Army Looks Inward in Hasan Probe

Civilians Will Take Part in Internal Review of Military's Handling of Alleged Fort Hood Shooter

(CBS/AP)  Updated 6:20 p.m. Eastern Time

A panel of civilians and military personnel will review whether the Army properly managed Maj. Nadil Malik Hasan, the alleged gunman responsible for killing 13 and wounding 29 at Fort Hood earlier this month, defense officials told CBS News.

The panel's investigation will include how staff at Walter Reed Medical Center handled Hasan's employment reviews, one official told CBS News correspondent Kimberly Dozier.

The commission is separate from the criminal investigation into the shooting. A formal announcement of the panel is expected in the next several days. The commission's charter - for instance, whether it has subpoena power - is still being worked out, reports Dozier.

Army Chief-of-Staff Gen. George Casey had said previously that the military would have to "look hard internally, hard at ourselves" in assessing how the shooting came to happen.

The White House has taken heat from Congress over the shooting, with Rep. Pete Hoekstra chiding officials for being "too slow" in providing lawmakers information on the investigation.

"There hasn't been enough transparency for members of Congress, for the press, or for the American people. You know, I think that we need to move very, very aggressively and do a full-scale investigation as to who knew what and where," Hoekstra, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, told "Face the Nation" host Bob Schieffer Sunday.

The White House said Monday that on Tuesday morning an inter-agency briefing team will go to Capitol Hill to brief House and Senate leaders and committee chairs, as well as ranking Republicans.

"This is the latest in a series of engagements with the Hill since the horrific events at Fort Hood, and further evidence of the Administration’s commitment to appropriately inform Congress without interfering in the prosecution of this case," said White House spokesman Tommy Vietor.

CBSNews.com Special Report: Tragedy at Fort Hood

Questions about Hasan's fitness for duty and commitment to U.S. soldiers have come sharply into question in the wake of the attack.. A group of doctors overseeing his medical training discussed concerns about his overly zealous religious views and strange behavior months before the Army major was accused of the shooting rampage.

Doctors and staff overseeing Hasan's training viewed him at times as belligerent, defensive and argumentative in his frequent discussions of his Muslim faith, a military official familiar with several group discussions about Hasan said. The official was not authorized to speak publicly about the meetings and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Hasan was characterized in meetings as a mediocre student and lazy worker, a matter of concern among the doctors and staff at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, a military medical school in Bethesda, Maryland, the official said.

The concerns about Hasan's performance and religious views were shared with other military officials considering his assignment after he finished his medical training, and the consensus was to send the 39-year-old psychiatrist to Fort Hood, the official said.

Related Coverage on CBSNews.com:

Imam: I did not Pressure Hasan
Where Were the Alarms on Hasan?
Transparency Needed in Ft. Hood Inquiry
Reporter: Army "Timid" About Hasan's Views
Obama: No "Political Theater" Over Hasan
Hasan Paralyzed, in Guarded Condition

Fort Hood, one of the country's largest military installations, was considered the best assignment for Hasan because other doctors could handle the workload if he continued to perform poorly and his superiors could document any continued behaviour problems, the official said.

The group saw no evidence that Hasan was violent or a threat. It was more that he repeatedly referred to his strong religious views in discussions with classmates, his superiors and even in his research work, the official said. His behavior, while at times perceived as intense and combative, was not unlike the zeal of others with strong religious views. But some doctors and staff were concerned that their unfamiliarity with the Muslim faith would lead them to unfairly single out Hasan's behavior, the official said.

Some in the group questioned Hasan's sympathies as an Army psychiatrist, whether he would be more aligned with Muslims fighting U.S. troops. And there was some concern about whether he should continue to serve in the military, the official said.

In the days after the shooting, officials revealed Hasan communicated with a radical Yemeni-American imam via e-mail. In an interview with a Yemeni journalist, contracted by the Washington Post, Anwar al-Awlaki said he didn't pressure Hasan into the attacks.

Sharon Willis, a spokeswoman for the Uniformed Services University, referred questions Wednesday about Hasan to his lawyer. The attorney, John Galligan of Belton, Texas, did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment.

The revelations about the concerns that Hasan's superiors had before sending him to Fort Hood come amid a growing debate over what warning signs the military and law enforcement officials might have missed before last week's massacre.

A joint terrorism task force overseen by the FBI learned late last year of Hasan's repeated contact with a radical Muslim cleric who encouraged Muslims to kill U.S. troops in Iraq. The FBI said in a statement late Wednesday that the task force did not refer early information about Hasan to superiors because it concluded he wasn't linked to terrorism.

The doctors and staff who discussed concerns about Hasan had several group conversations about him that started in early 2008 during regular monthly meetings and ended as he was finishing a fellowship in disaster and preventive psychology this summer, the official familiar with the discussions said.

They saw no signs of mental problems, no risk factors that would predict violent behaviour. And the group discussed other factors that suggested Hasan would continue to thrive in the military, factors that mitigated their concerns, the official said.

According to the official, records reviewed by Hasan's superiors described nearly 20 years of military service, including nearly eight years as an enlisted soldier; completion of three rigorous medical school programs, albeit as a student the group characterized in their discussions as mediocre; his resilience after the deaths of his parents early in his medical education, and an otherwise polite and gentle nature when not discussing religion.

The Army has said it has no record of enlisted service for Hasan, instead noting that his military service began when he started the medical school program in 1997.

The official said the group became increasingly concerned about Hasan's religious views after he completed two research projects that took a decidedly religious tone - one at the end of his residency at Walter Reed that advocated allowing Muslim soldiers to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars against other Muslims, and the other as he pursued his master's degree in public health that discussed religious conflicts for Muslim U.S. soldiers.

Some in the group shared their experiences with Hasan, all telling similar stories about repeated instances when he made religion an issue.

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

Those officials either declined to comment or did not return telephone calls and emails seeking comment Wednesday.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon has found no evidence that Hasan formally sought release from the Army as a conscientious objector or for any other reason, two senior military officials told The Associated Press. Family members have said he wanted to get out of the Army and had sought legal advice, suggesting that Hasan's anxiety as a Muslim over his pending deployment overseas might have been a factor in the deadly rampage.

Hasan had complained privately to colleagues that he was harassed for his religion and that he wanted to get out of the Army. But there is no record of Hasan filing a complaint with his chain of command regarding any harassment he may have suffered for being Muslim or any record of him formally seeking release from the military, the officials told the AP.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the case is under investigation.

Another Army official, Lt. Col. George Wright, said Wednesday that Hasan likely would have had to commit to another year in the military when he was transferred to Fort Hood earlier this summer. It is common for an officer to incur a one-year service extension when they receive a transfer to another post.

[finkfurst]

by jefleshman November 17, 2009 5:13 PM EST
We were discussing the many different rules and regulations I, as a service member, follow. I am not a Geneva Convention "Expert" or a Lawyer or an Military Legal person......
--------------------------
Exactly...... and you 'forgot' to mention training about the Geneva Conventions???? This is VERY simple - are you told that the Geneva Conventions apply to you or not? I know interrogating prisoners is not your job, but that's just a cop-out. You are a US soldier supposedly engaged in a war for ****'s sake! You absolutely SHOULD know.

[finkfurst]

jefleshman - AS USUAL, as soon as you have to answer a specific question you dry up. All you seem to be good for is posting poor quality links and juvenile statements.

Come on....... Have you been told that the Geneva Conventions apply to you or not?

[jgg000015]

why are they not allowing witnesses?

[AOCGUY]

jgg000015 - What are you talking about? Who is they and what witnesses are "they" not allowing?

[LiftingSkirts]

by DSR_57 November 16, 2009 10:30 PM EST
OR, if his evaluator put that he thought he was a radical muslim and that evaluator happened to be white, then I'm sure he would have had a whole other set of problems. Like having liberals on this site calling him racist and a bigot.
______________________

That's It Exactly. We are so afraid of being labeled a racist or bigot, we are more comfortable with radical killers in out midst than pointing them out and casting them out.

Amazing how powerful the PC purveyors have become...the minorities, as protected groups, have seized the moment. Don't even look at 'em at work or you might find yourself with a reprimand. Crazy power shift eh? All because of political correctness.

[DaVicar8]

The Army need not look "inward", but rather "up" the Chain-of-Command to thier Muslim Commander-in-Cheese...the guy who allowed another Muslim Terrorist to massacre Americans.

[AOCGUY]

DaVicar - It is a stretch to blame either the previous or current POTUS for this attack. Certainly the Army Medical Corp shoulders some of the blame for not identifying this guy early enough to either get him some help or boot him out of the Army. To suggest that the POTUS somehow should be aware of every service man and woman is ridiculous in the extreme. The failure was with Hasan?s supervisors and fellow doctors/students who noted his problems but did nothing to stop him.

We get that you hate Obama but quit blaming everything on him ? you just sound shrill and unthinking.

[excop1949]

FUBAR...

[dontknowitall]

Mind your own business!Don't get involved! Nobody likes a snitch! Do these words sound familiar? How about Fink. Rat. Trader. Whistle Blower. Gee I wonder why people keep their mouths shut. Guess it wouldn't have anything to do with protecting your career or your family. Either way if your a whistle blower your career is ruined. And if you did nothing to stop something like this you should be charged as an accessory. Huh. Nope never heard a thing.

[nowhiningallowed]

Let's start with totally changing the inbred mindset that we mustn't offend anyone, especially someone who is out of any type of majority. Political correctness indirectly led to this terrorist attack because too many were fearful of reporting this terrorist to the proper authorities for their hate-speech and terrorist rants. They cowered merely because he was a Muslim and forced themselves to accommodate, pander and try and accept and understand. Wrong. This radical Muslim terrorist should have never been allowed to remain in the military and he most definitely should have never been promoted to the level of Major. What was the military thinking anyway? Did they falsely convince themselves that by being nicey-nice to him he'd change? Wrong. Blame the slowness to properly react. Blame our society for the disgusting indoctrination of political correctness. Offending one individual and their group is much better than running the risk of slaughter, which is what occurred in this situation. Why should the voice of one that offends many be given any special consideration when all of the voices of those being offended by this one individual have had to acquiesce their majority and remain quiet about their being offended?

[cleric60]

Let me assure you that "Evangelical Christian" chaplains are being disciplined. All of us are taught NOT to force our own religious agenda that is a cardinal rule of the Association of Professional Chaplains and chaplaincy training in general.

[Lickedy]

Well, take Hasan to another quiet room and slam his private parts between the door jamb until he talks and then after wards, shoot-em. Your not going to get any substantial information out of a suicidal maniac !

[AOCGUY]

Aside from your amazingly juvenile post - he probably would not feel anything since he is paralyzed from the waist down.

[cattiej]

I would like to know if there are other people in other military bases that are or could be considered suspect.
The military isn't always willing to think like our enemy's. Case in point..We have MidAmerica Airport right next to Scott Air Force Base here in Illinois. The planes from China and Columbia land on the same runways that Scott Air Force Base uses..How dangerous is this...very The two jokers running MidAmerica airport have lied about just how many "flowers they are flying in from Columbia". Much of this news in the last two days in our local newspapers. MidAmerica airport should be taken over by the Air Force and it should become part of the Scott Air Force base. To me this is a case of "who's watching the farm"..my answer, nobody! American's are afraid to make any comment about someone for fear of being sued. Our country is being assulted from many fronts because of government officals only care about making money for themselves. Obama is over in China because we owe billions to the Chinese government. People, stop buying all that Chinese junk. We are selling out our country. Buy American, especially American cars. What do you have to loose, your freedom.

[50BMS13]

His bumper sticker was "ALLAH IS LOVE". It got scraped off by fellow soldiers, so someone knew something.

[retm-w]

What happened on Hasans yearly OER, his evaluator should have noted problems in behavior and work ethics. Or was it just pass him and let the next guy worry about it.

[Skirt-Lifter]

the latter

[AOCGUY]

I'm not surprised. Back in 1985 an Army NCO was assigned to my unit. Now this unit supposedly only took the very best. Within a year I relieved him for cause, but when I tried to give him a marginal performance report the CSM blocked it and he was sent off to another unit to continue his misbehavior. Later I discovered that prior to coming to my unit he was relieved at his previous unit and just passed on to us.

[DSR_57]

OR, if his evaluator put that he thought he was a radical muslim and that evaluator happened to be white, then I'm sure he would have had a whole other set of problems. Like having liberals on this site calling him racist and a bigot.

[finkfurst]

by AOCGUY November 16, 2009 8:07 PM EST
I'm not surprised. Back in 1985 an Army NCO was assigned to my unit. Now this unit supposedly only took the very best. Within a year I relieved him for cause, but when I tried to give him a marginal performance report the CSM blocked it and he was sent off to another unit to continue his misbehavior. Later I discovered that prior to coming to my unit he was relieved at his previous unit and just passed on to us.
--------------------------
Are you serious? Has the US army never heard of personnel files? No wonder you end up sending totally useless or dangerously psychopathic men into combat! It's about time your army learned what the word "professional" means.

[AOCGUY]

fink - Your point is well taken but one - I have never been in the Army and therefore had no access to his records. This was a joint unit. His selection was based upon reccommendations from previous commanders to our commander. If his old unit just wanted to push this problem down the road then shoving our direction was fairly early. The real failure was when our CSM blocked me from giving him the appropriate evaluation.

[finkfurst]

AOCGUY ...... and would you say that monitoring of personal performance and records is any better since the incident you described?

On a similar theme, you may have seen in another thread that I was also astonished by the lack of training given to soldiers about how to treat prisoners. Apparently only interrogators are given training about the Geneva Conventions! I have to say that I'm increasingly appalled and surprised at how unprofessionally the US armed forces are run, and so I'm becoming LESS surprised at the atrocities they commit when let loose in another country.

I have a feeling that there is an underlying idea that because they are Americans (who are obviously the best people in the world) they will always do the right thing, so they don't really need effective training or command!

[AOCGUY]

fink - As a commander I did review the records of persons recommended for assignment to my unit and did have the right to refuse anyone I did not want. I have also denied reelistment, preferred non-judicial punishment, and in one case prosecuted through courts martial and ultimately imprisoned personnel you would or could not conform to the standards required.

I'm not aware of the other article you speak of but in the 37 years I have been associated with the military "Law of Armed Conflict" training has been an annual requirement. And when I worked for GEN McCaffrey he directed us all to read, understand and carry Human Rights cards and report any abuse we observed including that done by other nations in our theater. While I have no doubt that American servicemen (and service men from your country as well)have committed and will probably committ offenses in the future, they are an extremely small part of our and your force and we have processes in place to deal with those who do not conform to our standards.

[finkfurst]

AOCGUY
jefleshman is a fairly senior NCO currently serving in Afghanistan and he was very clear that he had not received any training about the Geneva Conventions, only the "5 S rule". Does that surprise you?

The point is that US servicemen cannot be expected to know how to behave if they are clearly shown that things such a waterboarding are OK, and much more serious offences are covered up by their senior officers.

[AOCGUY]

fink - Yes it does surprise me. DoD Directive 2311.01E, "DoD Law of War Program" specifically directs all components to have an effective training program with respect to the Law of Armed Conflict. I won't go into the details of the directive (you can look it up yourself) but the program aside from requiring the departments to have a training program also spells out responsibilities that all service members have with regard to respect for human rights and reporting violations of the same. Maybe Fleshman can comment on this. If he has not had this training he needs to bring it up to his CO and Training NCO ASAP.

[mjlewis6]

Too bad Hoekstra has no interest in the monetary aspects of the previous administration or why WMD's were suspected in Iraq despite UNSCOM not being able to find any even with our information, what information President Bush had regarding an "Imminent attack" on the U.S. from Iraq in his runup speech prior to the invasion.

"Let's get to the bottom of this...." is always a trend for Republicans except when it involves Republicans...or business friends.

Bush finally got some backbone and told Cheney to go fish when asked for the upteenth time to pardon Scooter Libby, his former chief of staff for his role in the Valerie Plame-CIA disclosure matter.

If I like Bush for anything....it is for the above...and for clearly stating that our individual Constitutional Right to Have and Bear Arms....is to protect us from the government. All else is the fabric of fiction corporate bodies wrapped him in...I am sure he is glad to get away and come back to Texas, although Kennebunkport is more home to George Dubya than Dallas...and maybe Midland is closer to his personality for his YALE roots for a Presidential Library...Heck, he even had to drive to Alabama THROUGH NEW ORLEANS for his National Guard duty, the one he never finished...surely NEW ORLEANS should have qualified for the...oh, Katrina....that must be it.Oh well...

[Skirt-Lifter]

WMD weren't found period. If it was an "Intelligence Failure" then so be it. The real problem is accountability. Someone has to account for the failure. The "Buck" has to stop somewhere. In Truman's day, i know where it would stop.

A bunch of Saudis attacked us on 9-11 so we attacked Iraq & Afghanistan...OK...fine. I want an accounting of this.

I would love for the books to be opened up on contractors for the war effort. Most of all, I want GWB to tell the American people who told him there was WMD, why he believed it, and why was no one held accountable for the intel lapse.

[Xamkr]

"Meanwhile, the Pentagon has found no evidence that Hasan formally sought release from the Army as a conscientious objector or for any other reason, two senior military officials told The Associated Press."


Check the shredder bin, and maybe under the shirt of that guy that just left the building.

[ladyang]

Is the military also taking note of the radical extremist christian views that are being forced on members of the Armed Forces?

Right-wing radicals are spreading messages of hate and distrust in the military.

Many of these people are high ranking folks are senior enlisted and officers.

[cleric60]

"The official said the group became increasingly concerned about Hasan's religious views after he completed two research projects that took a decidedly religious tone - one at the end of his residency at Walter Reed that advocated allowing Muslim soldiers to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars against other Muslims, and the other as he pursued his master's degree in public health that discussed religious conflicts for Muslim U.S. soldiers.

Some in the group shared their experiences with Hasan, all telling similar stories about repeated instances when he made religion an issue."
WHY? WHY? Did his superiors, his supervisors NOT discipline him for attempting to force his religious/personal agenda on his patients or colleagues? One of the cardinal rules within medical chaplaincy is that we DON'T FORCE our religious/personal beliefs upon our patients or their family members. If it is a fact that they allowed this man to promote his religious agenda, they should be fired ASAP.

[SusanStoHelit]

I'd betcha they had to ignore Hasan pushing religion inappropriately because they'd turned a blind eye when others, of some evangelical Christian religion did likewise. So to punish him would mean they'd have to be hypocrites, or start punishing the Christians who likewise would push God on their patients.

[KabulsHere]

This is a consequence of the liberals freedom of speech hysteria.Hasan's superiors were afraid to punish him and be accused for dont respect his religion and free speech.

[ToolMangler1]

"The group saw no evidence that Hasan was violent or a threat. It was more that he repeatedly referred to his strong religious views in discussions with classmates, his superiors and even in his research work, the official said. His behavior, while at times perceived as intense and combative, was not unlike the zeal of others with strong religious views. But some doctors and staff were concerned that their unfamiliarity with the Muslim faith would lead them to unfairly single out Hasan's behavior, the official said."




a stick of dynamite if painted like aa barber pole looks very innocent and C-4 looks like modeling clay. In this day and age, PC is to be put aside when the health and welfare of others is at stake. It is a whole lot easier to apologize for hurt feelings than to apologize to people for hurt or dead family members.

[KabulsHere]

Couldnt agree more.Unfortunately underestimate threats is the trade mark of Obama's criminal regime.

I hope Obama will learn with this mistake.Whenever you see a Palestinian or a radical Muslim you better watch out.

[riptide213]

Make the most of this incompatible agitator profile to reveal, watch, and vet other latent threats from within.

Unceremoniously drum out of government or military any disgruntled tax paid public servants who wish to pursue their own personal exasperated inclinations or indoctrinations against US national policy and good military order, morale, or discipline.

Organizational, cultural, or societal fear to explicitly challenge, keenly investigate, or proactively keep in check any perturbed citizen or serving public servant for openly extremist and seditious religious or ethnic conduct is a national security Achilles Heel.