are reading into what I have said. That Carole is not following your line of reasoning also makes that evident. As I said, I would much rather this incident be an isolated thing. Let’s pray it is. Some uncomfortable things are coming out in media reports, but it is still early, so we all need to reserve judgment.
David’s post also succeeds in drawing attention to the preconceived prejudicial notions we all tend to hold to some extent that relate to other topics frequently discussed here. We are alternately pro-something or anti-something on any given day of the week. It’s easy to look at Islam in the abstract until you personally know some Muslims. Same thing holds for Christians or for gays and ex-gays.
Check out how many pro-gay comments on Warren’s new Facebook group are drawing comparisons between fundamental Islam and Christianity, by the way.
Will do. Thanks.
Sometimes, people see the extremes and assume they represent the whole. I think the real danger is fundamentalism of any sort.
You have all helped to strongly challenge some of mine. It has been good to get to know you. Thanks.
Food for thought.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/11/09/iftikhar.fort.hood/index.html
Debbie, BTW, I don’t care that pro gays equate christians to muslim extremists – they are wrong to do so but I can completely understand why they do. As well, two wrongs don’t make a right.
But you do care that folks in a time of a war against Islamic fundamentalist terrorism that began with a horrific unprovoked attack on Sept. 11, 2001 quite naturally wonder if an Islamic mass murderer at Fort Hood just might have had a religious motive? Can you likewise understand that? What you are saying is it is wrong for Christians to be likened to terrorists but you understand why. It is likewise wrong for Muslims to be suspected of being terrorists, but you cannot understand why Americans would wonder? I don’t get it. Christians have mighty broad shoulders, it seems. A lot of water has to roll off our backs.
What two wrongs are you referring to?
Before going there , let’s not hang all Japanese on the same line.
Secondly, it seems this man had tirades and episodes that are hallmarks of a disturbed individual.
Fortunately, in this country, we are allowed to speak against it without be taken to task for seditious acts or for being Muslim, Japanese, or German.
Whoever his CO is should be in the crosshairs for not recognizing an unstable individual with the potential to cause harm rather than just calling him a Muslim.
And in the end, we will never know why this guy did this. We will get an answer, I’m not sure it will be the truth.
And the only thing we can know for sure is that anyone who takes a gun and starts shooting at unarmed innocent people is crazy. Apparently, it happens enough in this country that we now have special rules for lockdown at public schools. We just did not expect it in the military.
Those in authority had to tow the PC line, worried about cries of profiling. Yes, someone ought to have seen warning signs.
Didn’t say anybody should be doing that. Said it’s quite natural for people to be suspicious in this case. Did we have sleeper Imperialist Japanese cells in this country during WW II? Did we have post-Pearl Harbor Japanese terror plots foiled here? Maybe we did. I don’t know.
We had many spies in the US during WWII. Both German, Japanese, Italian and we used the American Italian Mafia to watch the waterfront for us. So many things occur during times of war.
I’d certainly hate to be the CO who has to answer for this guy. There’s no PC rule when it comes to tirades in the work place – Protestant or otherwise. Who knows, keeping him in the military instead of granting him a dishonorable discharge may have been someone’s way of bullying him. There are SOOOOO MANY things we do not know.
What we do know – any person who goes into a place and shoots at unarmed innocent people is off his/her rocker.
Mary said,
Whether this is so or not irrelevant to the point you’ve been attempting to make, Mary, for using your own words in the block quote above, you are saying that Mohammed Atta and his co-horts were simply “crazy” people who “went off” and that we, as their targets, ought not to have associated them with Muslim terrorism at all. Using this reasoning, I’d expect you to argue that just because there are “crazy” suicide bombers who strap on grenades and meander into discos and restaurants, Israelis ought not keep a keen eye on Muslims or Arabs. I suspect, then, that during the era of strife in Belfast, you felt that just because the IRA was fond of placing bombs in mail boxes on the streets in the UK, people should have viewed those who placed those bombs there as simply “crazy” people, not people whose belief system had anything to do with their acts–thus, you’d not consider them “terrorists.” No, uh uh.
Carole – there are some differences here. Let’s go over them.
1. Suicide bombers from Muslim backgrounds are not enlisted by choice in the Israeli Army.
2. Suicide bombers are usually younger in age and have had little to no education and less still experience with the wider world – this man was american born, educated and 39 yo of age (fits another category of mass killer) albeit he is Muslim.
3. Suicide bombers usally kill arbitrarily, without picking each individual, and they kill themsleves in the process.
I am saying this is a homegrown American psycho nutcase and others are trying desparately to veil this in Muslim terrorism.
His selection and method of killing is too similar to Columbine and other mass killings in America and less like suicide bombers. He had to point the gun at an individual and shoot. This takes a different kind of thinking and logic to his insanity. He did not die in this action (like a real jihadist) and he did not point the gun on himslef. A man with his experience and background can figure out how to fix a bomb to himself and set it off.
He’s mad. No doubt and he is mad at Americans. But I think his breakdown comes far before anything having to do with his religion or to think that this wacko who kept going off in front of others or during counseling sessions was an unidentified Msulim terrorist in our midst. Crazy – yes. But not a plant. His actions don’t fit. A real jihadist would have followed a pattern to make his point.
My father was a civilian electrician who worked for the Navy during WW2. He went to Pearl Harbor ten days after the attack and served in Guam after the war. Most of what I know about his service at Peral came not from him, but from his sister. He revealed very little to her, even less to my mother or to his kids. All we really knew was that he never wanted to go back to Hawaii: “If you ever go, you’ll go w/out me.”
Thus, because my mother always had told me when I questioned her that he “didn’t like to talk about it,” I asked him very few questions. What few I asked were met with either grunts or shrugs. (I found out years later, after his death, from my aunt, that my dad was transported out to the crippled ships in the harbor and that he labored to re-store electrical wiring even as he saw others pulling out parts of dead bodies from the wreakage.)
Thus, used to my dad’s silence on the matter, I was stunned one day when the topic came up, and he mentioned Pearl and an experience he had had. Dad was not the type to let anyone see hurt so the fact that he brought this up at all was astonishing for all kinds of reasons .
A close family friend had dropped by, and my father and he talked as I sat listening. I really don’t recall how the topic came up–I guess the topic was his being Italian and our friend’s being Portuguese, and they were speaking of the slurs they had heard as kids if they roamed out of their neighborhoods. Dad was born and raised in the Bronx.
All of a sudden, with both rage and hurt in his voice, he told us that some “big-whig” Naval commander had called him into headquarters and questioned him about his loyalty to the U.S. My dad, animated now, scooting to the edge of his recliner, his eyes bulging as he told the story, said bitterly, “I told him to go to hell. If they wanted me there, fine. If not, I was a g.d. civilian and could walk out any damn time I felt like it.” (I have left out a few choice words.)
Not even my mother had heard this story. He had kept that to himself or at least not shared it with his family all those years. He went on to tell us that the civilians with Italian last names, especially those working on the ships, had been called in at one point or another. He was among the first and was thus stunned and unprepared by it.
As a young woman, I felt righteous indignation upon hearing this. “How dare they do that to my father, a good and decent man, unabashedly proud of his America, the country in which he’d been born.” I felt sorry for him and had that naval commander been in front of me at that moment, I felt I might have spat in his eye.
After our friend left, I said something like ” How dare they do that to you.” By now, he’d returned to his more usual taciturn, practical self. He shrugged, the transformation complete. “They had to.”
Now I, all of about 21, full of the idea that perfection was possible in the world, full of myself–convinced that I was fair but that others were not– still reeling from the story and the sight and the sound of my father’s hurt feelings, sat staring at him. I didn’t get it. Didn’t get him.
Many years later, I get it. I get him. The world isn’t perfect. People aren’t perfect. There are those that will do you and your loved ones harm even as you offer them your hand. You must protect yourself if only to protect those you love who need your protection. Sometimes that means people’s feelings will get hurt.
My dad carried the memory, and, as I saw, it still hurt when he recalled the indignity. However, it didn’t destroy him or his family or his country or his love for either. He was man enough to understood its practicality, its necessity, and he’d be enraged if he thought that those who are supposed to protect us today worried so much about hurt feelings that they’d sacrifice innocents.
I can’t even imagine, not even a little, how betrayed the family of those innocents feel–to know their country worried so much about political correctness or that those in command so worried about their careers that they sacrificed innocent lives for “hurt feelings.”
Carole,
I feel very sad for the families left behind from this. This tragic. But it seems in American in this day and age – we should have read the signs much better – yet, again.
BTW, I , too have personal experience from a familial relationship about the horrors of those we question and doubt during wartime. It is not easy. Someone should have given this guy the thrid degree when his rants began. And probably dishcharged him from the military or at least limited his contact with others severely. He obviously and outspokenly did not agree with the American policy. How obvious does it need to be?? The guy was not fit to be there.
Oh, Mary. What is “Muslim terrorism” or any other kind, for that matter? Those who commit atrocities in the name of dogma may be “nutcases” but that doesn’t mean they aren’t terrorists.
What are you afraid of?
Carole,
That’s my question to you. Are you so afraid that your own culture can create a mass killer such as this.
You have taken the easy path and put this man’s religion with murder instead of this man with murder.
You look for the easy answer and do not look passed to the obvious – he was not a suicide bomber. He walked in , pointed a gun at people, looked them in the eye, shot and killed them. He did not turn the weapon on himself and he survived.
Big difference.
One of the conclusions of the specialists who studied shootings like this one was that for some reason humanity was degraded in the eyes of the shooter. This guy didn’t invest much here, which probably gave him few reasons to love life.
Check this out:
I wouldn’t be surprised if this were the root cause, besides his development or difficult temperament. He invested a disproportionate amount in extremist beliefs and seems he was in a tense state. The Pittsburgh gym shooter had a similar issue, but was no Islamic extremist.
Individualism doesn’t have to be the cause, but it may not work for all. That is, some seem to be lost in individualistic settings, but may thrive in other cultures. For instance, this guy was Islamic, and in most of their communities in the Arab world every man is integrated and accepted, marriages are fixed and men decide. It’s a different paradigm which is darn efficient at least demographically. If you look at the highly individualistic societies, Western ones, they all seem to have less marriages, less children, more temporary couples, more depression, consumption etc.
“Causes” tend to pile on each other, it’s never just one cause. So saying it’s narcissism, in my opinion, only says that someone was stuck in a maladaptation. But I think what leads to violent outcomes is not only in the culprit, but also in his environment. This is I asked why does this type of events happen more often in your country. Access to weapons or something in society? Because when a shooter already acted out, he put himself outside of the order and society is going to defend itself by looking for symptoms in the perpetrator. This is why I challenged your method of looking for a culprit, a particular one, in narcissism. This method tends to keep a blanket of silence over whatever is going on in the social environment and single out the nutcase, as if these things appear out of a vacuum. If you don’t know the causes right, you can’t do prevention right.
Being alone and lonely can cause many mental defects to become exagerrated in strange actions. I feel sorry for everyone involved. Usually a family member sets up a meeting between two people for marriage. Where was his family? Where were his friends?
@David Blakselee
I think narcissism was a contributing factor, but it’s a whole bunch of them. If, let’s say this guy found a wife/girlfriend there would have been no killings. My 2 cents.
Mary, I believe individuals are responsible for their own actions. I don’t think the Muslim or Arab culture should assume responsibility for creating this man. He created his own reality. He used his Muslim faith to act out his anger, to justify it. He took from his faith what he wanted in order to convince himself his rage was blessed by his God.
Let’s say that instead of killing people at Fort Hood while screaming out his God’s name, he had instead murdered Muslims while screaming, “America is great!”
Had he done that, the world and I would have seen him as an “American” terrorist exacting retribution on the Muslim world.
What do you people mean by “Muslim” terrorist? It has just now occurred to me that you believe the adjective “Muslim” to be so narrow in its meaning that you are the one who has indicted a whole group of people.
Correction–
The first sentence in my last paragraph should read, “What do you think people mean by ‘Muslim’ terrorist”?
I would not see him as anything more than a disturbed man. That unfortunately is all he is. He may be a terrorist by someone’s standards but I don’t think he is supporting Allah, God, or country. He’s just fits the profile for a mass killer in our society. He fits the profile. He does not fit the profile of a terrorist.
Those are all statements you made in your comments above, Mary. So, do we or do we not know enough about the man to make the pronouncements you have made here?
Yes, everyone is innocent until proven guilty, innocent here being used merely to distinguish this man’s motives from his known crime. This jury is way out still. Yet you are certain he will not be shown to be a terrorist (even a solo one) whose Islamic religious extremism had a bearing on his actions. How so? Your empathy is understandable, but rather naive at this point.
And interestingly, you also have conveniently profiled me.
@ Anonymous,
Thanks for checking back in, on this post. I read your whole post, but was interested in commenting on a few ideas:
I can be reductionistic in my thinking and may have been so in this article. To persist in that error further
I believe Western civilization has substituted Consumption for Individualization.
Creating a firm sense of Self that is empty is key to consumerism…and can beget its own form of sublimated rage.
An empty self (what the narcissist hates about himself) can more easily be manipulated by authority and ideology.
You are right, there is never just one cause.
I am ascribing a final cause (in a string of causes)…which was probably an underlying defect in his personality.
As Carole so aptly put in her narrative about her father, we all suffer slights in an imperfect world…turning them into “causes” that destroy others is narcissistic.
@ Mary,
It has troubled me that people use words like “snapped” or “went mad” or “off his rocker.”
There are many who suffer from mental illness who are slandered by such descriptions (Not your intent). They struggle with anger and wounds in the world and do not become violent.
Such phrases unwittingly marginalize a responsible, mentally ill minority.
Furthermore, I think you are distorting NIdal Hasan a bit. I don’t think he went on any “tirades.” I think he had strong opinions and his behavioral self-control made him seem healthy enough to have such opinions without risk of acting them out.
It is horribly difficult, but reasonable to not blame his CO, or his religion, or our culture…but to blame the bright, upper middle-class, well-educated man who two months ago bought a particular type of gun which shoots bullets to defeat kevlar and turned against:
1. People in his own uniform (who had cared for and supported him during his training)
2. A young woman who was pregnant.
3. A nineteen year old recent enlistee.
4. And so on.
I have begun to wonder:
Our creative exploration of the myriad of reasons why a person does what Nidal Hasan has done may be due to preventing such things in the future…
But deep down, I think these people terrorize the general public. That experience, I believe, triggers a psychological defense “identification with the aggressor,” in which we seek to lower our sense of vicarious trauma (and possible risk) by empathizing with the perpetrator.
If I empathize with the myriad of possible reasons for his rage and don’t hold him personally responsible , it is likely to soothe him and he won’t turn against me.
Has anyone had such a personal encounter and found that identification does deescalate…even though huge facts and personal responsibility are often ignored?
Premeditated and reasoned (however treasonous and insane-appearing) acts.
David,
You’re right it was not my intention to marginalize or to inappropriately use names for mental illnesses. My point was that the shooter is responsible not his religion, not his anything. He seems to exhibit all the same things that a very isolated individual does. There are other aspects I notice (just from the news) of course we are not getting the whole picture and a distorted one at best.
We have had several so called lone gunmen shootings recently – in the last 50 years. None of them are being called terrorists. Yet, this is a sad commentary on our society that when an individual becomes angry with a group of “selected” individuals be them from work, school, church etc….people take it upon themselves to begin shooting in a crowd.
Yes – I have. David, is there a way to describe the process an individual goes through when they are de-sensitizing themselves? For instance, when we know, feel, or experience something that initially we know is wrong, does not feel good physcially, etc., however, we are compelled to do it anyway, and then through rationalizing the wrong to right, discomfort to comfort, etc., we gradually de-sensitize ourselves and any prior feelings or knowledge of right or wrong now don’t matter? Is this a part of narcissism? Does one develop narcissism in varying degrees and is it a defense mechanism?
David,
As far as empathisizing with the gunman – hmmmm – to make ourselfs feel safe?
I don’t think so. It does frighten me. And I do care about the man/woman/child who feels they must go to such a length for whatever reason. I even care about the thoughts and feelings of a suicide bomber – albeit at a far distance.
Debbie,
You have begun to discuss me instead of the gunman. Interesting. Whatever.
Oh, brother! No, Mary, I am merely responding to your charge here:
And here:
But, as you said, “Whatever.” I am done. Fruitless and pointless. Let justice be served. God bless our freedom fighters.
@ Ann,
So, Trauma begets anxiety…
One form of anxiety is depersonalization and derealization, for the victim.
Does this “emptying” of personal experience, make the victim more capable of empathy…toward the perpetrator?
I think so, for one signficant reason:
The victim, years afterward is filled with self-loathing and disgust. This level of self-hatred cannot fit the facts…
It must be an internalization of the hatred of the perpetrator (complete identification for self-preservation purposes)…
I think this happens at a micro-level for vicarious victims (readers and viewers of traumatic attacks), small amounts of vicarious trauma cause a dip in empathy toward the victim and in that space empathy for the perpetrator rushes in (in a convoluted way, to help protect the victim).
I think that is why the media, predictably, runs toward the perpetrator with curiosity and compassion.
Vicarious Stockholm syndrome…(that is a stretch).
This is based upon the experiences of my clients (and myself) and based up some theory and science.
I think this explains the lack of empathy for people who experience SSA…
Which is why I think fighting Narcissism is what we share with GLBT advocates…
@ Ann,
I think the perpetrator may experience depersonalization and derealization immediately after the attack.
As they successfully empty their rage into the victims they pick.
In “healthier perpetrators” they are wracked with horror and guilt (they become actively suicidal), afterwords…often in police custody.
This is all very blunt and please ignore this if it is too intense.
thank you so much David – always value what you write – when I referred to de-sensitizing, I meant from another perspective – one that would involve anyone who felt compelled to do something they originally and/or initially thought was wrong, didn’t feel good, etc. I have observed and experienced that most of the time we know what is right from wrong until we feel compelled (for a myriad of reasons) to rationalize the wrong into right and thus, begins the de-sensitizing process. When we have de-sensitized ourselves to what is wrong, it is no longer wrong to us and we begin to rationalize our actions and defend them – what happens in our minds to allow this to happen – is it narcissism or a defense mechanism that keeps us from another feeling we don’t want to have?
@ Ann
If this question is not rhetorical
Speaking of the victim here I think?
My experience is that their internalization of the trauma, the hatred and degrading, is “narcissistically encapsulated.” This makes it very resistant to new changes or new experiences. It is a rigid view of self constructed to protect a fragile and vulnerable sense of self (like the narcissist)…
Self-loathing is a false-self constructed in the face of a narcissistic attack (internalized homophobia, for example) to protect the true, fragile and vulnerable self, from further attack by identifying perpetually with the aggressor.
That is a lot of words strung together…and they are the words of a clinician and theoretician, not a scientist.
@ Ann,
Of course it depends…
But I see it as a defense against feeling the profound sense of vulnerability that all victims feel immediately prior to attack…
Victims often say, “I was so stupid, gullible, foolish.”
They rarely say, “He was so sneaky, dishonest, manipulative. He created his opportunity by disguising who he was.”
Judging the perpetrator excites in the victim more anxiety and fear of more violence.
On a legal level, it is why we do so much to protect jury’s anonymity.
thank you David – what if the person is not a victim and is faced with an everyday or unique personal moral dilemma – how does the process of de-sensitizing oneself happen and become a way of life? What we originally/initially know or think to be wrong becomes right after this process. Examples – stealing, abusing alcohol or drugs, extra-marital affairs, same gender attraction crossing over to same gender sex, foul language, lying, slovenly appearance/grooming, sense of entitlement, etc. Where one might experience this as a sporadic dynamic, another experiences it as a way of life. I think – at least it seems this way.
Many Americans cannot emotionally tolerate the notion that anyone should dislike them or hate them. This should not be surprising, considering that throughout our short history as a nation, we have idealized ourselves at the same time others have idealized us as well. Much of our high opinion of ourselves and the high esteem with which we are regarded by others is very much deserved; much is not.
At some point, societies like ours become similar to animals who’ve lost their survival instinct. The voices of those who’ve retained fitness are competing with those who’ve lost it.
Yes.
It’s pretty obvious he had a hard time reconciling his faith and his practice of his faith with his life here. Lap dances, strippers…as I recall the 9/11 guys did the same thing.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/09/national/
Point added to my post above–
Many people simply cannot or will not assimilate to the point they can live emotionally healthy lives in a culture that has values and practices that are very different from their own, and they would be better off living a culture that supports their belief/value systems, and the society would be better off as well.
Diversity is wonderful only if there is assimilation; the failure or inability to assimilate is harmful to both the individual and to the society into which he hasn’t assimilated.
Haha – it’s difficult living in a free society where you are allowed to do just about anything. It takes growth to discipline oneself. I think that’s why many people would rather outlaw their own vices rather than control their own lives. God also gives a choice. It’s not easy.
Here is a video montage of the victims of the Fort Hood attack, pray for their loved ones.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yXrhGOEbWE
Sorrow makes us all children again – destroys all differences of intellect. The wisest know nothing. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson
Brooks does not take the narcissism angle…but talks with poignancy about the narrative we tell ourselves when we are troubled.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/opinion/10brooks.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
Thanks for the link, David.
There are a lot of sad things about all of this, not the least of which is that a huge percentage of influential members of the fourth estate, people who CANNOT do a good job unless they retain skepticism, people who ARE PAID to be skeptical did not do their jobs.
Of great threat to a free society is the lack of a skeptical press.
Good one, David. FYI, here’s a link that does not require registration at the NYT. I can never remember my registration info for all the papers anyway:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/opinion/10brooks.html
Remembering, paring for and thanking all who have served:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1B81kW814qA&feature=related
Praying. “As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them.” ~ John Fitzgerald Kennedy
David Blakeslee,
I have an idea why people identify more with the victims after events like this one take place. One is because they are afraid for their own lives, it’s just fear of death, nothing too deep here, and the other is related, because they hate to see others suffer, because that makes their minds simulate pain in themselves, which they either don’t want to see or make it quit. So identification with the victims has no altruistic bases IMO, but people may make attributions about themselves being altruistic.
Whereas I think fear of death is universal, attitude towards death and the value of life can vary a lot depending on culture. It comes as the ultimate shock to a culture like ours, which values presence and manifestation in the here and now (including the stuff on consumption and narcissism you mentioned), to see people killed, no matter for what. It seems it’s something else for Muslims who believe they are doing a sacrifice for their god and for the Japanese who thought surrendering alive to the enemy is not an option. It’s really hard for us to comprehened why, it could be because values are so mummified in the West, that life has become a value in itself.
I wouldn’t ignore this, the cultural divides, because sometimes they make inhabitants of the same house blind to what’s going on from the outside of their own comfort and mental habituation. On the other hand, it’s weird that shootings occur more in a culture which values human life more than other cultures. You don’t see many shootings done by ordinary people in India, China or Russia. Life is cheaper there and weapons are expensive and harder to come by.
Sometimes what causes a phenomenon can be very unusual. Some researchers have linked increased suicide risk with countries which don’t get enough sun. Much the same, when shootings take place there are going to be people doing their job, investigating causes and writing reports. They usually find the same things, which explains why they can prevent them.
Now NPR is asserting mental illness based upon heresay amongst prior colleagues:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120313570
Our professional psychological culture sees nearly everything through that lens…whether it is criminal behavior or religious behavior…psychology interprets it authoritatively.
NPR cannot assert mental illness, without a formal assessment.
Schizoid? Asperger’s?
NPR makes the same mistake as others do, preferring to call someone “crazy” (and slander other mentally ill folks) rather than calling them calculating and mean (which better fits the facts).
I offer these three essays from Jerry Pournelle, a reasoned man I respect and one who knows history.
Also, perhaps you have heard about an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm written and produced by Larry David, he of Seinfeld fame? I have never seen the show but did read last week several blurbs about a recent episode in which a character urinates on a crucifix. The Catholic and other Christian churches were understandably outraged and voiced their displeasure in a flood of letters, emails, etc. David’s response in referring to his satiric show was, “We make fun of everybody. We have not singled you [Christians] out.”
However, as several columnists pointed out, it is not true that David’s show has made fun of everything and everybody. A glaring example is that he has never made fun of Islam nor the prophet Mohammad. One would hope that was because he had made a moral judgement not to but of course that is not the case. The writers point out that David is well aware of the fatwa issued on anyone who denigrates Islam or even portrays Mohammad. They went on to discuss the cases of Rushdie as well as the case of the last moviemaker who made a movie portraying the prohet–he was murdered in a fatwa. Thus, as for Larry David–no “brave” man nor honest man he.
One of Pournelle’s essays, the last, shines a light on what it does or doesn’t mean to be Muslim. I think it’s are thoughtful piece as are the others. The first one is the most recent.
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/2009/Q4/view596.html#Islam
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/2009/Q4/view596.html#Monday
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/2009/Q4/view595.html#treason
Ironically, because that is what they want most, I don’t see these NPR media types and their ilk as “fair” at all, but as milquetoast, weak-kneed, afraid to dig deeply as a Murrow would have done, for fear of what they might find. I don’t want any straight news journalist “on my side.” I want skepticism from them. They are too concerned with what their circle of friends might think. Imagine that.
Actually, I am heartened that ABC has been in the lead with some decent journalism on this. I didn’t think they had it in them.
Very good points, David and Carole. I, too, have been pleasantly surprised by some of the network coverage.
And then there are other perspectives. Please note that a suicide bomber or jihadists is supposed to conceal his identity , blend in with the group and then attack it.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/11/texas.fort.hood.investigation/index.html
@ Mary,
I think this is the quote you are referring to…
@ Carole, Debbie and Mary,
What I am asking readers to do in this article is to
1. Maintain their compassion and attunement to the victims first
2. Consider that Narcissism is at or near the root, not victimhood, mental illness, not vicarious PTSD…and not the Muslim faith (generally).
He may have been victimized…he might have had some vicarious PTSD…he certainly was a Muslim…
But intense narcissism (I think) is required to carry this out.
I make this point (to repeat) that this attitude, in milder form is aimed at those with SSA…Even though we want to blame global institutions like FOTF or NARTH or GLSEN.
To allude to an earlier post “What We Have In Common,” that we have not thoroughly explored, is that we have all been victims of narcissism in the debate over SSA.
Here are brief narratives about the victims, some are married, some are “loners,” some are members of minority groups…all served.
Less that 200 words are written about each person…read them, remember them and pray for their loved ones.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/06/fort.hood.shootings.victims/index.html
Psychology Today,
Goof City:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/21st-century-aging/200911/tolerating-the-intolerable-fort-hood-ambiguity/comments
Jeez…I didn’t read all the comments, but enough to know that all of you are too tied up in your academia to use your common sense. Yes, the longer you practice your profession, it appears that you lose that common sense that you should have or at least been taught.
Yes, at first the media gave wrong or misleading information, yes, everyone should have waited to get more details (supposedly facts) before commenting.
But for those of you who are not at war (which appears to be most of you) I suggest that you educate yourself in the war that we are currently in up to our ears and that the American and other Nations Military are giving their lives for and being maimed and subjected to every single day!!!
And as far as Islam goes…I suggest a very intensive education on the subject for each of you. I have been studying it since 2001 and it scares the hell out of me.
Here is a place to start on this current situation and subject:
Here is the truth in the matter. Pamela tells it.
I know it is hard, but read it with an open mind and google for background information or subject matter. It should be easy for you educated professionals. It took me several years to understand the threat and the implications for America, the world and for my family and myself.
Papa Ray (with just a high school education)
West Texas
Oh yeah, that one hits home for me this week. And, embarrassed as I am to admit it, I have had to examine how I may have reacted out of narcissism, myself recently. I am speaking especially with regard to the larger gay/ex-gay debate.
And Papa Ray, our entire nation is at war, lest we forget. Brave men and women are giving their lives every day, and they also have stories. Those of us who have served our country in uniform at any time know this well.
I will never forget the eerie feeling of standing at the edge of the fjords that linked to the Bering Sea off Northern Norway’s coast in March 1980, knowing full well that Soviet submarines were just a little way out there, monitoring our every move (I was with the 36th Marine Amphibious Unit as an Allied Press Information officer), while NATO conducted Operation Anorak Express. In those days, it was still the threat of Communism that scared us. Of course, our hostages in Iran had only been freed a couple months prior to that. We did not have a full picture yet of what awaited us.
Today, we have female Marines getting killed in Iraq. I was only playing war games. Yes, we cannot deceive ourselves into thinking there is not plenty to be worried about with Islamic extremism. This is a real threat to us all.
David,
Can society or societal and cultural institutions (like schools, faiths, places of worship, families, nuclear and extended, etc.) teach and instill narcissism in some whether they attempt to or not? Can they identify those most susceptible to it and use them to suit their purposes?
@ Carole,
Yes…
Setting limits with narcissism (through discipline and appropriate punishment helps)
Encouraging empathy helps.
Indulgence hurts.
Avoidance of limit setting hurts.
Most adaptations to narcissistic styles start in early childhood, but the society spends a great deal of effort trying to modify such an adjustment or to sublimate it.
It may be that Hasan attempted to sublimate it through professional identity and religious practice.
In my career, I saw, David, how a talent for motivating others could be used for either good or ill purposes. I know how many people, young and otherwise, are capable of being led down one path or its opposite–by one person, by a group, by an idea….
Put a John Wooden with evil intent among a group of young adults and he could identify quickly from among hundreds the ones most suited for his purpose, could train them, could change course quickly should he determine that his tactics/strategies were not achieving his desired end, etc.
I’ll not argue your points about narcissism. At some point we all either lose our ability to empathize or consciously choose not to empathize, especially when survival is uppermost in our minds.
However, I’d argue that the movement that promotes jihadism exists precisely because those who promote it know that there are Hasans and Attas out there….every political or military “movement”…hey, for that matter any human enterprise that tries to achieve something whether it’s win a war or make money or win a game and those who lead such movements use methods that manipulate the susceptible. Even Mary Kay motivational speakers know that. Appealing to narcissism is just one tactic. The motivators needn’t know the name of the term in order to recognize in people a certain trait or a certain need that makes them tick, what makes them do what the motivator wants them to do.
Artistotle’s topics of invention say it all.
“It may be that Hasan attempted to sublimate it through professional identity and religious practice.
Yea sure. On the day he murdered and wounded our American service men and women, All of what Hasan did was because of his religious practice and his belief in it.
All of it!!
Papa Ray
@ Carole
Beware extremely well groomed ladies in bright pink Cadillacs and Oldsmobiles!
Seriously, narcissistic wishes can be sublimated into religious, athletic or political submission… and leaders recognize this vulnerability and exploit it.
@ Papa Ray,
His religious practice guided his narcissistic strivings…it gave him a grandiose reason to express his revulsion and disgust of others.
Papa Ray:
I think David Blakeslee is right. By all accounts, this guy had a mental state which was going from bad to worse and his extremist religious beliefs gave him some kind of an outlet for his anger and hope of salvation.
Papa Ray,
The army is going to accuse the psychiatrist of premeditated murder of 12 people.
Terrorism seems to be out of the question right now.
Papa Ray,
No.
He shows all the hallmarks of an insolated individual who grasps on to a relgious ideology and then twists it just like others have done. He happened to be Muslim and probably used that to manipulate others into letting him slide by with all the other red flags waving very high and rapidly. He was a distrubed man who turned his religion into his “justification”. I have seen Christians kill people in the name of God, too. That is not Christianity anymore than what Hasan showed is Islam.
13 people.
How so?
But both are a form of terrorism.
How many Christians are waging holy jihad against Muslims at the moment?
David said to Papa Ray,
I agree and my point is that he and Atta and the others and that all terrorists use a “grandiose reason” to do what they do. What handier “grandiose reason[s]” than religious teachings which they believe “empower” them? This guy expected to die, like all jihadists. He expected his jihadist brothers and sisters to celebrate him, to idealize his death, to turn him into a hero. It’s the narcissist’s ultimate antidote to impotence—-to be turned into a hero.
I get the feeling some have obscured the meaning of “terrorism.” Maybe the word frightens some. Others, I am afraid, avoid using it because it disturbs their political biases. That is a victory for our enemies.
I still believe that common sense is really the retention of the survival instinct and that some have lost it.
Mary said,
If a person kills using his Christian faith as a “gradiose reason” to justify his killing, he is a Christian terrorist, Mary. It matters not what you think Christianity and Islam teach, preach. It matters what the terrorist uses to spur him, embolden him in using words to describe him.
Of course it is terrorism. Urban gangs are a form of terrorism. I don’t believe this guy’s target was the United States of America and Christians. I believe his motive was from mental illness and in the truist sense of the term not a miltary action of terrorism at all.
Remember David Koresh and Jim Jones? Didn’t they use their religion as justification for murdesr/suicides? It was not their religion that commited these horrific acts, as Mary so rightly points out, it is their twisted interpretation of their religion that, to them, justified what they did. Muslims practicing Islam are not all cut from the same cloth.
Just as all Christians aren’t. Thank God…
Jones and Koresh didn’t kill people who held beliefs they felt were in opposition to their own. They killed those who shared beliefs.
Thankfully!
Let’s see how this individual gets charged. So far – premeditated murder. No acts of treason or terrosrism against the United States have been filed, yet.
It won’t matter in terms of how he is punished. Just as those who may be convicted of a “hate crime” know, a person only has one life to forfeit or spend in prison, regardless of what motivated his heinous crime. Justice will be served.
And it really isn’t necessary to keep pointing out that not all Muslims or Christians are extremists or terrorists. We get that already. Either he is or he isn’t. The investigation will uncover the pertinent facts. No one here is making sweeping condemnations or pronouncements that I know of (except to declare Hasan mentally ill or definitely not an extremist, interestingly).
We can all rightly condemn extremism and terrorism. We can surmise that this crime might have been such an act, but no one can declare that at this point. Every time the word terrorist or Muslim or extremist is used in its proper context, we don’t have to have palpitations here. The man is innocent until proven guilty. Terrorism is a bad thing. Two different statements.
Carole,
check your facts. they did kill others. or ordered it.
Recall that Jones invited his flock to drink the Kool Aid. They did. They believed as he did. Koresh was encamped with his co-believers as well.
Hasan didn’t go into his nearby Mosque, didn’t travel to a Muslim community/neighborhood, didn’t take a plane to a Palestinian camp in Jordan and empty his weapons, did he? I mean, are you seriously arguing that he didn’t see his victims as “others?” He did not seek out those who practiced his faith, did not seek out those who hated the American military, did not seek out those who might have harbored anti-American values and slaughter them, did he?
The word “terrorist” refers to those who murder those they perceive in opposition to their strongly-held political/cultural beliefs. Koresh and Jones are just as contemptible as Hasan–but using the word “terrorist” to describe them is your attempt to take a noun that has multiple meanings and promiscously chose its most generic meaning from the verb “terrorize.” IOW, you are purposefully avoiding its more specific, relevant meaning.
Even using your inapt definition–the drinkers of the Kool Aid evidently looked forward to what they felt was their immediate heavenly destination–seems they didn’t feel terrorized. Are you seriously suggesting that the Guyana group (other than the children) can be compared to the victims at Fort Hood? I am stating the obvious, but I guess I have to–THEY HAD A CHOICE! I hope you realize the absurdity of that comparison.
Hey, Mary–I live in an area very close to many who died in that Guyana mess. I know people, personally know people whose relatives died in that mess. They were people who CHOSE to follow Jim JOnes and his People’s Temple. Their relatives had tried over and over again to get them to reject that a–hole, but they made a choice. When they got on the plane, they made a choice–some of them had followed him for years.
David Blakeslee said:
This is not true. NPR does not assert that Hassan was mentally ill. Certainly, they suggest it, and want the reader to believe that, but no where do they claim he was mentally ill. All the have done (unfortunately) is what just about every other news organization (and several people on this blog) has done, picked their own rational for why Hassan did what he did then set out to try and prove it.
Hopefully, the military investigators won’t be as easily swayed by their biases and try to remain objective in piecing together what happened and why.
Carole,
Check your facts again.
Carole,
Check your facts again.
Forgive the spelling errors–typing in anger will do that.
Bottom line—NO, the victims at Ft. Hood were not, WERE NOT like the adults in Guyana or at Koresh’s Branch Davidian compound. If you think you can make the case that they were, I’d love to see you try to do it with their families, loved ones, countrymen and women.
OK…I guess my thinking was right before I made my first post. But I’ll say it out loud now and leave all of you alone.
Your ignorance of Islam is tremendous, enormous and shameful for supposedly higher educated adult professionals.
Islam is a religion/social/everything cult that dictates how an individual lives and everything that they do or think right up to the time they die. Every thing, from which hand to wipe their ass to who they can lie to and especially concerning Infidels (that is all of you).
It is a cult that can not and will not change and is not compatible with anyone/any government outside of Islam. If you don’t convert, pay taxes to stay alive you deserve (according to Allah) to be put to death. In fact if you do any number of things and are an infidel, you deserve to be put to death. Only a few things reserve that faith to Muslims. (tip- Killing Infidels is not one of them) Now saying that the Quran is wrong will certainly earn you that as well as switching religions.
This Terrorist that was masquerading as a U.S. Soldier and Citizen (and many others are) decided that he would carry out Allah’s instructions that he wrote for all Muslims in their holy book the Quran. You can say that only radicals believe the words in the Quran but you would be wrong. It is just that most are not going to kill themselves if they have plenty of others to do it. And they do, they say that about ten percent of Muslims worldwide are radical extremists, or ones that actually follow Allah’s teachings to the word. Well what is ten percent of two billion?
Now your going to tell me that all of those millions “religious practice guided
histheir narcissistic strivings”Give me a break.
Please educate yourselves, until you do, most of you are part of this problem
Papa Ray
Ever read much about Mohammad, the prophet? Care to compare/contrast the account of his life with that of your savior, Christ?
The last comment, a question, was to Mary and Ann.
Papa Ray is right about fundamentalist Islam and the problem is that fundamentalist Islam has millions of followers. That the Muslims who are your neighbors and mine are not “fundamentalist” is blinding you. Mohammad himself, unlike, say Christ, was a warrior who raped and pillaged. A fundamentalist uses that as an instructive lesson.
Can’t recall Jesus ever calling for the death of someone — for any reason. “I have come that they might have life — and that more abundantly…”
He shall be called the Prince of Peace.
@ Ken,
Thanks for checking in…the article I cited was followed up by a radio spot on Oregon Public Broadcasting this a.m.
They referred to him as “psychotic”…that he had traits of fragmented thinking…and so on…citing mental health professionals who worked with him…
Very little of what they cite would fit the diagnosis they assert.
I found this quote interesting and wondered how it might pertain:
Thoughts?
Try this…from the same man:
Ellis, A. (1993). The Advantages and Disadvantages of Self-Help Therapy Materials, Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 24. 336
Mary said,
This shouldn’t surprise you or anyone who has followed this administration. This President doesn’t recognize terrorism–just like you. It doesn’t exist if you don’t name it as such. You can wish it away by refusing to name it.
Were authorities to call it “terrorism, ” he’d have to admit its existence and just as hard for him would be admitting that an act of terror on our soil happened on his watch. After all, he spent much of his candidacy trying to convince people that enemies fade away with kumbaya moments.
Authorities who might want to charge Hasan with acts of terror might face the end of careers under this administration.. .the same kind of wussy, self-absorbed behavior that allowed this guy to do what he did in the first place.
Irony of ironies–the countries of Europe which Obama wanted to win over have been excoriating him for what they call his “weakness.” So much for kumbaya.
Love the quote, David. I agree with him, on both points.
@Papa Ray
Islam is a threat in many ways, not just to USA, terrorism has been a threat until now, but this shooting doesn’t have the signs of organised violent act meant to induce terror for ideological aims. It was just a guy with an empty life who killed people out of resentment and who was desperately looking for something to give him a sense of roots and identity. This guy was disconnected from people in general, including other Muslims, and he probably tried to give his life some structure by using the religion of his family and looking for a woman that had the same belief, because women are supposed to be submissive to men in Islam and apparently that would have helped him find a wife.
His problem was lack of affiliation and finding a wife. Islam could have provided him with that. He took that path, he still failed, he became hardened in this mind solace he found, the more he defended it the fringier he looked to his peers, he thought they were singling him out for his beliefs, but it was mainly his behaviour. He felt his life was nullified by others because he was a “good guy”, believing in something that promised to give him some worth. His mental state deteriorated, he killed. Now he’s going to be tried, convicted and probably get the IV.
Compare this case with that of terminally ill people from the Muslim world who volunteer to become suicide bombers because their families get a certain amount of money for that. This guy emptied his house and gave away his things because he was prepared to check out of life without expecting anyone to get any reward, either Islamic extremist group, family or person. There was nothing for him here that gave him motivation, his religious belief was just a dream of a promise that one day he could have a life. I don’t think this guy should be profiled as some mean, conniving Satan, who was doing a great job pretending he was a nice guy to others. I think he was vulnerable and had some mental problems. If your army specialists are going to rule out any plea on insanity, then he’s gets execution. End of story, no extreme religious motivation.
Actually, I wouldn’t be surprised if they studied cases like this and found out it’s nice guys who turn into killers. Probably Osama bin Laden is a nice guy who is responsible with many deaths, many of them innocent.
Lastly, if you want to have this debate, separately from the Hasan case, you should also ask yourself why did extreme Muslim terrorists started to target America. I’ll tell you why: because America supported Israel in the Middle East conflict. There were no Islamic terrorist attacks against the US before the 90′s. USA supported the same side as al Qaeda against the Russians in the war in Afghanistan in 88-89. You were practically allies with bin Laden, how about that?
Carole,
A sitting US Senator was killed by the Jones group and ATF agents were killed by the Koresh group.
Carole,
This administration does not recognize terrorism?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/11/12/mosque.seized/index.html
Again, you might want to check your facts.
Me, check my facts, Mary, me?
John Burton was NOT our CA senator. He represented my district at the time, my district! I don’t need a history lesson about Guyana.
You have all the senators mixed up. John Burton was a state senator, first my assemblyman years ago.
He and his brother were friends with Leo Ryan….Leo was murdered by Jones’ fanatics.
Nonetheless – wasn’t a non-Jonesian killed?
Either way Carole, I disagree with your perspective. It seems, so do a lot of people. Take your argument up with others. I’ve made my point.
Yes, people who went down there to bring people back, including Leo Ryan, were killed.
According to this morning’s polls, 60%+ of Americans call Hasan a Muslim terrorist. Even more in Europe.
Perspectives matter– seeing things for what they are so that the right policy derives is important. There are many people who wish to kill you.
“Just because a bunch of people get togehter and decide what reality is going to be does not mean that is reality” Lily Tomlinson
Hahaha. Carole – where do you get your research? The people close to the case are not charging the man with terrorism, acts of war , or treason. I don’t care if you are biased – I don’t have to be.
Lily Tomlin, comedienne , is your guiding light? Saw Lily at the Concord Pavilion once and at SF’s old comedy club, the Boarding House, twice— fantastic entertainer, but….not my moral or philosophical guiding light or compass.
Can we get past aphorisms?
Your HAHA’s make you sound childish just as when you say, “I don’t care if you are biased–I don’t have to be” you bring to mind a six year old with her index fingers plugged in her ears as she cries, “NA NA NA na na naHHHHHH.”
What you were really saying a while back and are repeating with such inanities now is that you don’t want to discuss. You are still silent about those millions who practice fundamentalist Islam, the ones like Hasan? Like Atta? Like the Indonesians who kidnap and torture Western visitors? Like those who shoot Afghan women in the back of the head? Okay, go ahead and refuse to believe they exist and that they hate you and that one day, maybe even now, they are among you and yours.
Carole,
You seem to be getting carried away. I hope the best to you – we just disagree.
Mary, he is a soldier charged with murdering 13 fellow Americans, all but one of whom were also soldiers, during a time of war. They happened to be in garrison, prepping for deployment to the war zone. Anyone who cannot see the treason in that is blind or politically correct to the max. I am judging the act itself, and not the man’s complex (or perhaps quite simple) motives.
Carole,
I know you addressed this to me and Mary but am not sure why? As to the question though, yes, I have read about Mohammad, the prophet. I’m not sure I have ever declared my personal faith or belief in any kind of detail on this blog so I will answer in general terms. Regarding the second question, in my opinion, the difference between my pesonal understanding of Christ and my knowledge of Mohammad is very deep and very wide.
Carole,
Yes, this is correct, however, Jones and Koresh commited these acts rather than answer to authorities for holding people against their will. Am I right? Close to 1,000 people did the same thing on a flat mountain top in Israel by the Dead Sea. The difference is they were on top of Masada to escape their captors and when they could no longer hold them back with their limited defenses, they chose to die rather than live as pagens.
Yeah, I don’t know what that point was…. I am talking about one man in one situation and it has been exaggerrated out to all Muslims and My Savior. Which in the beginning if you will …. my savior does offer grace for the sinner, the misguided, the isolated and lonely.
Yes, it is and in varying ways. My personal belief is that when we feel capable of doing what we know is right, we usually do it. When an individual does not feel capable or the threat to their own survival (lots of ways to define this) is at stake, they usually will commit an act that sustains their comfort zone at the cost of others. This army psychiatrist had bad performance reviews from his superiors, was facing and unwanted deployment and, I think felt trapped. Add to that any teachings and associations he might have had with the dark side of those who practice radical Islam extremism and I can see how he justified to himself what he did. The same day this happened, I saw a young man who is a U.S. soldier with his wife and little girl – I stopped to say hello and thank him for his service and when I got back in my car I cried thinking about how many of those 13 soldiers had families and if I was crying, how did and could they feel.
As our empathy remains attuned to his victims, we are more capable of protecting vulnerable groups in the future.
Think about it this way…
A man, this week, killed his wife at work after she filed for divorce…she knew she was at risk and sought the support of local police.
Matthew Shepherd was brutually murdered by acquaintances, probably due to his vulnerability and sexual orientation.
Narcissism preys on the vulnerable and the unsuspecting.
Hasan could have attacked the base police station…instead he targeted unarmed soldiers, many of whom were in the medical profession.
Let’s keep our focus on the 13 and their loved ones.
Let’s keep our focus on the 13 and their loved ones.
David,
What would you like us to focus on regarding the 13 and their loved ones?
Ann,
My post at 4:40 yesterday point about the lives of Muhammad and Christ was to point out how/why vast millions of followers of the teachings of the two have such differing behaviors. To the vast followers of the fundamentalist “brand” of Islam—and they ARE vast— they are NOT “twisting their faith.” The words are right in front of them; their prophet did indeed lead a violent life and his life/teachings command them to kill infidels.
When people claim that “Islam is a peaceful religion” they fail to point out the historical and current truths–millions of followers of Muhammad use his life and directives to follow what you and I and any sane, intelligent person would NOT call a “peaceful” life. That millions of Muslims do NOT follow this fundamentalist “brand” is only partial comfort when millions of others DO. Your words that they are “twisting their religion” sound silly when they CAN POINT to Muhammad’s life and directives.
While there are some Christians who concentrate their fervor on the words of the Old, rather than the New Testament, 1) they don’t seem to have killed many people worldwide lately, have they, nor are they organized, nor do they number in the millions although their efforts to subjugate people, demonize them, are a part of history as well and if left to their own devices, they might try. 2) Other Christians keep them relatively in check by offering the New Testament, right?
Thus, it should surprise no one that there are those believers in Islam who will continue to practice their violent brand of faith–using the words and life of their prophet as their exemplar.
Simply put–your religion, your faith doesn’t direct you to kill; theirs does. They can point to the words and show you–they are incredulous over your words, “it’s a twisting.”
******************************************
My post regarding the Branch Davidians and Jim Jones was in response to Mary’s contention (and anyone else’s) that these too were “terrorists” because so many people were killed as a result of their brand of insanity. Jonestown? The Branch Davidian compound? These two ensconsced themselves and those of like mind into isolated compounds. They killed officials who went after them, who went to their encampments. Hardly what Atta and buddies or Hasan did–it was they who did the seeking of those who were NOT of like mind.
When an accosted person kills a policeman or any other official of a government agency, that is not enough to label them “terrorists.” Jeeeez.
Hasan sought out those whose beliefs he perceived differed from his and he attacked representatives of the US government on a US government installation and he planned it. Had he simply been a “crazy man, ” not a “terrorist,” he would have gone on a rampage elsewhere–in the 7-11 he visited each day, in the grocery store, at his apartment complex, in his mosque, etc. But he didn’t.
I have to agree with Papa Ray that until we educate ourselves we are a part of the problem.
Orwell’s words are prescient:
“To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.”
@ Ann,
Thanks for encouraging me to get practical:
Carol,
Yes, you are right.
Yes, I realize this. Also, perhaps I did not use the proper word when I said “twisted”. I should have probably said that some Muslims reject this part of Islamic teaching and, instead, practice other aspects of the religion.
Carole,
While it might be easy for all of us to make the above assumptions, which are more than likely correct, I would prefer to wait until a complete investigation to be completed and base my knowledge of what happened on facts as they are uncovered.
Yes, I agree to the extent that some do not educate themselves, or use critical thought, or turn their head the other way and pretend as though there is not problem. There is also the distinct possibility that others are very educated on the subject of Islam, Mohammed, etc. and a myriad of other subjects and choose to be part of the solution in a quiet and productive way.
Yes, I hope that we would all be cognizant of this. Love the Orwellian quotes
Thank you David – I appreciate this information.
We’ve had a lot of talk about narcissism in this thread, but it really goes back to where it originates — forgetting that this is a God-centric universe. If we kick Him off the throne and place ourselves (or any other god) there, we’ve got trouble.
carole said:
Or it could be that:
Hasan was a disturbed man who snapped and took out his frustrations on his co-workers.
Both of these scenarios fit the facts (given that little factual data that has been released about what happened). And there are many other scenarios that could explain why Hasan did what he did.
However, you can’t seem to get past the fact that Hasan was a muslim, and because of that, you seem to be blinded to the numerous other possibilities.
Now to be clear, Hasan’s religion may have played a very significant part in why he did what he did, or it may have been completely insignificant. I don’t know. And I’ve seen very few facts to indicate how significant it may have been. I’ve seen A LOT of spin by the media (and people on this blog) trying to convince people of their particular theory on the matter. But not much compelling evidence.
We qualify a lot on this blog…for good reason.
Oops
We qualify a lot on this blog…for good reason.
Debbie Thurman
Some are trying very hard to make Hasan Malik fit into the Muslim terrorist box. If they are right, then the reason why there was trouble is because he believed in his god.
Maybe he believed he was the hand of his god killing people who didn’t deserve to live, as Papa Ray said. Then who is the culprit: his god or him?
Ken, you said it could be that
Being disturbed and being a terrorist are not mutually exclusive. In fact, perhaps they go hand in hand. I have read people on this thread and heard a few voices in the pc media state that, “Any person who does this HAS to be a crazy man” —Their argument? Why, he was simply “unstable”, not “a terrorist.” One wonders why these same people didn’t call the 9/11 people “unstable.” MIght have something to do with the fact that NYC and DC, where they and their families live, were under attack. Hasan only went after people in podunk Texas afterall…. and primarily soldiers , not the media elite who live in NYC and DC, were victims.
You said,
Seems you haven’t been reading about some of the data collected–even Hasan himself saw himself as a Soldier of Allah which he had printed on his business cards. And, his emails?
blockquote>However, you can’t seem to get past the fact that Hasan was a muslim, and because of that, you seem to be blinded to the numerous other possibilities.
You’re right. I have too much common sense to not link his cultural and religious fervor with his actions. However, I note you cover your rear with, “Now to be clear, Hasan’s religion may have played a very significant part in why he did what he did….”
“May have”? Ya think?
Then you add,
. Gawd.
Your powers of reason are non-existent. I don’t ask you agree with me or be on my side. I only hope that enough people in this country are not of your mind. I am glad they don’t seem to be.
David,
Thought you might be interested. In this piece, Charles Krauthammer says,
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/11/13/medicalizing_mass_murder_99142.html
I am amazed at those who profess to be christians yelling, “Crucify him!” at this guy and saying things like justice will be served etc… Where is the compassion and the love of Christ at this time???
What an opportunity we have to demonstrate Christianity and this stuff is what spews out? I’m amazed.
Sigh – and Pilate washed his hands.
It is understandably more with the victims and their families right now. Doesn’t mean we can’t also feel compassion for their killer. But he will have to meet with justice, as well. Can you imagine the road these families will have to travel to forgive him? Some are going to really struggle with that, naturally. We are not superhuman in that regard. It takes time to get there. Let’s let God be God and we’ll do our best to be Jesus with skin on.
This event has just unleashed the underlying tension and fear many folks feel these days. Some may want to shrug it off or go into denial. We do need to face the very real problem of national security that is before us. We don’t have to live here in the U.S. with what other nations do on a daily basis. We somehow feel immune. No, we’re not.
We have to face the issue of principalities – not flesh and bone.
Another way to say it
Mary, you are mixing metaphors and principles, apparently without being aware of it. In the spiritual realm, yes, the battles are of another kind. We don’t go out looking for enemies to engage in the physical. We also don’t lie down and naively believe physical enemies (some of whom are earthly manisfestations of evil spiritual enemies, as you point out above) do not exist.
We fight spirit with spirit and flesh with flesh. Christ told his followers to be as wise as serpents and as innocent as doves. The Ephesians 6 armor of God is for the spiritual realm, the most important, as Christ also said to fear only the one who was able to destroy both body and soul. But we live in the real world where real enemies want to do us real harm. They do not recognize our God.
Love your enemies, yes. But be prudent and discerning at the same time.
True Debbie. And obviosly you and I see things differently. While you think I am mistaken, I think the same about your theology in practice.
Carole,
I am not sure what his motivation was for doing this and until I do know, I can only surmise. The attacks on 9/11 were a directive from radical Islamic extremeists to the ones that commited the acts. I am not so sure this was the case in Texas. I am also not ruling it out. My current thoughts are that this man could have acted alone out of hurt and anger and feeling very alone and displaced and without hope. Much like the young men did at Columbine and Virginia Tech or the individuals who commited similar acts at post offices and other work places.
Ann,
OBL issued directives and urgings (several times– we’ve many on tape) to those who were “pure” in their beliefs, to kill the infidels. He made clear they didn’t have to be part of an organized cell. Several well-known Muslim clerics, both in the Middle East and those in Britain as well, and even a few in the country, did the same after 9/11 and since.
American and Western terrorist experts told us to expect that either small cells, much smaller than the ones who conducted the 9/11 attacks OR that individual jihadists would likley being conducting attacks in the future. Remember? These warnings and reminders from our own leaders and security people were common–they pled with us to watch out for odd behavior and report it, and they reminded us that new tactics, such as the lone, in-your-backyard terrorist, or those in very small in groups as small as two, might become common. In fact, one such cell composed of only two people was in operation just a few miles to the east of where I now live. They were arrested in the small, quiet town of Lodi, a father and his son–one was convicted, the other trial ended in a mistrial, and I don’t know where things now stand since the media does grow tired of a story, you know? So much for vigilance, something that would have prevented the Texas murders and the 9/11 attacks themselves.
I say all this only to remind you that a person acting alone doesn’t negate his being a terrorist--OSL urged his followers to act in any way they saw fit in order to kill the infidels.
So, why do you use your contention that he may have acted alone as an argument against the idea he was a terrorist?
If authorities have evidence that the VA Tech murderer was part of any group, part of any institution or culture or cult, a follower of a belief system which had enouraged him or required him to exact revenge against others not part of that group, if they find that such a group, through their commands or their teachings urged him to kill, blessed him for so doing, then hell yes, call him a “terrorist” by all means! Call him a terrorist, and then name the culture or the institution or the group which confers their blessings or kudos on him; next, call him by that name–the ______VA Tech terrorist. Go ahead, fill in the blank if there is such evidence. I’ve no problem with that if it’s the truth.
The two Columbine murderers? Same thing. More than fine with me if they are called “terorists” if you find evidence they were following an institutionalized culture or system of authority or beliefs which commanded them or required them or praised them for slaughtering their fellow students.
Carole,
Perhaps I am not articulating well. Let me begin by saying I am well informed and very knowledgable about the points you cited in the above post. I appreciate your admonitions, however, I am already aware of them. Thank you anyway. As to my thought that he might have acted alone – it was just that, a thought, not a contention. I really don’t know what his motivations/reasons/justifications were to commit this horrendous act. I do not know if he acted alone for the reasons I previously proposed or if he acted alone in the name of Islam, or if he was viewed as vulnerable enough to be directed by an Islamic extremeist(s). I just don’t know and will be very interested to find out. I believe I stated in an earlier post that I had an initial assumption but wanted to wait until an investigation was completed before drawing an difinitive conclusions. At this point, I am not ruling out anything as I just don’t know.
Carole,
My reasoning was not that he just had to be unstable. My reasoning is that Hasan (from what we know) fits the profile of a lone gunman. He planned alone, acted alone, and had to shoot each person individuallly by his own hand. And he did not kill himself in the process. Marked differences from a jihadist attack.
This is an example of a suicide bomber .
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/11/14/pakistan.explosion/index.html
Debbie,
I wonder. Had you been there, would you have taken off the soldiers ear – that Jesus repaired?
Luke 22:47-53
I just have to wonder how people on this blog can chastise Uganda for having such a law and then turn around and be very deliberate in dolling out their own judgement of another human. All sins are equal. What makes anyone’s announcement that Hasan is evil any less absurd than the Ugandians making such a statement about homosexuals and casuing a law to kill them to be in place.
Debbie said:
This reminds me of:
Yeah – I guess some Christians will take the advice of Muhammad. LOL!!!
Perhaps some will, but let’s hope most get their marching orders from the Living Word of God:
The Word is a two-edged sword. It will not be mocked. Did you know that Nehemiah and those working with him rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem in only 52 days, utilizing both the sword and the trowel?
The “Living Word” implies that, as living things do, the Word evolves and changes with time.
It is only a dead word, such as Latin, whose meaning does not change with time.
As far as the citation of Biblical warfare is concerned, it is presumptuous to assume that oneself is on the winning side.
John 18:10: “Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant, cutting off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus.)”
What was Jesus’ response?
Mike – So true- so true. People often assume they are on the “right” side of things. I have to really wonder. And pray about things.
Also, just because I don’t call Hasan a terrorist does not mean that I am naive or less vigilant to my own protection. It seems some people want me to make the leap from one man to all violent Muslim men as terrorsits. Silly. And then I am called naive. And then perhaps they have confused themselves with God saying some are mocking God when in reality I am just disagreeing with their interpretation of the Word. That’s not mocking – that’s actually considering acting like a Christian.
Boy, howdy! You can sure say THAT again. Hardly ever do I hear someone say, “This is what I understand Scripture to say…” or “This is what I believe this passage means…”
@ Carole,
Thanks for the link….
Charles is a retired psychiatrist…and a very bright political writer.
@ Others,
regarding loving our enemy…a worthy calling for believers…and even for non-believers…
But it is not love to under-report the facts as a reporter, to distort the facts as a mental health worker (no such thing as vicarious post-traumatic stress).
Neither is it loving for a government charged to protect the weak and the vulnerable to people who are commited to harming them…
The individual is called to turn the other cheek. A government has a much different calling…
As does a parent.
To which kingdom do you belong?
No one is saying not to protect yourself, nor to wishfully think that everyone is destined for good towards me. But to ignore some of the signs we know and to lump this man as a terrorist only is to overlook a whole lot of human potential.
Even a parent does not falsley persecute his child.
I’m not trying to be mean-spirited here….but is this really true? It’s an oft-repeated complaint but does it have any substance? I’m thinking it’s one of those things that has been said over and over again without really assessing it’s truth or value. It seems to stand as a negative judgement with only anecdotal support…”hardly ever do I hear someone say”.
I’m not sure how many people or how much Michael hears aside from this blog…but this statement is not born out by the dialogues here. We’ve had one or two voices drop in from time to time with ‘the Bible says’ but the primary voices here, even the conservatives, have always seemed careful to qualify with ‘I believe’ or ‘my understanding is’. Warren? David? Ann? Mary? Debbie? Carol? Me? I can’t recall dogmatic pronunciations from any of them.
Nor does a loving parent naively, repetitively endanger a child…
It is always troubling when I see the consequences of this in my office: a passive, excuse making parent described by a repetitively abused child.
There are many Christian principals to weigh and to counter-weigh.
@ Mike Airhart,
As Michael B. and I have discovered, Ellis has conflicting quotes on the benefits of religion.
It should come as no surprise that Christ has conflicting quotes as well:
Matt. 10:34.
This may account for our differences with each other at this site, perhaps with TWO, XGW and BTB.
Regardless, quoting scriptures makes me a bit anxious as we appear both pious and confused.
Quoting Scripture really is a two-edged sword, and I am sure I am one here who could be called dogmatic and it would fit on occasion. I have to be honest and realize that. There, I made it easy.
David Blakeslee,
I wom’t discuss values here, but if anyone wants to prevent this stuff, I think they have to look into causes properly. I’m not so convinced Hasan is an evil, malevolent creature who carefully planned to kill his coworkers because he was Muslim or narcissist. And I’m neither convinced that the innocent are innocent. If someone dies because of someone else’s actions, that doesn’t make them innocent of whatever they did in the past. Hasan is guilty of murder, but that should not have a bearing on judging what caused the shooting. In other words, the fact that he is legally and morally guilty of killing others who were not able to defend themselves does not say that the cause lies only with him. We cannot know 100% what was in this guy’s mind and what lead to the killings, beside what investigators reported (Filter No1) and what the media chose to report (Filter No2). THerefore, it’s likely that any interpretation has some degree of error and we’re all weighing each other’s interpretations depending on what weight we ascribe to reported facts.
Anyway, a good exercise which I think is also useful for forensic psycho-experts is to compare cases and see what common and diverging patterns they see in the development of these people. For instance, until this case made the news all around the world, I never got curious about the life of the guy who bombed a federal building in your country, the first big case of terrorism before 9-11. His name was Timothy McVeigh and he killed a lot more people than Hasan without being a Muslim.
Some factors which ring a few bells from this guy’s life:
- his parents divorced when he was ten
- he was bullied
- was withdrawn
- didn’t know how to impress girls
- retreated into a fantasy world in which he thought he was getting back at his ennemies
- became interested in computers
- became interested in weapons
- used weapons to impress peers, probably to feel a sense of empowerment, get some respect he could not get otherwise
- threw himself into military service as if he wanted to toughen himself and become affiliated, probably also get to exercise what he understood by freedom (license to possess and use weapons)
- lonesome lifestyle, suicidal ideation, frustration with not being able to get into a relationship with a woman
etc, etc.
These factors can also be identified in the VTech shooters, with the exception of divorce and military employment. Most of them can be found in Hasan’s life.
Now, there are also a couple of biographies of Bin Laden. Didn’t have the time to look into them, but I’ve browsed through one of them and found some interesting factors:
- OBL was born in a large family, he had a great number of older brothers
- his father died, some say his mother separated from his father before that, before he went through puberty
- while he was financing military operations in Afghanistan against Soviet Russia, he took a visit to the site and was said to have had a sort of religious awakening – Muslims believe that political events are the reflection of the struggle in the world between their god and the forces of darkness – the forces of darkness can be anything from Western habits to Russians who persecuted their ‘brothers’ of the same religion,
- he got into organising military operations, found a calling in that, probably in connection with fighting the forces of darkness
- war experience exposed him to everyday, visible and violent death
- everywhere he set his base he put himself under the influence of a mentor, some say surrogate fathers
- rumours that one of his mentors has a medical training in psychiatry too, besides being a surgeon, and that he may have taken neuroleptics when he was younger
- after the terroristic attacks he organised in the US, many of the videotapes with him were analysed by experts who said his body language may show he has some mood disorder (signs of anhedonia)
I think a short analysis can reveal some common patterns here. But I wouldn’t focus on the discussion on whether factors excuse actions, because I think that’s beyond question.
I think this is a good demonstration that not all Muslims will see things in the same light either. So it is not wise to lump a man into one genre and instead look at him as a human with strengths, weaknesses etc…. all the things that make us christians human and fallable and whole. And…. we will have to agree that we see things differently.
As it was noted several posts prior.
@David:
You are right, I will try to refrain.
@ Eddie:
I think if we are really honest with ourselves, that we might have to admit that there were times when we might have across thay way – even if it was not our intent. Me, for example.
Looks like a kind of justice:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091224/ts_nm/us_yemen_alqaeda_awlaki
Here is a bit more:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.bfa31bb71423ae24c6092cc685173db9.cc1&show_article=1
It appears that Hasan had a rationalized, premeditated theory at the root of his aggression:
This is a great quote:
Less likely it is PTSD (vicarious).
It appears to be an application of a literal interpretation of some Islamic scriptures.
It appears to be encouraged by a spiritual leader within the Islamic faith.
Now we know:
Hasan was a terrorist.
http://bigjournalism.com/mwalsh/2010/01/15/friday-night-document-dump-now-they-tell-us-ft-hood-was-terrorism/
This may indeed be true but I found it interesting that the government official ‘remained anonymous’, said ‘there is no doubt in my mind‘ (always watch for those dubious qualifiers) and that the article also stated that they have yet to link him to any extremist groups. This has always been a possibility and I don’t think the media backed away from it as a possibility. My tae was that they were cautioning people not to jump to a conclusion. Still good advice. It may turn out to be true but that article had enough gaps in it to leave me open to the possibility that it isn’t true.
Hasan’s behavior was inconsistent with military duty…but this was overridden by superiors who prized having a Muslim Psychiatrist:
found here: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/02/22/ft_hood_suspect_was_army_dilemma/
Political Correctness, run amok
From here: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OWI5NjMwOGI2Mzc3ZTcyNzE1NjI0NzY0ZjQ4YWU0NDc=