As many as eight Army officers could face discipline for ignoring or missing plenty of signals that Maj. Nidal Hasan might pose a threat:
Hasan got passing grades and a promotion in part because disturbing information about his behavior and performance was not recorded by superiors or properly passed to others who might have stepped in, the report found.
As Hasan's training progressed, his strident views on Islam became more pronounced as did worries about his competence as a medical professional. Yet his superiors continued to give him positive performance evaluations that kept him moving through the ranks and led to his eventual assignment at Fort Hood.
Unless there was an extraordinary collection of incompetence among the people around Hasan, there must be a reason everybody kept ignoring those signs. Nowhere in the New York Times story is there even a hint of what that might be, and I'm guessing there isn't in the military reports, either. Perhaps a small clue can be found in the comment of Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey after the attack at Fort Hood, that it would be an "even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here.” Not much chance of that, apparently.
