Senior Official: More Hasan Ties to People Under Investigation by FBI

Senior Official: More Hasan Ties to People Under Investigation by FBI
By MARTHA RADDATZ, BRIAN ROSS, MARY-ROSE ABRAHAM, and REHAB EL-BURI
ABC News

Alleged shooter had "unexplained connections" to others besides Awlaki.


A senior government official tells ABC News that investigators have found that alleged Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan had "more unexplained connections to people being tracked by the FBI" than just radical cleric Anwar al Awlaki. The official declined to name the individuals but Congressional sources said their names and countries of origin were likely to emerge soon.

Questions already surround Major Hasan's contact with Awlaki, a radical cleric based in Yemen whom authorities consider a recruiter for al Qaeda. U.S. officials now confirm Hasan sent as many as 20 e-mails to Awlaki. Authorities intercepted the e-mails but later deemed them innocent or protected by the first amendment.

The FBI said it turned over the information to the Army, but Defense Department officials today denied that. One military investigator on a joint terror task force with the FBI was shown the e-mails, but they were never forwarded in a formal way to more senior officials at the Pentagon, and the Army did not learn of the contacts until after the shootings.

Official: Nidal Hasan Had "Unexplained Connections" - ABC News

Click to expand...

I have remained silent about this incident until today, because I wanted to wait a few days and see what emerged... Plus, to be honest, the fact that the man turned out to be a Muslim that was opposed to the war, didn't surprise me at all.

The reason I'm posting on this incident today, was because quite frankly, I'm fed up with the people on this forum and elsewhere, that are defending this man and/or refusing to call this incident what is, an act of Islamic terrorism. The final straw was when I posted an interview with Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, and someone actually had the gall to attack him and others on the "far right", and accuse them of being anti-Muslim.

Nobody is attacking the Muslim faith here, there just stating the GD facts.

What in the hell has this country come to, when people are now being attacked and scorned for telling the unvarnished truth?

.

Grim17 said:

Nobody is attacking the Muslim faith here, there just stating the GD facts.

What in the hell has this country come to, when people are now being attacked and scorned for telling the unvarnished truth?

Click to expand...

You have not been looking around on the forum if you think that.

I have no issue with calling it terrorism if people really wish to nor do I have a problem with calling it a mass murder by a mentally unstable male.

Call it what it is and you will not hear many people complaining.

Grim17 said:

The reason I'm posting on this incident today, was because quite frankly, I'm fed up with the people on this forum and elsewhere, that are defending this man and/or refusing to call this incident what is, an act of Islamic terrorism.

Click to expand...

Aside from condemning the massacre, I haven't commented further on the matter. IMO, there seems to be a rush to reach conclusions. However, the investigation is in its early stages. While most who have followed the story are well aware of various leads and snippets of evidence made available in the media, the investigation will need to be thorough. All relevant evidence needs to be examined and assessed. Then, and only then, will the investigators make their conclusions known.

Arguments that one should wait until the investigation is completed before embracing any particular conclusion(s) is not the same thing as "defending" Major Hasan, nor is it an unwillingness to term the massacre an "act of Islamic terrorism."

A defense of Major Hasan would be an effort to justify or excuse his massacre. No one is doing it at DP.

An unwillingness to accept the massacre as an "act of Islamic terrorism" would be denial of such an outcome after--not before--the investigation reaches such a conclusion. Right now, the investigators have reached no conclusions. Speculation based on reported leads and fragments of evidence is not the same thing as a conclusion.

IMO, even if it is not popular among some, the prudent course is to let the investigation proceed and wait until the investigation is completed and its findings made available before reaching conclusions that the crime was or was not an act of terrorism.

This comes down to two failures, IMO. Both of which place blame on organizations and individuals.

1. Contrary to popular belief, the U.S. Military (particularly the Army) is an insanely PC organization. I know this first hand. I totally believe that Hassan had co-workers that were worried about his state of mind and his possible allegiance to Islamic fundamentalism, and sympathy to our enemies in Iraq and AFG. I also believe that those who were concerned were apprehensive about complaining about Hassan because of fear of PC backlash; nothing is private in the military and often, you are guilty until proven innocent. A white male making an official complaint about an Arab Muslim officer would have made waves, and there is no doubt in my mind that the sympathy would have been with Hassan during any investigation. The Army does not want PR nightmares...and an official investigation into an officer for possible sympathies toward our enemies would have made the news and opened the Army to intense scrutiny from the PC crowd.

2. If our intelligence services were tracking Hassan for any reason, the whistle should have been blown right there. This guy has a freaking SECRET clearance with the U.S. government. Even though he is a mental health care professional, if he deployed he would have access to SECRET information that he could have provided to our enemies and compromised Operational Security.

I'm not sure if Hassan's fear about the impending deployment or allegiance to radical Islamism is to blame for his actions. Maybe both. But it's not like people weren't tracking this guy. They were, both in the Army and intelligence services. There were massive failures to reign this guy in...and if it turns out that no action was taken because of fear of PC backlash, that is reprehensible and severe punishments should be handed out to those who sat on this. It should also make us think twice about calling a spade a spade.

Currently in the Army, leaders are forced to do "risk assessments" on all of the Soldiers in a given unit. It is a numerical formula to identify what Soldiers are most "at risk" of hurting themselves or others; a myriad of factors are weighed, like: age, rank, past legal history, substance abuse, # of deployments, PTSD, combat injuries, etc. We track them by this formula and usually, the most high-risk individuals are the ones who end up in trouble. But Hassan's issues went beyond normal Soldier stuff...this guy BEGGED to get out of a deployment, spoke out against our operations overseas and apparently proselytized his faith to his co-workers and those he counseled. His risk assessment was beyond that of an "at risk" Soldier, IMO.

Then again, sometimes crazy people do crazy things. I'm not sure we can't make that blanket statement in this case. I'm very anxious to see what Hassan says if his health improves. I am anxious for the trial. I want to know answers. I want to see the evidence. I hope that Congress does an inquiry and isn't PC about releasing the results.

People deserve to know the complete truth. If only to prevent this from occuring again, then that is reason enough.

donsutherland1 said:

Aside from condemning the massacre, I haven't commented further on the matter. IMO, there seems to be a rush to reach conclusions. However, the investigation is in its early stages. While most who have followed the story are well aware of various leads and snippets of evidence made available in the media, the investigation will need to be thorough. All relevant evidence needs to be examined and assessed. Then, and only then, will the investigators make their conclusions known.

Arguments that one should wait until the investigation is completed before embracing any particular conclusion(s) is not the same thing as "defending" Major Hasan, nor is it an unwillingness to term the massacre an "act of Islamic terrorism."

A defense of Major Hasan would be an effort to justify or excuse his massacre. No one is doing it at DP.

An unwillingness to accept the massacre as an "act of Islamic terrorism" would be denial of such an outcome after--not before--the investigation reaches such a conclusion. Right now, the investigators have reached no conclusions. Speculation based on reported leads and fragments of evidence is not the same thing as a conclusion.

IMO, even if it is not popular among some, the prudent course is to let the investigation proceed and wait until the investigation is completed and its findings made available before reaching conclusions that the crime was or was not an act of terrorism.

Click to expand...

Post of the week.

Very well said, I couldn't agree more.

Grim17 said:

I have remained silent about this incident until today, because I wanted to wait a few days and see what emerged... Plus, to be honest, the fact that the man turned out to be a Muslim that was opposed to the war, didn't surprise me at all.

The reason I'm posting on this incident today, was because quite frankly, I'm fed up with the people on this forum and elsewhere, that are defending this man and/or refusing to call this incident what is, an act of Islamic terrorism. The final straw was when I posted an interview with Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, and someone actually had the gall to attack him and others on the "far right", and accuse them of being anti-Muslim.

Nobody is attacking the Muslim faith here, there just stating the GD facts.

What in the hell has this country come to, when people are now being attacked and scorned for telling the unvarnished truth?

.

Click to expand...

This is about politics, the left fears the right will use this to label obama as the first president since bush, to allow a terrorist attack on this country. Of course obama could never be blamed for this, just as no one should have blamed bush after 8 months in office. Politics are just down right nasty these days, and this will be used against this president, and that is sad.

Now I can blame the president for not calling this what it is, or for making excuses for islam in his recent speech at fort hood. He said that no religion condones this behavior, well that is simply not true, they do call for violence against the infidel. This is not something the "far-right" cooked up, this is in their good book, just as the old testament had in their good book.

This was terrorism, this man was following his religion, and anything to the contrary, is a damn lie.

Jackboot said:

This is about politics, the left fears the right will use this to label obama as the first president since bush, to allow a terrorist attack on this country.

Click to expand...

I'm a conservative and never once did that thought ever cross my mind.

Of course obama could never be blamed for this, just as no one should have blamed bush after 8 months in office. Politics are just down right nasty these days, and this will be used against this president, and that is sad.

Click to expand...

I haven't seen anyone on the right do so yet... and I'm talking about politicians and pundits, not no-name posters on a political forum.

Now I can blame the president for not calling this what it is, or for making excuses for islam in his recent speech at fort hood.

Click to expand...

Every honest person in the US knows what this was, and also recognizes how the president and democrats in DC haven't.

He said that no religion condones this behavior, well that is simply not true, they do call for violence against the infidel. This is not something the "far-right" cooked up, this is in their good book, just as the old testament had in their good book.

Click to expand...

I know this, and you know this, but I'm still not willing to condemn the entire Muslim faith quite yet... but I am getting awful damned close.

This was terrorism, this man was following his religion, and anything to the contrary, is a damn lie.

Click to expand...

DING DING DING... WE HAVE A WINNER!

.

This would have happened under Bush. This is totally different that 9/11, well more or less. I don't think this guy was a sleeper, he was making too much noise. I think those in his command chain didn't know WTF to do with him, but they should have taken action.

Grim17 said:

I have remained silent about this incident until today, because I wanted to wait a few days and see what emerged... Plus, to be honest, the fact that the man turned out to be a Muslim that was opposed to the war, didn't surprise me at all.

The reason I'm posting on this incident today, was because quite frankly, I'm fed up with the people on this forum and elsewhere, that are defending this man and/or refusing to call this incident what is, an act of Islamic terrorism. The final straw was when I posted an interview with Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, and someone actually had the gall to attack him and others on the "far right", and accuse them of being anti-Muslim.

Nobody is attacking the Muslim faith here, there just stating the GD facts.

What in the hell has this country come to, when people are now being attacked and scorned for telling the unvarnished truth?

.

Click to expand...

Politically correct.