It is cowardice, not blindness, when you are afraid to look.

You don’t look, because if you looked, you’d see. And if you see, you’ll know.

And you don’t want to know. Because then you can deny that you knew.

And claim there is no way you could have known.

But it is your job to know. To do otherwise is dereliction, or worse.

The tide of political correctness that has absolutely pervaded our senior military leadership in this nation is a (THE) direct cause of the tragedy at Fort Hood. The recent news of the dishonorable and shameful actions by senior officers at the US Naval Academy regarding the Color Guard detail at the World Series ( ) is merely a symptom of that disease. The USNA incident was not simply the condoning of discrimination based on skin color, but discrimination against two white midshipmen being COMMAND DIRECTED. Similar “diversity” efforts mandating equally unfair measures, have been done not just with the tacit concurrence of senior officers, but at the direction of those senior officers.

To those who do not believe that this rampant political correctness and lack of moral courage on the part of field-grade, general, and flag officers contributed to the Terrorist attack at Fort Hood this past Thursday, I offer an excerpt from a Ralph Peters column in yesterday’s New York Post:

“Given the myriad warning signs, it’s appalling that no action was taken against a man apparently known to praise suicide bombers and openly damn US policy. But no officer in his chain of command, either at Walter Reed Army Medical Center or at Ft. Hood, had the guts to take meaningful action against a dysfunctional soldier and an incompetent doctor.

Had Hasan been a Lutheran or a Methodist, he would’ve been gone with the simoon. But officers fear charges of discrimination when faced with misconduct among protected minorities.”

I have left out Mr. Peters’ comments regarding the somewhat disturbing non-reaction of our Commander in Chief. Such will be debated elsewhere in forums more appropriate than this. Suffice to say a certain Cambridge Police Officer might be glad to hear that our President has of late become a fan of “finding out all the facts” before making public comment.

However, I would go much farther than Ralph Peters regarding the Army’s cowardice.

Article 94 of the UCMJ is the punitive article covering Mutiny and Sedition.

Article 94 states, in part:

(a) “Any person subject to this chapter who–

…fails to do his utmost to prevent and suppress a mutiny or sedition being committed in his presence, or fails to take all reasonable means to inform his superior commissioned officer or commanding officer of a mutiny or sedition which he knows or has reason to believe is taking place, is guilty of a failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition.

Among the elements of the offense one finds this:

(5) Failure to report a mutiny or sedition.

    (a) That an offense of mutiny or sedition occurred;(b) That the accused knew or had reason to believe that the offense was taking place; and

(c) That the accused failed to take all reasonable means to inform the accused’s superior commissioned officer or commander of the offense.

Major Hasan’s chain of command should be charged under Article 94. Not only did they certainly know of Major Hasan’s pronouncements and internet postings and hadn’t the courage to discipline him, but they allowed this man who had sworn himself an enemy of this nation and its Constitution to be promoted to his current rank.

I took the opportunity to re-read LtCol Heinl’s classic essay on Special Trust and Confidence, and noted the part about no tolerance for an officer lacking integrity. Those in Major Hasan’s chain of command at Walter Reed Hospital, and perhaps at Fort Hood, should face a General Court Martial. The Chief of Staff of the US Army should feel the heat good and hot. The command climate that creates such cowardice and political correctness needs to be dissolved immediately.

But the problem is endemic to much of our senior leadership, who have time and again sold their souls to comply with what they must have known to be wrong and unjust. The current climate of social experimentation and sacrifice of all on the altar of “diversity” have made matters far worse.

There are those who claim that such bald-faced bigotry in our Armed Forces, such feel-good politicising and social engineering, such style over substance have made us stronger.

They’re lying. And they know they’re lying.

As Mr. Peters states, “The chain of command protected a budding terrorist who was waving one red flag after another. Because it was safer for careers than doing something about him.”

What is the logical conclusion of allowing those careers to continue?

Such shameful bankruptcy of moral courage could be found on the faces of those in the gray uniforms sitting in the dock at Nuremberg. They sat as examples for all the world to see, examples of how otherwise honorable men became criminal accomplices because they did not have the courage to stand up to what they knew to be wrong. They are examples still, should one have the courage to look.

It is cowardice, not blindness, when you are afraid to look.

You don’t look, because if you looked, you’d see. And if you see, you’ll know.

And you don’t want to know. Because then you can deny that you knew.

And claim there is no way you could have known.

But it is your job to know. To do otherwise is dereliction, or worse.

Posted by UltimaRatioReg in Army, Navy

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  • Yeah, I was once compelled by principle and the UCMJ to “rat out” a fellow officer. I was not happy about it, I didn’t really want to do it, and it may have adversley affected my career. However, I can look myself in the mirror in the morning without flinching. We need to acknowledge the pressure that is put upon us to be “team Players” and not put our shipmates in a negative light. There are good reasons for that tradition, but sometimes you have to suck it up and do the right thing.

  • Yep.

    I think the time may at last be ripe to pull a page from the past. Remember back in the Cold War the questions you were asked about when you joined and/or went for a security clearance? The ones about any association you had or once had that with Communist organizations and/or philosophy?

    Take that and mix in the more recent push against hate groups – then give it to the lawyers to chew on.

    Well – even without singling out a single religion, something to the effect “Do you now, or have you in the past been associated with any secular or religious organizations that advocate violence against the United States government, military or people – or supports those who advocate such violence.”

    That isn’t too much of a departure from what we do right now, and should give some more top cover to those who hear one of their coworkers spout off.

    We don’t tolerate those who voice sympathy with Nazis – we shouldn’t tolerate those who support Islamic terrorism, or terrorism of any kind.

    There are some things a tolerant society must be intolerant of. And yes, it takes moral and professional courage.

  • Total

    You are an embarrassment, and so is this column.

  • UltimaRatioReg


    Care to explain why?

  • Total, did you just come by to sling stuff at the writer? I thought we had discussions here? This place is supposed to be for give and take.

    Explain your disagreement with the writer and his words or you are the embarrassment.

  • T the Elder

    This is a very powerful essay that stands front and center for telling the TRUTH. It is time that an honest accounting of what brought this about is exposed and those whose malfeasance led to what can only be described as a terrorist attack, be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

    I have seen this kind of political correctness infect our entire society, who out of fear of retribution have put their collective heads in the sand.

  • RickWilmes

    ‘It is cowardice, not blindness, when you are afraid to look.
    You don’t look, because if you looked, you’d see.  And if you see, you’ll know.
    And you don’t want to know.  Because then you can deny that you knew.
    And claim there is no way you could have known.
    But it is your job to know.  To do otherwise is dereliction, or worse.’

    I am reminded of the following passage,

    ‘Suppose that you are an astronaut whose spaceship gets out of control and crashes on an unknown planet.  When you regain consciousness and find that you are not hurt badly, the first three questions in your mind would be: Where am I? How can I discover it? What should I do?

    You see unfamiliar vegetation outside, and there is air to breathe; the sunlight seems paler than you remember it and colder.  You turn to look at the sky, but stop.  You are struck by a sudden feeling: if you don’t look, you won’t have to know that you are, perhaps, too far from the earth and no return is possible; so long as you don’t know it, you are free to believe what you wish– and you experience a foggy, pleasant, but somehow guilty, kind of hope.

    You turn to your instruments: they may be damaged, you don’t know how seriously.  But you stop, struck by a sudden fear: how can you trust these instruments? How can you be sure that they won’t mislead you? How can you know whether they will work in a different world?  You turn away from the instruments.

    Now you begin to wonder why you have no desire to do anything.  It seems so much safer just to wait for something to turn up somehow; it is better, you tell yourself, not to rock the spaceship.  Far in the distance, you see some sort of living creatures approaching; you don’t know whether they are human, but they walk on two feet. They, you decide, will tell you what to do.

    You are never heard from again. ‘

    Moving on to Cdr. Salamander’s blog,

    ‘You understood that nothing was guaranteed – but you also knew that the system was a meritocracy based on fair, established rules that everyone agreed upon when they started.’

    Welcome aboard, I have known this to be a lie for 20+ years now.

    And yes, I agree with LtCol. Heinl when he writes,

    Much of the blame for this soured climate of attitude toward and among the officer corps can be attributed to a half dozen principal causes. These are:
    1. Egalitarianism on the national scene.’

    The ‘diversity problem’ is the result of egalitarianism but that does not get to the root of the problem facing our military or our country, or explain why the tragedy at Ft. Hood occurred.  

    The root of the problem concerning all these issues is the ethics of altruism  or self-sacrifice.  As long as our military leaders continue to put their heads in the sand on this issue than the nonsense concerning the Naval Academy Color Guard and tragedies like Ft. Hood will continue to occur.

    As far as I am concerned, there is no excuse for either one to happen considering the fact that the passage I started this comment with is taken from a West Point speech given in 1974 by Ayn Rand titled, ‘Philosophy: Who Needs It?’

    Well, I submit that our military leaders need philosphy and they need to start by reading and listening to Ayn Rand’s speech.

    Do they have the courage to look and listen?  I doubt it!!!

  • Byron

    Total is a forum sniper. I’ve seen his ilk for years on the net. The sniper will pop into a discussion, make a very nasty comment about an individual or group, and disappear to resurface with a different nick(name). Unlike REAL snipers who serve their service and nation in the line of duty, this kind of sniper has no honor at all.

  • LBG

    I am inclined to agree. I have said on Sal’s forum that the senior leadership has acted out of cowardice. They fear the Diversity Nazis and as a result this happened. They have promulgated a Soviet style political officer mentality through the service. Diversity is the new red. Just make it a meritocracy, the rest will sort itself out. Counting brown, red, yellow, female and white people just is not a mission enhancing activity. Yet, we have protected classes that can do no wrong- even when they do. In this case it cost lives in a horrific act which laid the cowardice for all to see. Will anybody in the CoC get fired or go before the green table? Nope. Cowards of a feather flock together.

  • Total

    It’s an embarrassment because you are using the deaths of our servicemen and women to make a highly-debatable political point. It’s an appalling rush to judgment.

  • Byron

    It is a statement of fact that this fanatic loudly expressed his views in public and amongst military colleagues. It is a statement of fact that this was known to his MILITARY chain of command. It is a statement of fact that he was allowed to continue with his impending movement to Iraq, despite his very public objections. It is patently obvious after the fact that in spite of these facts, that his chain of command allowed this individual to continue on with his deployment when he could become a real danger to troops.

    These are NOT political points. They are facts. The chain of command for whatever reason failed to act upon the facts and thus allowed this religious fanatic to kill and maim service members and civilians in the one place they should have felt safe in.

    The only embarrassment here, Total, is yourself and the inflammatory and foolish statements you continue to make.

    Go thee away, troll, and return to your nasty resting place under the bridge!

  • Total

    “These are NOT political points. They are facts. The chain of command for whatever reason failed to act upon the facts and thus allowed this religious fanatic to kill and maim service members and civilians in the one place they should have felt safe in.”

    Whether those are in fact true remains to be seen. It’s early yet, and first reports are often badly wrong. But even if they are all true, connecting those facts to some right-wing mythical idea of “political correctness” is NOT fact; it’s politicking at its worst, and politicking after such a tragedy is, as I said, embarrassing.

  • UltimaRatioReg


    The FBI investigation and complaints from fellow service members are a matter of public record.

    The reason for the inaction of the chain of command is most disturbing. I have outlined why I believe there was inaction.

    What is embarrassing is that there are those who will abjectly refuse to address the issue, whose heads are so far in the sand (or other places) that the only thing visible is the soles of their feet.

    Methinks perhaps you label it “politicking at its worst” because you are lined up in front of that altar of “diversity”. And any voice or comment or opinion perceived as the slightest bit critical of the effects of, or philosophy behind, that diversity push is immediately labeled “right wing mythical idea”.

    Diversity Uber Alles.

  • Byron

    Premise: The facts about the Major are true: That his fantical sentiments were known to his command.

    Conclusion: His command either A)failed to believe what the evidence said, or B) chose not to see what was before them.

    Given this, Total, what does this say about the Majors command structure and their lack of action to kick this nutcase out of the Army before he could go jihaddi on innocent soldiers and civilians? And this is NOT politicking; it is a discussion about a command failure. No one here gives a rats ass about who holds the political reins. What they do care deeply about is the breach of faith that occured the day this nutcase showed up with two weapons and started his attempt to get to his virgins.

    Personally I hope the Major gets life; cons tend to be fairly patriotic, and will visit this POS with much abuse and terror of their own.

  • Brian McMenamin, Sr.

    I think that it would be difficult to sustain a charge under Article 94 as the court would likely find that there was no way that those charged had direct knowledge of the plan to kill. I do, however, think that there would be a very could chance of sustaining charges of “incompetence” and/or “failure to supervise” by not having reported untoward behavior and/or behavior unbecoming an officer. The leaders of our military must develop more ‘testicular fortitude’ in their dealings with anti-US behavior wherever they observe it – even in the ranks!

  • Total

    And this is NOT politicking

    Of course it is. No one in this discussion has any real idea why the Major did what he did, or why his commanders didn’t deal with it. So you’re going for the bogeyman of diversity because you don’t look it. And, shamefully, you’re doing it in the wake of tragedy.

  • Total

    don’t _like_ it.

  • Total

    Diversity Uber Alles

    And using cheap invocations of the Nazis to do it.'s_law

  • Task at hand…all…task at hand. First and only warning. Don’t make it personal.

  • RickWilmes


    This tragedy has a cause and it is important to identify that cause. The suspect is a Major, with a questionable history concerning his beliefs and loyalties to the defense of the Constitution and this country.

    This blog is the proper place to ask why and how did this happen. To my knowledge, URR has been the first individual to make an attempt to show that the problems at the Naval Academy and throughout the military have a common cause. Yes, political correctness is involved. Politics is a branch of philosophy which is based on ethics. Ethics derives from epistemology and metaphysics.

    As far as I am concerned, diversity is just a secularized version of the meek shall inherit the earth. Diversity deals with non-essentials. Example, skin color and sex. Instead, the focus should be on individual merit not the particular group you come from. The ethics of altruism or self-sacrifice has made this corruption possible, by allowing the group to take priority over the individual.

    The arguement that using this tragedy and the dead as a form of politicking commits the same altruistic error as the diversity crowd. Somehow, the dead should be honored by keeping our mouths shut. Well, I respectfully disagree. As I think, URR hasn’t dug deep enough to get to the root cause.

    The fact of the matter is that all of our military leaders need to look in the mirror, do some soul searching and introspection and recognize that the altruistic premises they accept and don’t challenge leads allows these tragedies to happen.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    “I think that it would be difficult to sustain a charge under Article 94 as the court would likely find that there was no way that those charged had direct knowledge of the plan to kill.”

    Perhaps true, but Art 94 does state:

    (1) with intent to usurp or override lawful military authority, refuse, in concert with any other person, to obey orders or otherwise do his duty or creates any violence or disturbance is guilty of mutiny;

    (2) with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or other disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition;

    One could make a case for Art 92 as well.


    Maj Hasan had been known by his chain of command to have posted anti-American hate-speech on the Web, praise suicide bombers while using his own name, being highly critical of US policies, and to have argued with his military patients over the worth of their sacrifices. When he began to shoot his innocent comrades, he shouted “Allahu Akbar!” again and again.

    Now, you may claim that nobody has any idea why Major Hasan did what he did. I don’t buy that line of nonsense for an instant. It is clear what his motives were. He told us.

    To label this a “rush to judgment” reminds me of the famous line from Dr Strangelove; “I hate to judge before all the facts are in, but it looks like General Ripper exceeded his authority”.

    Whether you can bring yourself to look or not? Well, that’s up to you. You_don’t_have_to_like_it.

    As for Godwin, Deutschlandlied (Deutschland Uber Alles) was written decades before Hitler and more than a century before the Nazis. So save it.

  • CPT Joe

    The Army fostered these killings by promoting a known enemy of the United States. His mouthings against the US were even known by the FBI. Yet he was promoted, not kicked out of the service. High command continues to enforce these stylish personnel actions, even when it endangers our troops and sailors. Two tract systems that promote individuals based on gender/racial diversity quotas as opposed to merit, put people in positions they should not have been placed in and that endangers the lives of troops and and the safety of expensive ships.

  • Andy (JADAA)

    Looking back, using that well known medical instrument the Retrospectoscope, does indeed tell a tale both near term and long term. As has been discussed over on Lex’s blog, most of the services view their medical branches as being something less than “Real Army (or Navy, or Air Force) and in many circumstances those service members in the medical branches also view themselves similarly. Thus they sometimes judge their peers differently than we would judge peers in other branches. (I know of whence I speak as my spouse was a serving Army Medical Corps officer for over 8 years)

    I have to wonder if the Major’s many previous pronouncements were viewed with the distortions that life within the Beltway sometimes promotes, especially during the time of the Previous Occupant of the White House, when it was considered the height of high fashion in some circles to vilify all that was done by “that” Administration. Nonetheless it seems from first reportage that even the statements many have confirmed the Major as making struck many as somewhat beyond the pale.

    That utterly nothing other than some counseling sessions was done can, arguably, be traced to the attempted show trials of the early 1990’s when all the Services saw what was attempted to be done to the Navy, and the Naval Aviation community in particular and learned the same lessons, with a lot less blood, that the surviving members of the Red Army, Frontal Aviation and the Red Banner Fleet learned: Shut up, say nothing, cheer on the Political Officers and maybe, just maybe, you may survive. Coupled with eight years of focus on social issues within the armed forces, those who have focused on a “career” versus a professional calling learned quickly which terminology and programs were politically expedient and which were not.

    Personally, I remain mystified by the appearance of intentional neglect on the part of the Major’s superiors and look forward to the hoped for eventual resolution of my concerns.


  • Total et al need to read a little of the British press.

  • UltimaRatioReg


    Coincidence, I am certain.

    After all, there’s no way any of us know why Major Hasan did what he did, right?

  • Grandpa Bluewater


    Doesn’t Matter.

    “Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.”

    Dead to rights.

    Sequence of events recommended:

    Fair trial. Firing squad.

    Investigation of prior chains of command. Forced retirement of those who enabled the result by deriliction of duty.

    Force wide attitude adjustment.

    If the flags in the head shed are faithful to their oath and their plain duty.

    Me? Poolside. Eating popcorn.

    This is getting to be better than professional wrestling.

  • Grandpa Bluewater

    There should be no need to say:

    Deepest and sincerest condolences to the families of the fallen.

    Prayers without ceasing for the recovery of the wounded.

    Thanks be to God for the first responders, and in particular the base policewoman first on the scene, armed; who did her duty with courage and skill though wounded herself. Speedy recovery and the thanks of the entire nation to her.

    But let’s put it in the record anyway.

  • Derrick

    Regarding the first statement about the 2 officers being pulled from the color guard duty due to being white males: that is pure racism. They have to give an explanation based on qualifications and experience, not skin color. If they can prove it, they should sue the US government for compensation.

    As for Major Hasan, he has murdered several US soldiers and wounded several more. It can be construed as treason because in firing upon uniformed American service personnel on US soil, that is an act of war. Unfortunately, he’s dead now.

    I think as a precautionary measure in the future soldiers should be routinely reminded that despite their personal, religious or political beliefs, they swore an oath to defend the US and are being paid much more than most soldiers around the world to do so. If they are making statements like Captain Hasan, they should be reminded of their professional responsibilities.

    This is a sensitive area because being a devout Muslim is not a crime, and not agreeing with the US government’s orders for the military is not a crime. I do not believe in racial or religious profiling, but the truth is, currently the majority of Al Qaeda’s operatives are fundamental Islamists. The problem I have with racial profiling is that the minute a terrorist of a different ethnic group commits a crime, immediately that entire ethnic group gets treated like criminal suspects.

    So how to prevent situations like Captain Hasan from recurring, I currently don’t have any suggestions.

  • UltimaRatioReg


    Agreed. Was using some of my best sarcasm to indicate that there was no way of knowing….

    I agree to the Treason charge, but also recommend the Art 94 for his chain of command. In either place. Should they be found to have known of Maj Hasan’s words or actions and did not intervene appropriately, they should go to a GCM.

  • Cap’n Bill

    One suggestion. If it is fact that the staff medical officers consider themselves to be a different breed, the heads of the military services must take immediate corrective action. Any Officer in the US Military serves as do all other Officers and must be held accountable for his manner of service.

  • GCM for the Chain of Command would be a superior way to go, as during discovery a lot of problems will be brought to light that could lead to changes to prevent another event like this – if we have the right leadership in place with the right top cover to implement it. Big “ifs” but I am an optimist at heart.

    Anything else, and I think as we see at Annapolis – the desire to make uncomfortable things go away would prevent that airing.

    Bureaucrats vs. warriors. The uniform doesn’t usually tell you which is which.

  • RickWilmes

    Concerning how bureaucrats have bureaucratized the military, I recommend ‘Bureaucracy’ by Ludwig Von Mises.

    Blaming the bureaucrats, once again, does not go deep enough. The following passage is particularly relevant to the issue at hand.

    ‘ “There cannot be any doubt that this bureaucratic system is essentially antiliberal, undemocratic, and un-American, that it is contrary to the spirit and to the letter of the Constitution, and that it is a replica of the totalitarian methods of Stalin and Hitler.  It is imbued with a fanatical hostility to free enterprise and private property.  It paralyzes the conduct of business and lowers the productivity of labor.  By heedless spending it squanders the nation’s wealth.  It is inefficient and wasteful.  Although it styles what it does planning, it has no definite plans and aims.  It lacks unity and uniformity; the various bureaus and agencies work at cross-purposes.  The outcome is a disintegration of the whole social apparatus of production and distribution.  Poverty and distress are bound to follow.”

    This vehement indicment of bureaucracy is, by and large, an adequate although emotional description of present-day trends in American government.  But it misses the point as it makes bureaucracy and the bureaucrats responsible for an evolution the causes of which must be sought for elsewhere.  Bureaucracy is but a consequence and a symptom of things and changes much more deeply rooted. (p. 3-4)

  • UltimaRatioReg


    Interesting point. I was rolling around the word “bureaucracy” in my head because it just didn’t seem to fit. And your description is likely why.

    The problem is one of senior leaders acquiescing to policies and measures that are questionable in value and effect, and then to measures that do harm to good order and discipline, and finally to measures and policies that deliberately erode the core strengths and values of our Armed Forces.

    These policies and measures are often demanded by those who are, at best, dismissive or ignorant of the mission and virtues of our Armed Forces, and at worst, openly hostile to them.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    This from General Casey interview regarding Fort Hood:

    George Stephanopolous stated “General Casey told me on This Week that he’s worried that diversity could become another victim of Thursday’s mass killing at Ft. Hood.”

    And from General Casey: “I believe it would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here.”

    General Casey needs to be a casualty. His sacred cow is not combat readiness nor the well-being of the Soldiers whom he is supposed to be leading, but the precious and politically favored “diversity”. Get him out of that uniform and into a suit. That is what politicians wear.

  • Byron

    General Casey, you planning on meeting with the loved ones who have lost their fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, etc., and explain to them that you hope that the Army’s diversity won’t become a casualty? I suspect that if you even tried you’d get your silly lying a$$ kicked. I know if my kin was killed that day and you tried to foist this crap on my you’d be practicing falling down.

  • Mike Jones

    Keep up the trenchant analysis and commentary. We need the Navy to return to its proud tradition of upholding the truth.

  • Fouled Anchor

    General Casey is quoted in an AP article today as saying “diversity in the military ‘gives us strength.'” That’s a pretty hollow statement IMHO. I would like to hear him elaborate on that.

    That quote comes from an AP article about Major Hasan’s (not so surprising) attempts to contact Al Qaeda, available here:,2933,573166,00.html

    According to this report, General Casey is also concerned that “the country not to get caught up in speculation about Hasan’s Muslim faith, and he has instructed his commanders to be on the lookout for anti-Muslim reaction to the killings at the Texas post.” That’s a valid enough concern, but where was the concern for anti-American reactions, within the service, to our current operations?

    Certainly there are benefits to all kinds of diversity (background, education, experience, etc), but saying only “gives us strength,” without any explanation, says nothing at all. It’s just blind support of diversity for diversity’s sake.

  • RandyT, USN Ret.

    In regard to diversity one only need walk through any mall in America to see we are not all lily white, male heterosexuals. If we limit our recruitment to only those that are, we will have to bring back a white, male heterosexual draft.

    Serving in the Navy and Navy Reserve from 1966 to 1994 including regular Navy tours from 1966 – 1969 and 1977 – 1994 retiring as a CTRC (SW) in 1994 I witnessed our diversity changes. During this past seven plus years of war one can read and see story after story of heroes of all sexes and all backgrounds.

    Out of this tragedy at Fort Hood came many heroic stories, but one that sticks out, in the diversity area is the story of Sgt. Kimberly Munley, an Army veteran.

    ((Hero ‘Civilian Cops’ Emerge After Fort Hood Shooting
    Sgt. Kimberly Munley Lost So Much Blood Doctors Feared She Wouldn’t Survive ))

    Had we had not allowed women to serve and to serve in any field they could qualify for one needs to ask who would have stepped out of that cruiser to take out this shooter? Based on the below article, and demographics it is becoming harder to find these people:

    ((Military finds 75 percent of today’s youth can’t serve ))

    As for the failure of the chain of command in Hasan’s case there were very possibly other factors than diversity or political correctness. First of all his rank, if I’m not mistaken these medical type come in as Captains (O-3) and promotion to Major is 99.9% assured.
    Secondly his profession as a doctor – of sorts – is in high demand and most likely played a part in “passing him on.”

    Cap’n Bill you are correct in your assessment of much of the medical officers corp. I remember taking my son to a doctor at the Naval Hospital in Pensacola and the guy having two and three day food stains on his khaki shirt.

    What I would agree with is the absolute failure of the chain of command to pick up and act on warning signs this guy gave off. But it would not be the first time nor, I am afraid, will it be the last. In my 28 years I witnessed this lack of getting the attention of the chain of command a few times.

    In 1980 while at a SECGRU command in Okinawa I had a young seaman out of “A” School reported to my watch section. Immediately he displayed what I would call abnormal behavior and inability to adjust not only the watch standing environment but also being in a foreign country. In one or two counseling sessions he made remarks like “god tells me not to trust these people”. I warned my division chief and officer, both assured me he would be ok. I asked on of my PO3s to keep an eye on him on break. First day of break I get a call form the Petty Officer – “Petty Officer T” “Seaman X went nuts and tried to attack and rape the OOD.” The OOD was a young female USMC First Lt. She needed no help in subduing the guy, and he found himself in the brig and then padded room of the Navy Hospital. Chain of Command missed it.
    (This was the only time I had my CoC come back to me, my Division Chief came up to me on my first day watch afterward, “Boy Petty Officer T you called that on right.)

    While in Misawa, JA the following tour I got a young Marine in from the Radio Battalion for my watch section. Got the same vibes from him, “god tells me to listen only to you” among other things he said to me and others in about a two week period. On a day watch I went to the office and told the division chief and officer that this Marine was going to be a problem. They assured me otherwise. I walked back down to my spaces and the Marine was running around the spaces, jumping on printers – I went towards him shouting at one of my sailors, “Go get the Gunny.” Our Gunny was about six foot two and 200 pounds. The Air Force medical came and took the kid out in s straight jacket. Chain of Command missed it.

    On a destroy in San Diego 88-92 I was on the CPO discipline board where we would interview and screen sailors accused of infractions, recommending CO Mast or other actions to the Chain of Command. Young third class comes before us. During his duty as a roving patrol (in port San Diego) he was assigned to carry a 45 Cal or 9 mm. There was a strict rule not to put the clip into the gun unless he became aware of an immediate threat. He was on report for chambering a round while on watch. This had come to light when he unchambered the round in front of his relief. Then upon investigation we found he did this all the time, and would go into the birthing areas and play quick draw. We recommended at minimum his qualification to perform the roving watch be removed and that he not be allowed to handle weapons unsupervised. The MCPO and myself went to the XO to press this. The XO assured us the kid was ok and a few days restriction would be enough. A month later the same Petty Officer with the same gun with a round chambered aimed it at and threatened to shoot his division officer! He was subdued and hauled off to the brig in San Diego. Chain of Commend failed.

    Those our just three times I witnessed failure of the Chain of Command to deal with ‘crazies” and none were diversity issues as in all three cases the crazies were white males. The one thing that comes to my mind is that they all had “god talk to them” or in the case of the roving patrol an abnormal fascination of some kind, in his it was a bit of a rage against authority and gun fetish. (No I’m not an anti-gun liberal.)

    Just my three cents worth on the subjects.

  • Cap’n Bill

    It seems to me that the senior military officers of this era have moved beyond the citizens in their perception of what is good for their Military and for the Nation. Education, Firm Moral Beliefs, Patriotism, Concern for Others, Self reliance—these are qualities that most of us believe are important. If in doubt go back to the Boy Scout Law: A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty,
    brave, clean, and reverent.
    One wonders who these gentlemen have for their Life’s Guide ?
    I fail to see Diversity as being of much value.

  • UltimaRatioReg


    NOBODY is advocating that the Armed Forces shouldn’t be diverse. In fact, that is the red herring in this entire failure. I have had Muslim Marines in units I have commanded, as well as female, African American, Hispanic, Jewish, and just about any other group one can be defined by. I have served next to them, Muslim Marines included, in combat.

    But when “diversity” becomes the politically correct term for:

    1. Giving unfair advantage to one ethnic or racial group over another, as in the USNA accessions process

    2. Deliberately choosing an individual or individuals over another based solely on race or skin color

    3. Failing or refusing to enforce standards of conduct, or maintain good order and discipline, because one might be afraid for one’s career when the subject of that enforcement is a part of a politically protected minority group

    The fact that 99.9% of Army medical officers reach the rank of Major is no excuse for this incident or Major Hasan’s promotion. I believe it is still required under Title 10 to reaffirm one’s oath of office upon promotion. Major Hasan did so knowing that his words were lies. And his chain of command promoted him knowing those words were lies.

    I can think of no better candidate for the 0.1% not to be promoted to Major than someone who had been known by his chain of command to have posted anti-American hate-speech on the Web, praise suicide bombers while using his own name, being highly critical of US policies, and to have argued with his military patients over the worth of their sacrifices. Let alone someone who shouts “Allahu Akbar” while killing thirteen of his countrymen and wounding 30 more.

    The fact that Major Hasan was there, in that position, at that rank, is due to the cowardice and moral bankruptcy of his entire chain of command, from General Casey on down.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    One thing you are right about, RandyT, the Army got its diversity in this tragedy. Major Hasan killed a very diverse group of people in this terrorist act.

  • RandyT, USN Ret.

    Yes UltimaRatioReg I saw those folks’ bios on a number of sources, just my post was getting a bit long – thanks for noting.

    My comment about the 99.9% promotion was not an excuse other than to say that perhaps the failure of the chain of command had as much to do with “supply and demand” as being a result of trying to be diverse politically correct. I do agree it is a failure of those in commeand of this guys path to continuted service in an Army.

    One thing that got my attention was the fact this guy had come to the attention of the FBI. I have read nowhere that they informed his command or the Army investigative folks. After all the talk of working together the past seven years appears to be just that, talk.

    As for giving people special favors just to be diverse that is as wrong as not promoting people because they are of a different “diversity.”

    I have a good friend that worked with me as a civilian a few years back, she was an eleven year Navy veteran and now also a SCPO in the Navy Reserves at NAS Fort Worth. Got a call from her Thursday night for volunteers to go to Temple, Texas to give blood. We went. Amazing the turn out – every type American one can imagine.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    “I have read nowhere that they (FBI) informed his command or the Army investigative folks.”

    My guess is that the FBI did indeed inform the chain of command. What is not a guess is that his chain of command knew enough of Major Hasan’s actions and statements that he should have been charged on numerous occasions under a variety of the punitive articles. He wasn’t. And the why he wasn’t is, in my opinion and that of many others, because his chain of command hadn’t the courage to do so for fear of their own careers.

    Such a command climate must be dismantles, and the commanders who set it, sent packing.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    *Burma Shave*

    Last line should read “dismantled”.

  • RandyT, USN Ret.

    I would agree with “dismantled” if in fact his chain of command knew, or perhaps dismantled and shipped off to places unknown.

    Taking about knowing, not knowing and resposibility it looks like the finger pointing has started:

    If the above is true there is more than Hasan’s command that needs to be dismantled. If NSA had this “electronic” means information and did not pass to the Army via their SCA they need dismantling from the top down. And if NSA/Army Intel did and the command we speak of did nothing for any reason I would go with your orgianal idea UltimaRationReg – or much worse.

  • Grandpa Bluewater


    You are never so short of personnel that it justifies failing to ruthlessly remove or hospitalize the obviously unfit, be his/her name Hasan, Obeyango, Sitting Elk, OToole, Perlmutter, Miller, Molinari, Kim, Tanaka, Hoy, Diem, Garcia, Corpuz, Casey or McCain (any reference to any specific person’s surname, living or dead is coincidental – although I’ve served with good sailors, saner than me (possibly poor criteria, but whatthehell) who had pretty much all of them).

    It goes double for hearing voices or other evidence of mental derangement. To which I hasten to add: mental illness never goes away or gets better by neglect, but sometimes is treatable. Major Hasan may have been best handled with 125 mg per day of an antipsychotic drug and an honorable discharge, enabling him to join the American Legion and lead a productive life as a shrink at an alcohol rehab clinic in a Maryland suburb. His prospects are much bleaker now.

    As well we all should know.

  • RickWilmes


    I agree with your response to me and that is why I think the “Philosophy: Who needs it?” speech is so important when it comes to this issue.

    The following is of particular interest concerning your response and the ‘diversity issue.’

    ‘In your own profession, in military science, you know the importance of keeping track of the enemy’s weapons, strategy and tactics–and of being prepared to counter them. The same is true in philosophy: you have to understand the enemy’s ideas and be prepared to refute them, you have to know his basic arguments and be able to blast them.

    In physical warfare, you would not send your men into a booby trap: you would make every effort to discover its location. Well, Kant’s system is the biggest and most intricate booby trap in the history of philosophy–but it’s so full of holes that once you grasp its gimmick, you can defuse it without any trouble and walk forward over it in perfect safety. And, once it is defused, the lesser Kantians–the lower ranks of his army, the philosophical sergeants, buck privates, and mercenaries of today–will fall of their own weightlessness, by chain reaction.

    There is a special reason why you, the future leaders of the United States Army, need to be philosophically armed today. You are the target of a special attack by the Kantian-Hegelian-collectivist establishment that dominates our cultural institutions at present. You are the army of the last semi-free country left on earth, yet you are accused of being a tool of imperialism–and “imperialism” is the name given to the foreign policy of this country, which has never engaged in military conquest and has never profited from the two world wars, which she did not initiate, but entered and won. (It was, incidentally, a foolishly overgenerous policy, which made this country waste her wealth on helping both her allies and her former enemies.) Something called “the military-industrial complex”–which is a myth or worse–is being blamed for all of this country’s troubles. Bloody college hoodlums scream demands that R.O.T.C. units be banned from college campuses. Our defense budget is being attacked, denounced and undercut by people who claim that financial priority should be given to ecological rose gardens and to classes in esthetic self-expression for the residents of the slums. ‘ (From Philosophy: Who Needs It, a speech given by Ayn Rand at West Point in 1974)

    Well, I submit that the egalitarians and the diversity crowd are the lower ranks that Ayn Rand identifies above. Now look at what Ayn Rand has to say about egalitarianism below and consider how the military, a man-made institution, is being used to push ‘diversity’.  Individual merit and intelligence is being denied at the expense of non-essential attributes. Examples are skin color and sex.


    ‘But this is not the meaning that the altruists ascribe to the word “equality.”

    They turn the word into an anti-concept: they use it to mean, not political, but metaphysical equality—the equality of personal attributes and virtues, regardless of natural endowment or individual choice, performance and character. It is not man-made institutions, but nature, i.e., reality, that they propose to fight—by means of man-made institutions.’

  • RickWilmes

    Burma Shave


    ‘And from General Casey: “I believe it would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here.”’


    ‘Of special significance to the present discussion is the egalitarians’ defiance of the Law of Causality: their demand for equal results from unequal causes—or equal rewards for unequal performance.’

    Above quote taken from the link I provided above.

    My conclusion, Gen. Casey is an egalitarian who is attempting to deny the Law of Causality.

  • UltimaRatioReg


    I part company with you in thinking that Major Hasan had a mental illness that was the cause of what he did at Hood. He is an avowed Radical Muslim Jihadist, and believes what he did was right.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    Here we are:,2933,573469,00.html

    Interesting and very telling comments from Major Hasan’s classmate at Bethesda.

    Political correctness run rampant. Shame. Those who foster and perpetrate this betrayal of America for political expedience disgrace the uniforms they wear.

  • UltimaRatioReg

    Perhaps most telling from the article above:

    “Finnell recalled Hasan telling his classmates and professors, ‘I’m a Muslim first and I hold the Shariah, the Islamic Law, before the United States Constitution.'”

  • Southern Air Pirate

    I am going to make a minor bow toward diversity with regards to this debate. Having grown up being taught my own family history going back to relatives that left Bismarck’s Prussian Wars only to get involved in the War Between the States and later wars in this nations history. At various times I was taught it was wrong to paint with a broad brush ethnic types. In my father’s home town in Illinois a German man was lynched in some WW1 Anti-Germanic hysteria. Cause of that members of my family changed their Christian name from a distinct German name to a more anglicized Anglo-Saxony name as a way to hide from the hatred. Numerous other Germans in the town did the same. My maternal grandfather was denied entry into a couple of special programs in the Navy because a relative had contributed some money to the German-American Bund prior to WW2, the only reason was that the relative had donated was the support of family that still lived in Germany. It was until later that the family found out the truth behind the Bund. The FBI ruled my grandfather a security risk, so he spent the war from 1943 to 1946 as an AMM at NAS Corpus Christi working on N2S’s.
    I am also going to say that in numerous places through out the nation during the early part of the 20th Century to do anything in politics or even be considered a upstanding member of some communities, people had joined the Klan. So guilty by association to certain groups doesn’t always mean they are guilty of the same crimes.

    That being said when my great grandparents came to this country they made it their effort to assimilate themselves into the community. My grandfather and great uncle both remember that my great grandfather was an active member of the auxiliary fire squad and made sure that even though German was spoken from time to time in the house that everyone family learned English. Everyone in the family was active in some fraternal organization such as the Rotary, Lions, Knights of Columbus, Legion, etc. Basically they made their identity that of being an American.
    If there are people who can’t separate that aspects of their culture is wrong here in the United States of America then they need to change, not the nation. If there are those whose religion dictates the word of God is higher then the community standard, then they need to take a critical look at the word and the teacher of that word. Those who cover their eyes to atrocities and don’t believe that when someone speaks evil actually has evil in their heart because of fear from backlash, need to grow a backbone; leadership is doing what is right not politically expedient or correct.

  • Byron

    And now you officers have heard from the mess decks. Read and heed, you flags, the young man speaks the absolute truth.

  • Russ

    I remember my oath. I vowed that I would “Bear true faith and allegiance to the (Constitution)”

    I am a common Sailor, and I am really not fluent with the UCMN specifics, but it seems to me that the Officers in HIS chain of command failed. I don’t know specifically WHERE, WHY or HOW they failed, but the evidence of their failure is painfully obvious.

    So yes, no matter where their failure was, I believe they are culpable for their actions. They knew SOMETHING and they didn’t intervene. We teach Enlisted leaders something called “Intrusive Leadership.” Somebody should have intruded into this dudes business.

    I believe that the Senior Leadership failed to bear true faith to defend against all enemies and they also failed to keep faith with the sons and daughters of this nation. They deserve better. They did not deserve to be sacrificed on the alter of diversity, or ennui, or whatEVER the hell fogged their eyes.

    This, of course, is not a new failure on the part of our Senior Leadership.

  • Russ

    Of course by UCMN I mean UCMJ

  • Grandpa Bluewater


    We don’t part very far on this one. Almost certainly jihadi. Still, probability of .0001 means there is a possibility, albeit microscopic.

    The problem is that when somebody is a jihadi due to incurable insanity or religious fervor, how do you tell which? After a certain point, it doesn’t matter, just do your duty.

    My point was weeding out, properly done, may wind up the biggest favor you ever did the individual who was plucked. Once again, duty, while painful at times, is the best course in the long run.

    My original recommendation stands: try for treason, upon conviction after fair trial, execute.

  • Grandpa Bluewater


    Big 10-4.

  • Fouled Anchor

    Interesting national poll on whether political corectness caused the tragedy at Ft. Hood. Summary of the results available here:

    “Americans think the main reason these people kept silent was political correctness: 46 percent think Hasan’s co-workers did nothing, even though they thought something was wrong, because they feared being accused of prejudice against his religion. Some 38 percent say people kept silent because they didn’t think he was that dangerous (38 percent).”

    Full report available here:

  • I understand that but where does it take us?
    What’s the speed of dark? 🙂

  • UltimaRatioReg


    It takes us to where more and more light is shed on the discriminatory and likely illegal practices of the “diversity bullies” who are pushing a social/political agenda instead of leading their respective armed forces, and ensuring they are ready for war.

    It leaves us with bald-faced politicians instead of Generals (Casey) and Admirals (Roughead) in charge of the Army and the Navy, respectively, when neither of them should be allowed to remain in the uniforms they have disgraced.