Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan went off the rails a few days ago and killed a lot of innocent people. We've had so many incidents of this kind over the years - we're familiar with the typology of these crimes. Just within driving distance of my own house, we've had the shootings at Virginia Tech a few years ago, the closer-to-home killings committed by the "Beltway Sniper" John Muhammad,* and the 80-year-old Nazi who attacked the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC, to name but a few.
Something must be different about this one, though, because suddenly the specter of "terrorism" has arisen. Two things are indeed different: The perpetrator is a Muslim, and the shootings took place on an Army base. But that's not much of a difference. Everything so far supports the idea of another angry, isolated, wacko going off the deep end. Examining the internet activities and reading habits of these characters after the fact is standard, and in most cases, they show connections to sites that might be considered suspect. Is it really surprising that Hasan, as a Muslim, attended a mosque for prayer? Don't many people, in confusion or despair, look to their religion?
But, terrorism? Sorry, I don't buy it. I guess it's "terrorism" in a literal sense, i.e., any crime of this kind creates, by the intent of the killer, "terror." This is the quaint old-fashioned kind of terrorism I first encountered in Paris in about 1950, where my U.S.-Army dad was assigned to help with rebuilding of military bases. Communists ran through the Métro stations occasionally with their hands painted red, and they (or someone) vandalized our family car and threw dead rats over the fence in front of our house.
But terrorism has grown up since then. Now, we normally are referring to organized, often state-supported, international, terrorism. Mr. Hasan's act has none of the characteristic markers of that. Naturally, al-Qaeda and an occasional mufti will praise Hasan's act, but if they had organized it, I think we could count on it having been far better orchestrated, and claimed far more immediately and loudly.
We'll see what investigators come up with, but for me, the answer lies in asking ourselves the simple question, if Hasan weren't a Muslim, would we be hunting for terrorism? I think the answer is a clear "no." Unfortunately the reactions of our officials and media suggest that terrorists - real terrorists - have been successful in shaping our thinking, and it's not healthy.
* Since I have mentioned John Muhammad, it's worth noting that the Supreme Court today began the long, possibly quixotic process of restoring the American people's trust in it by denying a request to stay Muhammad's execution.
Comments