PDA

View Full Version : Fort Hood aftermath: Pentagon opens two reviews


Warrior-Mentor
11-20-2009, 06:04
In Fort Hood aftermath, Pentagon opens two reviews
Threat-identification policies, quality of casualty care assessed

By Ann Scott Tyson and Ben Pershing
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 20, 2009

The Pentagon is launching an urgent review of whether military procedures hinder the identification of service members who pose a threat to their fellow troops.

As part of the 45-day investigation, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates ordered an examination of whether Army policies and procedures played any role in failing to prevent the Fort Hood shootings. The review will also assess medical screening and discharge policies, programs to assess service members before and after they deploy, as well as procedures for reporting "adverse service member information," he said.

Gates also ordered a separate in-depth investigation, lasting four to six months, into potential "systemic institutional shortcomings" in the military services related to care for victims of mass-casualty incidents, the performance of health-care providers and stress on the force.

Word of the Pentagon reviews came on the same day that a Senate committee held the first public hearing on the attack that killed 13 people and wounded dozens at the Army post in Texas.

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, began the hearing by saying he believed the incident was "a terrorist attack." He added that senators wanted "to determine whether that attack could have been prevented, whether the federal agencies and employees involved missed signals or failed to connect the dots."

As more becomes known about the behavior of the suspect, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan, before the shootings, pressure has mounted on the Obama administration and the military to explain why the Army psychiatrist did not warrant further investigation or preemptive action.

U.S. intelligence officials knew last year that Hasan had been corresponding with a radical Islamic cleric; earlier this year investigators learned of Internet postings, allegedly by Hasan, that indicated sympathy for suicide bombers; and colleagues of Hasan's at Walter Reed Army Medical Center said the "intensity" of his embrace of Islam raised concerns among doctors there.
Identifying 'deficiencies'

Gates said the Army's "in-depth, detailed assessment" would look at "whether the Army programs, policies and procedures reasonably would have prevented the shooting." The goal, he said, is "to determine whether, in fact, there were lapses or problems."

The secretary promised "full and open disclosure" of the findings, adding that avoiding "similar tragedies" is imperative.

Togo D. West Jr., the former veterans affairs secretary and Army secretary, and retired Adm. Vernon Clark, a former chief of naval operations, will lead the 45-day review. It will look for "deficiencies" in Pentagon procedures for "identifying service members who could potentially pose credible threats to others," Gates said.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, joined Gates at the news conference and said that commanders are responsible for taking necessary action, should service members make radical statements. While not referring to the Hasan case, Mullen said his expectation is "for any commander certainly to be aware of those kinds of things and then to take appropriate action . . . to certainly not sit idly by but to address it." Still, he said, "a single proclamation, if you will, doesn't, in and of itself necessarily mean anything. You've got to put it into the circumstances."

Asked whether he believes management failures in the Army played any role in the Fort Hood shootings, Gates replied, "If there are questions of accountability, the Army would address those internally." He said he was confident in the service's ability to "investigate itself."

Gates called it "disturbing" that Hasan had e-mailed cleric Anwar al-Aulaqi, but the secretary said he wanted to find out "all the facts" before drawing conclusions. Asked whether he would join Lieberman in characterizing the shootings as "a terrorist attack," Gates replied, "I'm just not going to go there." As the senior Pentagon leader, he said, he did not want to be seen as influencing the military criminal judicial process now underway.

Hasan, who is conscious but paralyzed from the waist down, remains in an intensive care unit at Brooke Army Medical Center at Fort Sam Houston, in San Antonio, his attorney said Thursday.

John P. Galligan said the Army has allowed Hasan's legal team to hire a civilian chemist to observe the examination of all evidence related to the shootings as well as any tests involving Hasan.

Galligan said he has requested that the military make funds available for Hasan to hire a private civilian investigator to conduct a probe independent from those of the government. Galligan, a retired colonel and former military judge at Fort Hood, also has requested that the government reinstate his security clearance so that he can review any classified documents relating to his client.

Galligan said that the government has shipped him a box of personnel files and other records related to Hasan and that he expects more records to be made available in the discovery process.

Action on the Hill

The Senate homeland security committee has received only partial cooperation from the Obama administration in its investigation of the attack, with Lieberman rebuffed in his requests to have current officials appear. But Lieberman said Thursday that the committee had received access to important classified documents, and he sounded cautiously optimistic that the administration would be more forthcoming.

Sen. Susan Collins (Maine), the panel's ranking Republican, recalled the missed opportunities to head off the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. "In the wake of the mass murder at Fort Hood, we must once again confront a troubling question: Was this another failure to connect the dots?" Collins said.

Lieberman emphasized that the panel would seek to answer a few vital questions: What information did the government have on Hasan before the attacks, including e-mails he may have sent? What judgments were made about those e-mails? If the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Force had vital information on Hasan, was it shared with the Army?

He added that the panel would also examine the perils of homegrown extremism and "political correctness."

Senators heard testimony Thursday from five experts on terrorism and homeland security, several of whom expressed fears that warning signs about Hasan may have been ignored or played down because he is Muslim.

Retired Army Gen. John Keane recalled instances during his career when possible oversensitivity to issues of ethnicity and religion made military leaders blind to potential threats.

"This is not about Muslims and their religion . . . nor is it about the 10,000 Muslims in the military who are, quite frankly, not seen as Muslims but as soldiers, sailors and airmen," Keane said. "This is fundamentally about jihadist extremism, which is at odds with the values of America."

Gates also voiced concern over the possibility that the incident could lead to suspicion against "certain categories of people," apparently referring to Muslims. "In a nation as diverse as the United States, the last thing we need to do is start pointing fingers at each other," he said.

SOURCE:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/19/AR2009111902528.html?hpid=topnews

Dozer523
11-20-2009, 06:58
This is a good idea. And I'm with the SECDEF regarding characterizing the shootings as "a terrorist attack," Gates replied, "I'm just not going to go there."

I have lately started to wonder about the government access to so much knowledge about Hasan prior to the attack. "U.S. intelligence officials knew last year that Hasan had been corresponding with a radical Islamic cleric; earlier this year investigators learned of Internet postings, allegedly by Hasan, that indicated sympathy for suicide bombers; and colleagues of Hasan's at Walter Reed Army Medical Center said the "intensity" of his embrace of Islam raised concerns among doctors there.
How did the government gather this information? Regarding the correspondence was that gathered via warrant? Against Hasan? or the cleric addressee? Based on what probable cause? Or application of the Patriot Act? Same questions regarding the internet postings allegedly by Hasan. Are public forums open to government scrutiny? And if so how do we feel about the possibility the Government might be checking out what is said on PS.com?
As for thwarting a Congressional investigation, well those have seldom done much good in the past. The Ollie North investigation comes to mind.

When I first heard of the terrible events at Ft Hood I am a little embarrassed to say I imagined a young man pissed off about the company Grade Article 15 imposed the night before. He was ordered to clean his weapons and instead of breaking them down he locked and loaded and went kicking doors in the company area for a little payback.

Warrior-Mentor
11-20-2009, 08:27
I have lately started to wonder about the government access to so much knowledge about Hasan prior to the attack. "U.S. intelligence officials knew last year that Hasan had been corresponding with a radical Islamic cleric; earlier this year investigators learned of Internet postings, allegedly by Hasan, that indicated sympathy for suicide bombers; and colleagues of Hasan's at Walter Reed Army Medical Center said the "intensity" of his embrace of Islam raised concerns among doctors there.
How did the government gather this information?

Regarding the correspondence was that gathered via warrant? Against Hasan? or the cleric addressee? Based on what probable cause? Or application of the Patriot Act? Same questions regarding the internet postings allegedly by Hasan. Are public forums open to government scrutiny?

Two words. Anwar Awlaki

He's toxic. And if our government wasn't monitoring his communications, I would be even more concerned.

As a former FBI agent told me, "Anyone trying to communicate with Anwar Awlaki, especially someone in the United States, warrants further investigation."





.

JimP
11-20-2009, 14:34
The dim bulbs and muslim apologists running these investigations will be sure NOT to find any systemic evidence of Political Correctness contributing to this situation.

Anyone want to place a bet on cold beverage of choice??

How about that 9-11 commission?? How many recommendations have ACTUALLY been implemented?

greenberetTFS
11-20-2009, 15:09
And if so how do we feel about the possibility the Government might be checking out what is said on PS.com?/quote/Dozer

Dozer has a valid point,do you think we might be under some form of scrutiny? :confused: After all we are Veterans and not at all supportive of BHO's administration policies ......... :rolleyes: "Napa" might be monitoring our site as we speak,we know her feelings regarding returning Vets as potential terrorists................ :mad:

Big Teddy :munchin

BMT (RIP)
11-26-2009, 08:05
WASHINGTON -- Military officials investigating failures in the wake of the Fort Hood shootings may recommend that individuals be held accountable for failing to perform their duties.

Such a move would be notable for a military grappling with how to prevent another tragedy when the perpetrator is one of its own, as in the case of alleged Fort Hood shooter Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. Such disciplinary action could create a new expectation that all service members must learn to be more vigilant.

The two retired military officials leading the Pentagon's review of the shootings visited Fort Hood Tuesday and vowed to identify "programs, policies or procedural weaknesses" within the Defense Department that may have allowed the shooting to happen. The investigators emphasized that they were not looking to pin the blame on someone.

But if the review finds that individuals were derelict in their duty, those individuals could be recommended for disciplinary action, according to another military official. "It's pretty clear that one of the expectations is to do just that," said the official, who asked to remain anonymous because of the sensitivity of the issue.

"If they saw something that a responsible person would say, 'hey, this is not right, this is not consistent with the values of military service,' then I think they do have an obligation to either confront the individual, which may or may not have happened, or to highlight that to supervisory personnel, which may or may not have happened," the official said.

The Fort Hood shootings earlier this month took the lives of 13 service members and injured 29 more. Hasan, who is reportedly paralyzed chest down after being shot by police officers, has been charged on 13 counts of murder.
"It is not a purpose of ours to point fingers," said Togo West Jr., a former Secretary of the Army who is conducting the investigation along with former Chief of Naval Operations Vern Clark, during a press briefing at Fort Hood Tuesday. "We are simply here to accumulate information and offer our best judgments for the secretary of defense."

West and Clark's investigation is one of several, including two others ordered up by Congress and the White House respectively.

An Army psychiatrist who counseled service members with post traumatic stress syndrome, Hasan had signaled that he did not want to deploy to a war zone. Earlier in his career at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, he had made a presentation on Muslims in the military that may have raised questions about his world view and his fitness for US military duty.

Hasan was also in touch with a radical cleric in Yemen by e-mail.

In hindsight, these circumstances seem like clear warning signs, say experts, as well as officials close to the investigation, but it's possible that in isolation, those incidents may not have rung not ring the right bells. The Pentagon investigation will be to look at why links weren't made.

A National Public Radio report Wednesday indicated that the Army maintained separate files on Hasan – a personnel file containing routine information on him and what's known as a "training file," where Army officials had documented some of the more troubling reports about his performance.

The FBI, in investigating Hasan for his links to the cleric, possibly did not get the right file, the report suggested. That could have hindered authorities from making the connections to help them understand the nature of the threat posed by Hasan.

In announcing the Pentagon review last week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who has gained a reputation for demanding accountability and firing those who perform poorly, said the Army will determine if anyone failed to act properly.

"[I]f there are questions of accountability, that the Army would address those internally," he said.


BMT

The Reaper
11-26-2009, 09:47
Togo West is a Clinton hack.

I suspect that if he is involved, the answer will be very PC, and in no way reflect negatively on Islam or the fact there are Islamic terrorists living and being created here among us..

TR

Bill Harsey
11-26-2009, 09:59
There may be factors in this that go above the military and it doesn't look like those are going to be considered.

Snaquebite
12-02-2009, 12:09
Tuesday, December 01, 2009

FORT WORTH, Texas — The military plans a mental evaluation to determine whether the Army psychiatrist charged with killing 13 people at Fort Hood knew his alleged actions were wrong and whether he's competent to stand trial, his civilian attorney said Tuesday.

Attorney John Galligan said he received notice Tuesday night from Maj. Nidal Hasan's captain that the military likely will issue a "mental responsibility exam" order Wednesday. The notice did not indicate when or where the exam, which is done by what the military calls a sanity board, will take place, Galligan said.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578647,00.html?test=latestnews

Wrong by what standard? Competent by what standard?
If Hasan believes his actions were not wrong according to his faith, does that make him incompetent to stand trial?

Utah Bob
12-02-2009, 12:36
Tuesday, December 01, 2009

Wrong by what standard? Competent by what standard?
If Hasan believes his actions were not wrong according to his faith, does that make him incompetent to stand trial?

No. If he understands that society regards his actions as wrong that's good enough to declare him competent.

PedOncoDoc
12-02-2009, 12:42
The military plans a mental evaluation to determine whether the Army psychiatrist charged with killing 13 people at Fort Hood knew his alleged actions were wrong and whether he's competent to stand trial, his civilian attorney said Tuesday.

I posted earlier on this. If he follows Sharia law, he will not believe that what he did was wrong - so therefor would be considered mentally incompetent. But, this would open a huge can of worms - any and all devout Muslims would be considered mentally incompetent in the eyes of our justice system.

...and, as an army psychiatrist who probably had to make these decisions himself as part of his medical practice, don't you think he would know a few catch phrases to say to ensure he is declared incompetent?

This WILL get ugly, and you can quote me on that...

Snaquebite
12-02-2009, 12:47
I posted earlier on this.

Sorry for the double post, must have missed it.:confused: