# Senate Report: EVERYBODY Knew Major Hasan Was Insane Jihadist, But Kept Quiet To Be PC **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 4, 2011, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113 "2011-02-04T03:21:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a183cd/32.png) [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barkis_is_Willin)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/41 "2011-02-04T16:44:22Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] Because it would not be accurate, that’s why. [/QUOTE] Maybe so, but my point is that the Senate report implied that the DOD is PC driven in not identifying the incident as an act of “violent Islamic extremism.” [QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] I know the right wing desperately WANTS this incident to be represenataive of some kind of wider, organized effort, but really it was just one nutball, no different than the Tucson shooter. [/QUOTE] I certainly don’t want this to be the result of a gobally organized plot, nor do I think it was. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/42 "2011-02-04T17:06:11Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > This carries an assumption that such a characterizatuon is incorrect. I disagree that it is. This was one lone nutjob, not an organized group. Yes, true enough. OK, fair point. ---
**Author:** ![Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a183cd/32.png) [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barkis_is_Willin)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/43 "2011-02-04T17:06:43Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I agree the authors are probably be trying to say that’s a PC thing. On p. 31 they remove any doubt regarding their opinions. [QUOTE=p.31] We are concerned that exactly such worries about “political correctness” inhibited Hasan’s superiors and colleagues who were deeply troubled by his behavior from taking the actions against him that could have prevented the attack at Fort Hood. [/QUOTE] I’m not greatly familiar with the culture of the army, but the report reads as though Hasan was moved around and even promoted just so he would become somebody else’s problem. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/44 "2011-02-04T17:21:06Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > This is not what the report says. It’s not even close. From your post (emphasis added): > [@](#): > > The report says: the FBI and Defense Department knew who he was communicating with and about his behavior, and that that behavior was grounds to dismiss him under existing military policy. However it says they did not dismiss him and did not stop him because: the FBI and DOD didn’t share their information, an FBI field office did not identify some of his communications with al-Awlaki and did not tell the Army, the failure of two FBI field offices to work together (sound familiar?), **because the FBI focused on the wrong issue - whether his actions counted as terrorism instead of whether he was becoming a radical - and because the Department of Defense hasn’t done enough to train military members on how to recognize radical Islam and doesn’t address it specifically as an issue the way it does with, say, white supremacy.** A lot of people - including me - would consider refusal to identify radical Islam as a terrorist issue as a product of a PC mindset which insists on separating Islamic terrorism from the Islamic religion. Which is besides for the page 33 bit, which you quoted and ignored. (And I’m not sure what you meant in disussing your quote from page 50.) ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/45 "2011-02-04T17:28:53Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > …if not to point out that there must be SOME reason the DOD is avoiding the term “Islamic extremism?” If not for PC reasons, then why? Probably because you can count the number of Islamic extremists in the US military on one hand. As of 2002, the number of Muslims of \*any \*stripe serving in the military was [statistically insignificant](http://www.prb.org/pdf04/59.4AmericanMilitary.pdf) (.pdf, see p. 25)- and Muslims made up less than 1% of the US population. Think of it in cost/benefit terms: why bother training military personnel to recognize Islamic extremism when most of them will never even serve with a Muslim, let alone an extremist one? ---
**Author:** ![MsRobyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@MsRobyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsRobyn)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/46 "2011-02-04T17:31:06Z")
> [@Cluricaun](#): > > According to [this](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4772331) article by NPR 40% of active duty military in the US identify as evangelical christians. I’m sure of that 40% that a healthy number of them read, watch, or listen to some sort of evangelical material that espouses what many of us non evangelicals would consider tending towards violent extremism, and despite the military’s wishes otherwise most of them enage in evangilism while on duty, which could be considered fixating on your religious convictions in an inappropriate way. I’m in no way excusing Hasan, I’m just pointing out that if you start tossing religious nutters out of the service you’ll quickly cease to have much of a service left. Actually, [evangelism](http://blog.au.org/2010/09/27/army-maneuvers-military-officials-should-leave-proselytizing-to-civilians/) in the [military](http://www.talk2action.org/story/2010/8/19/113223/843/Front_Page/U_S_Soldiers_Punished_For_Not_Attending_Christian_Concert) is apparently a [good thing](http://content.usatoday.com/communities/Religion/post/2011/01/fitness-us-army-spirituality-religion-/1). To some extent, evangelism is institutional as early as basic training, when recruits who do not wish to attend religious services are put to work cleaning or in working parties. If you don’t want to do that, you have to go to church. Jewish services, which are held Friday evenings or Saturday mornings, occasionally conflict with other activities, which can make it difficult to attend without the intervention of the chaplain. When I asked to be able to go to my graduation service, which was the norm for graduating recruits, I was denied and asked flat-out if I was “too religious to be in the Navy.” Once I got to the Electronics Technician A School at Great Lakes, my Christian peers were excused from duty to go to church, but Jewish students had to request permission and sign out to attend. When the Jewish chaplain complained to the commander of the A School about the double standard, the commander decided that ALL students on duty had to get permission and sign out. Guess who’s fault it was? That’s right, it was my fault for daring to open my mouth to someone who could do something about it, then being singled out for “special treatment” for demanding the same right that they had. “She thinks she’s special because she’s Jewish.” Uh, no. Try again. The sad thing is, these people don’t perceive that this is wrong, and they don’t see the irony in putting in a uniform to defend the rights of all Americans, including those who are not Christian, then behave in a way that puts the lie to that. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/47 "2011-02-04T17:40:01Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > A lot of people - including me - would consider refusal to identify radical Islam as a terrorist issue as a product of a PC mindset which insists on separating Islamic terrorism from the Islamic religion. They didn’t say the DOD ‘refused to identify radical Islam as a terrorist issue.’ They said the DOD focused on the narrow question of whether or not Hasan’s actions to date (his speechifying, his contacts with Anwar al-Awlaki) counted as terrorist activity. Instead, the authors say they should have focused on the bigger question of “whether he was radicalizing to violent Islamist extremism and whether this radicalization might pose counterintelligence or other threats (e.g., Hasan might spy for the Taliban if he was deployed to Afghanistan).” It’s doubtful that you could call him a terrorist before his attack; on the other hand if they had dealt with the fact that he’d become a radical, they could have kicked him out of the military and the shooting might not have happened. > [@](#): > > Which is besides for the page 33 bit, which you quoted and ignored. It’s editorializing and we don’t know the factual basis for that concern. For some reason Joe Lieberman just doesn’t have that much credibility with me. If the report pointed to actual incidents of the military or the government being reluctant to do anything about Hasan for PC reasons, that would be different. > [@](#): > > (And I’m not sure what you meant in disussing your quote from page 50.) I was saying that the quote from page 50 and the quote from page 33 were the only references to anything like the OP’s thesis in the 50-odd pages of the report that I read. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/48 "2011-02-04T18:24:05Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Pony up the evidence for your Global Islamic Supremacy theory. I don’t comply with such demands when they come from Holocaust deniers and anti-evolutionists. Since your views belong in the same league with such crackpottery, I see no need to comply with yours. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > They don’t have to. They have cruise missiles. And just when I think you couldn’t possibly get any sillier, you post this … :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/49 "2011-02-04T18:40:29Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > They didn’t say the DOD ‘refused to identify radical Islam as a terrorist issue.’ They said the DOD focused on the narrow question of whether or not Hasan’s actions to date (his speechifying, his contacts with Anwar al-Awlaki) counted as terrorist activity. Instead, the authors say they should have focused on the bigger question of “whether he was radicalizing to violent Islamist extremism and whether this radicalization might pose counterintelligence or other threats (e.g., Hasan might spy for the Taliban if he was deployed to Afghanistan).” I don’t follow the distinction you’re making. It sounds the same to me. > [@](#): > > It’s editorializing and we don’t know the factual basis for that concern. For some reason Joe Lieberman just doesn’t have that much credibility with me. If the report pointed to actual incidents of the military or the government being reluctant to do anything about Hasan for PC reasons, that would be different. “We don’t know their basis” is not the same thing as “they never said it”. > [@](#): > > I was saying that the quote from page 50 and the quote from page 33 were the only references to anything like the OP’s thesis in the 50-odd pages of the report that I read. Even if this were true, so what? What you said was “This is not what the report says. It’s not even close.” You can’t support that by “… were the only references to …”. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/50 "2011-02-04T18:45:57Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > I don’t comply with such demands when they come from Holocaust deniers and anti-evolutionists. Since your views belong in the same league with such crackpottery, I see no need to comply with yours. I am neither of those things, and you’re the one with the whack-a-doodle conspiracy theory that the Mooslims are out to get you. I’ll take your lack of cite as an admission that it’s absed on nothing but your imagination. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/51 "2011-02-04T18:49:54Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I don’t follow the distinction you’re making. It sounds the same to me. It’s not even related. The report says the FBI and Defense Department did not deal with the issue of Hasan becoming a radical - which would have been cause to discharge him - because they focused on the narrower issue of whether or not his behavior, such as his statements, presentations, and communications with al-Awlaki, made him a terrorist. That has nothing to do with ‘refusing to identify radical Islam as a terrorist issue.’ It means they didn’t see the forest for the trees when they were investigating him. > [@](#): > > Even if this were true, so what? What you said was “This is not what the report says. It’s not even close.” And I stand by that. The report does not conclude that anyone (or everyone) refused to act on Hasan because of concerns they would be accused of prejudice against Muslims. The authors do say they think PC-ish concerns may have prevented his military superiors from doing more. That does not address the separate failures by the FBI and the Defense Department. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/53 "2011-02-04T20:03:45Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > It’s not even related. The report says the FBI and Defense Department did not deal with the issue of Hasan becoming a radical - which would have been cause to discharge him - because they focused on the narrower issue of whether or not his behavior, such as his statements, presentations, and communications with al-Awlaki, made him a terrorist. That has nothing to do with ‘refusing to identify radical Islam as a terrorist issue.’ It means they didn’t see the forest for the trees when they were investigating him. Again, I think these are not only related but they are identical. Puzzling. Unless you’re saying (as indicated in your final sentence) that it’s true that they failed to realize that his being a radical Muslim pointed to the risk of his being a terrorist, but not because they failed to realize in general that there was a connection between the two but rather because they failed to connect it in this specific case. If that’s what you’re saying, then at least you’re saying something, but not anything convincing, IMHO. I think it’s a lot more likely that they failed to make the connection because they were wary of connecting Islam to terrorism, which has gotten a lot of pushback in “religion of peace” circles. > [@](#): > > And I stand by that. The report does not conclude that anyone (or everyone) refused to act on Hasan because of concerns they would be accused of prejudice against Muslims. The authors do say they think PC-ish concerns may have prevented his military superiors from doing more. That does not address the separate failures by the FBI and the Defense Department. Are you making a distinction between “stopped some individuals from challenging” (page 33 of the report) and “refused to act”? There’s no meaningful distinction. And just because there were also other failings does not mean that this particular failing was not an important one. In general, you have been engaging in a lot of dubious hairsplitting that doesn’t come close to supporting the sweeping assertion in your first post to this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2011, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/54 "2011-02-04T20:52:50Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Again, I think these are not only related but they are identical. The report says the agencies got snagged on this issue of whether or not his actions _were themselves_ terrorism. They concluded they weren’t and dropped the whole issue. The report says that instead of focusing on that minor issue, they should have focused on Hasan’s interest in radical Islam. That interest was unambiguously real. > [@](#): > > Are you making a distinction between “stopped some individuals from challenging” (page 33 of the report) and “refused to act”? There’s no meaningful distinction. > [@](#): > > In general, you have been engaging in a lot of dubious hairsplitting that doesn’t come close to supporting the sweeping assertion in your first post to this thread. The authors don’t say they found anything was ignored or covered up because of PC concerns. They say they are “concerned” that’s what happened. Their entire support for that notion is a one-line quote. In other words, it sounds like one or both of them is focused on that issue and included that because they already believed it’s what happened. You’re attempting to defend the OP’s conclusion based on one sentence on page 33 of a 91-page report. If the authors felt this was a major contributor to investigators and military personnel failing to stop Hasan, they just might have discussed it a little further. The authors do not conclude that ‘EVERYBODY Knew Major Hasan Was Insane Jihadist, But Kept Quiet To Be PC’ or that ‘Major Hasan was a dangerous lunatic, and everybody around him knew it. Nobody took action, because it would make any whistle blower look like an “Islamophobe.”’ They don’t say anything remotely close to it. ---
**Author:** ![Sandwich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/22d042/32.png) [@Sandwich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sandwich)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2011, 8:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/55 "2011-02-06T08:38:25Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > By the way, why is it that nobody ever characterizes abortion bombers or IRA terrorists as "Christian extermists?’ Um, on this side of the pond the IRA and its offshoots and its terrorist adversaries are routinely described as sectarian. That they are a Christian sect is implicit. In the same way as Sunni / Shia violence is described as sectarian, with ‘Islamic’ being implicit. It’s only Christian or Islamic terrorism if the opponents aren’t the same religion (and the violence has a religious motivation, as it usually had in Ulster). Which reminds me, if the US is a Christian nation, then are its crimes in Iraq Christian terrorism? Or have no crimes at all been committed? Or is the US not Christian? ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2011, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/56 "2011-02-06T23:49:39Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > You are in a very deep state of denial. Get back to me when they start flying jetliners into skyscrapers. Should we bring up the Crusades or no? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2011, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/57 "2011-02-07T00:33:39Z")
> [@mrpayday](#): > > Well I think it’s Yoko Ono’s fault. I’m still not seeing a debate here. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2011, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113/58 "2011-02-07T14:23:23Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Should we bring up the Crusades or no? No. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-report-everybody-knew-major-hasan-was-insane-jihadist-but-kept-quiet-to-be-pc/570113.md?page=2)