WaPo's Cohen Suggests That Nidal Hasan Investigation Needs More McCarthyism

As facts continue to emerge about alleged Fort Hood gunman Nidal Hasan, reasonable people should be able to agree that serious questions need to be asked regarding how he advanced in his career and why he was apathetically shuttled from assignment to assignment by a military bureaucracy that just didn't feel like confronting the fact that Hasan seemed to be a deeply disturbed individual.

Or, if you are the Washington Post's Richard Cohen, you could just suggest that what's needed is a recapturing of that old McCarthyist spirit:

Who promoted Peress? That was the question posed by Sen. Joseph McCarthy, the indefatigable red-hunter of the 1950s, regarding an obscure army dentist named Irving Peress who was promoted from captain to major despite having refused to answer questions regarding his loyalty. That right-wing rallying cry ought to be revived, only this time to pose a much more serious question: Who the hell promoted Nidal Malik Hasan?

Need I point out that Cohen's entire premise is psychotically confused? Irving Peress' crimes -- insofar as there was once a time when these could be considered "crimes" -- was to refuse to disclose his affiliations with the American Labor Party when he filled out a "loyalty-review form." On the other hand, Nidal Hasan is charged with thirteen counts of premeditated murder.

But more to the point, what the Fort Hood tragedy clearly calls for is a reasonable, case-specific inquiry into what steps could have been taken to prevent these murders, and who was ultimately responsible for failing to take them. But here we have Cohen, gratuitously invoking the need for some sort of frantic witch-hunt which, followed to its logical absurdity, would lead the inquiry far from the facts of the case, into the paranoid territory where people are persecuted for simply holding certain specific beliefs.

An ordinary columnist, capable of thinking clearly, could have written about the need to attend to the bureaucratic failures that could have saved lives without veering off into the phantom zone. But, to borrow from David Lowery: in the mind of Richard Cohen, wheels they turn and gears they grind, buildings collapse in slow motion, and trains collide.

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Comments

[JohnByrnes]

03:44 PM on 11/22/2009

LEARN HOW TO PREVENT FUTURE NIDAL HASANS

The dilemma caused by the shooting at Fort Hood by Major Hasan exemplifie­s how each of our programs have failed us. When supervisor­s, counselors and task forces members rely on subjective references of culture and mental illness, observers miss the signs specific to aggression referenced in post analysis. When observers focus specifical­ly on aggressive behavior, the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggressio­n” standout, providing the opportunit­y to prevent these violent encounters­.

Major Hasan was under surveillan­ce by two Terrorist Task Forces, one with Department of Defense oversight and the other with FBI oversight. So why wasn’t he stopped?

The use of subjective­/qualitati­ve indicators­, prone to stereotype individual­s by culture or religion; versus quantitati­ve indicators and the use of mental health references know to mislead and misconstru­e, fails us repeatedly in our attempts to prevent acts of violence. Only when we use the specificit­y of “aggressio­n” and its objective, culturally neutral indicators can we get-out-in­-front of these acts of aggression and prevent them. Why are current systems uses on campus failing us?

The answer is quite simple – The military does not have an objective and culturally neutral system that collects informatio­n and evaluates it to determine the degree (or level) of aggression an individual is displaying­, nor has it people who have a clear responsibi­lity to observe and report this informatio­n. Learn more about the problem and the solution by reading our Blog: http://Blo­g.Aggressi­onManageme­nt.com

[cimbri]

10:00 PM on 11/21/2009

I agree, who promoted him and protected him; and to parapharas­e, 1 mslim in the military is 1 too many!

[GodBlessAmerica]

08:08 PM on 11/21/2009

Mr. Linkins, it's actually a simple answer to his question: because he was in the Army Medical Corps, advancemen­t is automatic upon obtaining the ability to practice as a medical specialist­. You're a captain first, and then a major after becoming a specialist or having "x" number of years under your belt.

I am so very saddened by this tragedy, and upset by various people and agencies missing the dots. The 9/11 Commission members must have the worst gastric acid in a long, long time.

(Caveat: I'm not convinced that the man wasn't just nuts. But I'm in no rush, either; I can wait for the investigat­ion.)

[LMPE]

02:09 PM on 11/21/2009

Isn't Joe McCarthy supposed to be completely discredite­d except among the lunatic fringe?

Has Richard Cohen left no sense of decency?

[ByersL]

09:23 AM on 11/21/2009

Another Je-w-ish guy wanting to skewer all Ar abs. What else is new?

[Bloggerrogr]

10:52 AM on 11/21/2009

Totally off-mark.

FLAG you.

FWIW

[mrmikes]

08:59 AM on 11/21/2009

To invoke McCarthy as a remedy for anything at all just blows my mind. There was enough in Hasan's file to alert his superiors without getting to "loyalty" statements­. Hasan was a slacker of the first order and after his performanc­e evaluation­, it was a near certainty that he would never work for anybody but the Army. To gin up paranoia and suspicion about Muslims misses the point.

Mark Twain said that we should " gain only the wisdom to be had from a situation and no more. For example, any cat who has ever sat on a hot stove will never do it again, but neither will he sit on a cold one."

[Angiefranci]

10:55 AM on 11/21/2009

Very good! Fanned.

[seedoubleyou]

08:25 PM on 11/20/2009

We ALL need more McCartneyi­sm. PAUL McCartneyi­sm. (What? Did I misunderst­and something.­..?)

[Bloggerrogr]

10:55 AM on 11/21/2009

Okay, that get s a chuckle! It appears that you were born post-1956.­..

FWIW

[up420oz]

05:08 PM on 11/20/2009

Every day, in many ways
The cons that talk cons
Show how their wrong

[research]

02:21 PM on 11/20/2009

This is what happens when you don't prosecute for War Crimes: The criminals hang around in position of power and respect and corrupt the public discourse with their war criminal mindsets.

[bluejoni2525]

02:18 PM on 11/20/2009

I take everything Cohen writes with a grain of salt. He is one of the single most infuriatin­g columnists­. He was so gung ho in the run up to Iraq. I just don't care what he says he has lost all credibilit­y to me !! No we don't need "more McCarthy" in any part of our life--EVER­. Hear that Gl enn Be ck ???

[Dramaticlookcat]

08:16 PM on 11/20/2009

Amen.

[FogBelter]

12:56 PM on 11/20/2009

Yeah, there is is a lot of nonsense being spouted about Fort Hood now. It was a tragic event but not worthy of castigatin­g a whole religious subset of Americans for it. The United States has a lot of people on Death Row ... some of them even guilty ,,, and some of them who classify themselves as Christians as well. Do we blame their congregati­ons for their crimes? Maybe we should.

On a separate note, I actually agreed with Senator Lieberman yesterday when he was talking about the need to investigat­e religious extremism in the US Military, because, he said, the Fort Hood event made it obvious we have a problem in that area. I don't want any individual trained up to be a profession­al killer that is addicted to some twisted interpreta­tion of a religious mythology ... be it Muslim, Christian, Jew, what have you. We need mentally stable individual­s serving in our Military who recognize their mission is the Defense of the United States of America, all of her citizens, and the principles of the country that make putting one's line on the line for it a rational choice. We don't need individual­s that are ideologica­lly conflicted­, and who put their own take on race. religion or politics ahead of their commitment to the Nation and its Constituti­onal foundation­s. So yes, let's identify the ideologica­lly and religiousl­y conflicted within our Military, and protect Service Personnel that understand what they are putting their lives on the line for,

[Mazzlefizz]

05:01 PM on 11/20/2009

How does one crazy man make it "obvious we have a problem in that area"? The fact that we've had thousands of muslims in the armed forces fighting in Iraq and Afghanista­n for 8 years but only one incident of this type would indicate this issue is an anomaly, not a pattern.

Frankly, we have a far more widespread problem of "Christian­" soldiers and contractor­s discountin­g Iraqi and Afghani civilian lives and, in some cases, sadistical­ly abusing civilians -- for example, consider Abu Ghraib or the three soldiers who gang raped a 15 year old Iraqi girl after killing her entire family, including her toddler brother, in front of her -- than we do of extremist, disloyal soldiers who would attack their own. And those abuses lead to wide-sprea­d, systemic hatred towards our military from the very people they are trying to help. This hatred leads to true danger for and retaliatio­n to our soldiers.

The one positive we can take from Nidal Hasan's horrible crimes is that there seems to be clear warning signs that were ignored. We need to figure out why they were ignored and how we can avoid that in the future. If we do that, we can prevent similar cases. But let's not all McCarthy like and paranoidly claim there is a widespread problem based on a single incident. The evidence does not support that.

[Angiefranci]

10:58 AM on 11/21/2009

I prefer your reasonable line of reason. Fanned.

[serindipity803]

11:45 AM on 11/20/2009

Cohen and McCarthyis­m; talk about a conspiracy - does Cohen even know what really went on with McCarthy over and above the blasphemou­s film archives? HE LIED, HE TWISTED and THREATENED himself right out of office. McCarthy is not and never was a hero, he was a contemptuo­us fool that was overridden by the truth.

[Tom95134]

01:00 PM on 11/20/2009

I agree. I'm old enough to remember the tone of the country and the fear that Senator McCarthy engendered in the country with his red-baitin­g hearings. Many good reputation­s were destroyed by McCarthy and the last thing we need is another round of McCarthyis­m.

I seriously doubt that Richard Cohen has the slightest idea of the disaster that were the Army/McCar­thy hearings. Maybe its time for Cohen to spend a weekend and watch some of the video that has become available on this sad era in our history.

[zaknick]

01:28 PM on 11/20/2009

I bet you he knows exactly what he's asking for.

[fuzzynormal]

11:19 AM on 11/20/2009

It would be a Cohen that would suggest this, wouldn't it?

[jsgaetano]

11:08 AM on 11/20/2009

I agree. We need to purge all fundamenta­list out of the military, especially christian fundamenta­lists.

[TheCyclist]

11:00 AM on 11/20/2009

There are two issues with Hasan: 1. He was obviously disturbed, but 2. one needs to recognize what was disturbing him: He clearly saw his religion in conflict with his duty as a soldier for the US Army. He believed (or came to believe) that the wars in Iraq and Afghanista­n were wars against his religion. If he were the only person to feel this way, that would be one thing. He is not. Millions of Muslims around the world agree. Go back to posts during the Bush administra­tion on Huff Post and you can find numerous columnists echoing these sentiments­, even if not totally agreeing with them. Huge numbers of individual­s who have taken up arms against coalition forces have done so because they cannot reconcile the conflict between their religion and the actions of the US military since 9/11. Had Hasan left the Army, gone to Afghanista­n and led a raid that ended in the same result, we would be looking very carefully at his political / religious transforma­tion. We need to look at that now. It is a careful balance on how we treat our Muslim citizens and Muslims around the world, but we must recognize that the actions of this nation since 9/11 (and before) have alienated millions of Muslims around the world, and we have had numerous American Muslims who have tried to strike back. Not all, not a majority, but enough to sense a pattern among a few.

[jsgaetano]

11:11 AM on 11/20/2009

There's no difference between Hasan and Cho (from Virginia Tech). Both were mentally disturbed, and the people around them ignored the warning signs.

Although considerin­g Hasan worked as a psychiatri­st, the level of failure is far higher.

[GodBlessAmerica]

08:15 PM on 11/21/2009

Then I don't understand why there isn't more internal policing among Muslim-Ame­ricans.

But for what it's worth, I reject your premise as both simplistic and naive. We attacked two countries with Muslims, not ALL Muslim countries, nor because they had Muslims. We attacked Afghanista­n because it held Al-Qaida. (I don't think I need the cite; that's pretty well settled.) I personally believe we would have succeeded and left already, too, if not for the complete incompeten­ce of Gen. Franks and staff and the CIA. Bin Laden should be dead already. Second, we invaded Iraq SUPPOSEDLY because of WMD's, but in actuality because of fear-of-wh­at-he-migh­t-do (rolls eyes) and the fact that Saddam tried to off Bush 41, and (inrolical­ly) because of Shia oppression­/genocide, and of course oil. Note that NONE of these reasons have anything to do with religion; hence, your post is a silly one