Call Joe Lieberman's Bluff On Ft. Hood

John Nichols: Have The Investigation Into Whether There Was Terrorism But Make The Hearings Real

(The Nation)  John Nichols writes about politics for The Nation magazine as its Washington correspondent.

---

Following the horrific shootings at the Fort Hood army base in Texas, Connecticut Senator Lieberman pulled a thread from the right-wing blogosphere and called for a congressional inquiry into whether the incident was an act of "terrorism."

Not domestic terrorism, but full-blown terrorism that is comparable to what is seen in the most unstable of warzones.

"This was an attack on America troops," Lieberman chirped on Fox New Sunday. "You've got to see it as if 12 American troops were killed in Afghanistan."

But, wait, U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan are fighting a strategically-sophisticated and structurally-coordinated enemy that employs traditional military tactics and terrorist strategies such as suicide bombings in urban areas.

Is Lieberman serious about making a comparison between what happened at Fort Hood and what happens in Kabul?

Not really.

When he's pinned down, Lieberman makes the slightly more precise calim that the Army doctor who killed 13 people and wounded 29 at Fort Hood showed signs of being a "self-radicalized, homegrown terrorist."

Never mind that another way of saying "self-radicalized, homegrown terrorist" might be "completely isolated mental-health case."

Never might that, when he started running the "terrorist" line on Fox New Sunday, host Chris Wallace used a sound line of questioning to make it clear that the senator did not have "any evidence so far (from) what you and your staff have heard in briefings that.. he was exchanging communications either in this country or overseas with other Islamic radicals."

Lieberman says he plans to use his chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security Committee to launch a congressional investigation into the motives behind what he describes as "the worst terrorist attack since 9/11."

In his calmer moments, Lieberman admits that "it's premature to reach conclusions about what motivated [Major Nidal Malik Hasan]" and acknowledges that "the stress he was under" was a factor.

But, of course, the "homegrown terrorist" line was a headline grabber.

And the senator will not let go.

So be it.

Let's call Joe Lieberman's bluff.

Let's have the Homeland Security Committee hearings.

While the Army and the FBI will conduct both criminal invesigations and serious inquiries into why Major Hasan's breakdown was not adequately noted or addressed by his commanders, congressional oversite of the military is always appropriate.

So have the hearings. But make them real.

There's no need to downplay the fact that Major Hasan was a Muslim, or that he appears to have bought into some of the most extreme -- and broadly rejected -- variants on Islam.

There's nothing wrong with asking precise, detailed questions that offer as much explanation and detail as can be accumulated. There is no point in being politically correct -- or in being politically incorrect. Embrace transparency and facts. Bring in experts and ask questions.

Ask all the questions.

What was the bigger factor motivating Major Hasan: stress or religion?

Was Major Hasan a cold, calculating Islamic extremist or a deeply troubled man who was about to be dispatched to a warzone (Afghanistan) on a mission that associates and family members said was his "worst nightmare"?

Was the stress Major Hasan was under the sort that might lead an otherwise responsible individual to get lost in a swirl of religious ranting and fundamentalist fantasy?

Could such stress lead other individuals to embrace fundamentalisms, be they Muslim, Jewish or Christian?

Might it be a good idea to strengthen the wall of separation between church and state in what is supposed to be a secular fighting force?

And don't hestitate to ask questions about Muslims in the military?

Was Major Hasan a typical American Muslim? or an outlier far removed from the mainstream values and practices of a religion that has been practiced in the United States since the founding of the republic?

Was Major Hasan typical in any way of the thousands of Muslims who currently serve in the U.S. military?

Isn't it true that the overwhelming majority of Muslim soldiers serve with distinction and that, overall, Muslim soldiers -- like their Jewish, Buddhist and Hindu comrades -- have historically been seen as less likely to get involved with fights and violence on military bases?

Isn't it true that Muslim soldiers are seen by military commanders as essential players in a diverse Army that does not merely reflect the whole of America but that presents the best face of America in a world where it is vital to assure that this country's military missions are not dismissed as the "crusades" of a western nation that does not understand Islam or Islamic states?

Was Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey right when he warned against actions that could "heighten the backlash" against Muslims in the military and argued that Muslim soldiers provide diversity "gives us ALL strength"?

Was General Casey even more right when he declared after the shootings, and after he had reviewed detailed reports about Major Hasan's background, motivations and actions, that: "As great a tragedy as this was, it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well"?

[Omnivorous]

The author is a PC idiot and is representative of the complete madness and lack of common sense in the media and government.

This terrorist attack by this jihadist should never have happened and was the fault of politically correct insanity.

Uncle sam bears half of the burden of the murdered soldiers, the grief and loss of the families.

This piece of dreck is an insult to them and to America.

CBS, you have lost your minds printing this garbage.

[Dreadnut]

First of all, what's a "calim"?
Second of all, 13 people are killed at Ft Hood and liberals vent their outrage in the direction of Joe Lieberman, ooooow..... get tough time, huh ?
Third of all, I don't think I've ever seen so much collective energy being harnessed in an effort to obfuscate the fact this guy might be a terrorist.

[justsane-2009]

uh, the article was not about the shooting; it was about lieberman saying that the guy was a terrorist. and really, there is far more evidence that he was just a guy who snapped than that he was a terrorist. for starters, a terrorist would have been looking to take out far more than a dozen or so soldiers. given his access to the base, he certainly could have done far more harm, had he been a terrorist.

[I_am_me1953]

RE: by justsane-2009 November 12, 2009 12:44 AM EST

And again today I will pose my question that went unanswered yesterday. (Seems no one can tell me the differences, but all have an opinion.)

What is the definition(s) of, and what seperates, terrorist, hate crime, wacko nut jobs?

Please classify the following crimes:

Columbine murders:

John Allen Muhammad, DC Sniper:

Timothy McVeigh:

Youth gangs:

Murderer in Fl office building last week:

Postal employee who goes "Postal":

Man in Kileen in 1991 Luby's Restaurant incident:

O. J. Simpson -if he had been found guilty:

Hasan and Fort Hood:


Is Hasan a terrorist simply because of his last name as the Fox News reporter implied during an interview with Kay Bailey Hutchinson?

I am still waiting for answers.

[AOCGUY]

I_am_me - You make a good point. The term has been misused repeatedly. According to the DOS terrorism is "...premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience..." The term non-combatant includes both civilians and military personnel who are unarmed or off duty at the time.

While what Hasan did was heinous it doesn't necessarily qualify as an act of terrorism. The facts will come out and then we will know. I suspect this is more likely be determined to be a mass murder by a mentally deranged man. The end result is the same; 13 dead and Hasan will most likley end up in Leavanworth either serving a life sentence or on death row.

[justsane-2009]

the man fits the classic profile of a mass shooter, just like the guy who shot up his former office the following day, the men that "go postal" every year, like the columbine shooters. he was lonely, unmarried, not very good at his job, feeling like the world was out to get him. he just happened to be a muslim.

lieberman needs to dial back the rhetoric. if he's determined to hold hearings, he can investigate the fraud that masquerades as health insurance.

[jimbob133]

Any who defend this man should have to go live in Iran.

[KPeters_from_UK]

by jimbob133 November 11, 2009 7:29 PM EST
Any who defend this man should have to go live in Iran.

That is your argument? It is precisely why we need to defend him that makes the States a better place to live than Iran. It is in Iran where there is no defense; where justice does not exist. In Iran the justice system is more interested in quick "justice" and followed by a quick hanging. If you don't like the American system it is you who needs to move to Iran.

[AOCGUY]

jimbob - I'm trying to understand your comment. Do you mean to imply that Hasan shouldn't be afforded counsel? BTW I don't belive he has even been charged yet - that will come out an Article 32 hearing.

Or are you suggesting that someone has defended Hasan's action? Other than that Yemeni whackjob I've have not read or heard of anyone defending his actions.

[mrdavidkolds]

I agree. I think what he is saying is that you folks seem to be defending Islam. If you like Islam, give up you freedom and live in one of the many oppressive Muslim cultures you defend. But if you are a woman, a Jew, a Christian or just non-Muslim you could be in serious trouble. Liberals tend to be naive. Like the hikers who are imprisoned in Iran. They were liberal America bashers who defended Muslims and their culture. Now they get to experience the reality of Islam.

[Ferrell-2]

I don't know whether John Nichols has a law degree or not but he sure sounds like one in his awkward defense of Hasan at the expense of Joe Lieberman. If this tragedy had not happened here, it would surely have happened in Afghanistan and he wouldn't have just been injured, he would have been killed right there on the spot by armed servicemen. Bear in mind, his victims were unarmed as is usually the case in Muslim terrorist attacks. He was shot by a civilian police officer. Senator Lieberman's remarks were right on.

[eyesopenwide]

Terrorism is a concept. Your view of terrorism probably depends on your perspective.

I imagine all the innocents caught up in our current money-making, oil territory grabbing adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan probably think of the U.S. as the real terrorists.

When bombs fall from the sky and blow your family to smithereens, I imagine most folks probably think the bombers are the terrorists.

Thou shalt not kill.

[mrdavidkolds]

The scripture you refer to is do not murder. Killing to defend yourself isn't murder.

[OregonJames]

Lieberman is an idiot and a disgrace.

[noloyalisti]

Lie bemann is an absolute nightmare. I would love to have someone from Connecticut, a relatively highly educated very blue state, explain why someone would vote for this McSame, McBush supporting DINO moron.

[YourVeryWrong]

Apparently they thought the mainstream Democrat was worse. If you can think, it makes you think.

[msimamaji]

45,000.
That's the number of Americans who die each year because of inadequate medical care, according to a report published by the Harvard Medical School. We are experiencing a 9/11 each month and Joe Lieberman doesn't care.
Babies fare particularly badly. Our infant mortality rate is twice as high as the infant mortality rate of Sweden or France, according to the 2009 CIA Fact book. A recent report by the CDC proves that the major reason for our infant mortality rate is inadequate pre-natal care.
But Joe Lieberman doesn't give a rat. He gets lots of campaign contributions from health insurance companies and his wife makes a lucrative living as a lobbyist.
In other words, Joe Lieberman is killing American citizens, including innocent babies for his own political and financial gain.
Before Lieberman calls any one a terrorist he should look in the mirror. He is responsible for far more American deaths than Osama bin Laden.

[KPeters_from_UK]

I completely agree with your comment. It is easier to grasp the tragedy of the deaths of a few than thousands hidden away.

[msimamaji]

2,266 veterans died in 2008 because they were uninsured and lacked access to the medical care they needed. That was the finding of a study conducted by the Harvard Medical School. That death toll is much time higher than the number of deaths Fort Hood.

As one of the co-authors of the report, Dr. Steffie Woolhandler explained, "Like other uninsured Americans, most uninsured vets are working people --- too poor to afford private coverge but not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid or means-tested VA Care."
I find it tragically ironic that Joe Lieberman babbles about Fort Hood, while he blocks health care reform, which could save the lives of many veterans. (I might also add that one third of our homeless are veterans.) For real, who actually is supporting our troops? In terms of combat deaths, isn't Joe Lieberman an even greater terrorist than Major Hassan.

I might point out that I did not make up this information, I found it in an article by Lyse Siegel on the Huffington Post, August 10, 2009. Why did I find this information on the Huffington Post and not on the FOX (Fake News Network) or the so-called mainstream media?

[mrdavidkolds]

This isn't the first time Politically Correct liberals have excused Muslims who kill "unbelievers". If you believed liberals, there are no evil people in the world and there has never been Islam motivated act of terrorism. Bah!
? 1990: "A prescription drug for ? depression" (to explain the assassination of Rabbi Meir Kahane)
? 1991: "A robbery gone wrong" (the murder of Makin Morcos in Sydney)
? 1994: "Road rage" (the killing of a random Jew on the Brooklyn Bridge)
? 1997: "Many, many enemies in his mind" (the shooting murder atop the Empire State Building)
? 2000: A traffic incident (the attack on a bus of Jewish schoolchildren near Paris)
? 2002: "A work dispute" (the double murder at LAX)
? 2002: A "stormy [family] relationship" (the Beltway snipers)
? 2003: An "attitude problem" (Hasan Karim Akbar's attack on fellow soldiers, killing two)
? 2003: Mental illness (the mutilation murder of Sebastian Sellam)
? 2004: "Loneliness and depression" (an explosion in Brescia, Italy outside a McDonald's restaurant)
? 2005: "A disagreement between the suspect and another staff member" (a rampage at a retirement center in Virginia)
? 2006: "An animus toward women" (a murderous rampage at the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle)
? 2006: "His recent, arranged marriage may have made him stressed" (killing with an SUV in northern California)

Additionally, when a Osama bin Laden-admiring Arab-American crashed a plane into a Tampa high-rise, blame fell on the acne drug Accutane.

Taken from a Daniel Pipes e-mail newsletter.

[msimamaji]

How many lynchings in the South were committed by mobs of White Christians? If you check out Klan Watch published by the Southern Poverty Leadership Conference, you will find similar lists of hate crimes. And white extremists continue to level death threats against people in the SPLC. Does this mean all white Christians engage in lynch mobs???
Yes, you can make a list of Muslims who committed violent acts, but bear in mind that there are 1 billion Muslims in the world. Does this list contain a billion names. I am totally opposed hatred toward any group of people - including Muslims.
We

[ToolMangler1]

I am not coming to Hasans defense, I am trying to look at what he did in the correct light.
(1) He did commit murder and mayhem on American soil,
(2) He does appear to be internally conflicted.
(3) He should pay with his life for what he did.
(4) He won't be the last, (unless the military and Nation get to the truth of what happened and correct the cause)

People call his attack 'cowardly' and The President referred to it as a "Craven" (another word for cowardly).
Both descriptions are (to my POV wrong).
If this man had his values straight, I would have trusted my life to him as another soldier. He would have been welcome in my 'Foxhole'...
Consider the way events unfolded, He tidied up his affairs, made preparations to die, and committed himself to his task.

That being said, I hope the Military plays this straight without finger pointing or blame, He should be tried (fairly), Sentenced and the sentence executed swiftly without rancor.

[jt92202]

Just because one Muslum did this in the US doesn't make all Muslum's the same as him as we all know but we also know that the Extremist Muslum is capible of this kind of terror attack. He stated he was a Muslum First and an American Second, I don't believe that is the kind of person I want defending our country. His loyalties lay with his religion first, he should never had even been thought about getting deployed to the middle east. I do not think he would have been able to handle seeing Muslum's being killed an wounded, I think he would have turned on the US and started something over there. That is my 2 cents and I could be very wrong about it.

Let the Army, FBI, CIA, and any other dept look into this and decide what happened and then decide if we need some kind of hearings in the congress or house to happen. The congress and house has much bigger things to deal with before they stick their hands into this, let everyone do their job before Joe and his pals (meaning all of congress and the house) gum up the situation!!!

I don't believe he was just a mental case, I do believe he did this for "his" god and "his" beliefs. This statement in no way means I believe all Muslums has his beliefs, I feel his beliefs are warped and fall into line with extremism!

[briannorwood]

Joe Leiberman is nothing more than a self-serving, dweebish little jackass. I am sorry the people of Connecticut were fooled into voting for him last time, but you can be sure that this is his LAST term of office!

[smac761]

To those who find investigating the islamic jihad connection in this tradegy unnecessary: please stay out of careers where you have any security responsibilities.

[stn_sage]

Considering Leiberman's actions the last few months...HE's the LAST guy that should be making any qualitative judgments concerning anyone else's mental health! HE appears to be 'nuttier than a fruitcake'!

Yet...there he is...on one news station or another...making some sort of outrageous comment or another! How sad!

He is visible proof of why Congress is failing so badly...because it's members are more 'pop-off artists' than competent workers!

How the state of Connecticut could have sent such a strange, and twisted individual to represent it...is BEYOND me! Hopefully, they'll replace him someday, before he does too much more damage to the nation!

[smitvict]

"Could such stress lead other individuals to embrace fundamentalisms, be they Muslim, Jewish or Christian?"

Let me see, have we ever heard of a Jewish terrorist, Christian terrorist or Muslim terrorist? PC gone amuck again. I agree with Leiberman, let's call this individual's actions for what they are and not hide behind "offending others".

[lfitts2]

Lieberman is an attention grabbing jackass. He embodies the worst of both the Democratic AND Republican parties. His judgment is bad all around...whatever he says..is usually wrong and should be ignored

[newerdeal]

That doctor has inside, very personal info about the actions of our troops during and in the wars.

Was he sharing that info with his email buddys ?

[nor-one]

Why do you insist on putting "Droopy" back in the news? You should leave this poor jewish woman alone! She's still trying to get over having lost her bid for power by backing the repubs in the last election. Like Glen Beck she's a classic "dry drunk."