Fort Hood suspect warned of threats within the ranks-Cited stress facing Muslims

[kpete]

Source: Washington Post

Fort Hood suspect warned of threats within the ranks
Cited stress facing Muslims Hasan spoke at Walter Reed in 2007

Maj. Nidal M. Hasan, the Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood, was supposed to discuss a medical topic during gave a presentation to senior Army doctors in June 2007. Instead, he lectured on Islam, suicide bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims conflicted about fighting wars in Muslim countries.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2009/11/10/GA2009111000920.html?sid=ST2009110903704

By Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 10, 2009

The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that to avoid "adverse events," the military should allow Muslim soldiers to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars against other Muslims.

As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the residency program.

Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims conflicted about fighting in the Muslim countries of Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The Washington Post.

"It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims," he said in the presentation.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/09/AR2009110903618.html

[Blue_Tires]

1. if all this is true, then the Army is looking to take bigger and bigger shares of the blame

[Rebubula]

2. LOL

Sounds more like the guy wanted to fulfill his own prophecy. It would be interesting to see if any OTHER Muslim members of the military were saying the same thing or just this guy that went out and made his statements true.

Either way, the only person responsible for these killings is the person that pulled the trigger.

[EFerrari]

3. Nope. His superiors are also responsible for him -- that's their job.

The doctors who worked with him are also responsible for monitoring each other's performance -- they took an oath.

[Rebubula]

5. I disagree

Unless someone directly tells you "I am going to shoot this place up and kill everyone that I can" - you can never predict human behavior...regardless of your training or Oath. Only Deanna Troi would have been able to stop this - yeah...I am a geek.

The ONLY person directly responsible for this massacre is the shooter. Others may have blame laid at their feet, but they did not pull the trigger.

[EFerrari]

8. Predicting human behavior is both a task of the military

AND the psychiatric establishment.

And I'm not trying to let him off in any way but rather thinking about today and tomorrow and the next time.

[BennyD]

17. "predicting human behavior"

How would one go about "predicting human behavior" without violating the doctrine of political correctness? What factors would you cite to the "higher-ups" to support your contention that a particular individual represents a "possible" danger and how would you support those views/observations?

[Robb]

22. What the hell is "the doctrine of political correctness?" nt

[EFerrari]

24. People who deal with psychosis in their own brains or in the brains of others

do it every day and it has nothing to do with "political correctness", aka being forced to treat other people better than your prejudices against them dictate.

I was married to someone who had 100 pounds and 10 inches on me and you bet I learned how to predict his meltdowns. If I can do that, I have to assume that military PSYCHIATRISTS can do better than I did.

[paulsby]

43. you fail to understand psychology (or psychiatry)

if you believe that the field has much predictive ability.

empirical evidence has repeatedly shown that it has very poor predictive ability. that's why (among other things), it's a "soft science"

in very extreme cases, it has a high degree of certainty in predictions. in most cases, it has very little

this is actually a well accepted caveat with psychology. i was introduced to it in my first semester of grad school - in counseling psychology

[EFerrari]

46. Whatever Paul. I know crisis prediction works

because I'm still here.

:)

[paulsby]

47. human beings are remarkably complex and unpredictable

that's part of our chahm

like i said, in extreme examples, psychology has half-decent predictive ability.

let's remember that metric assloads of people get released from psychiatric custody and commit further crime even though the "experts" said they were not "likely to reoffend"

that's not a dig on psychologist/psychiatrists, it's just a recognition that human beings are far more complex than our understanding, plus there is that pesky free will, and chaos/complexity principles

[EFerrari]

50. I sort of agree with all of that and yet, it speaks more to

the too little attention that these real problems get and much less to the limits of predictive ability that people like Hasan are left in their jobs and other people pay with their lives.

There are lists of predictors. Even English teachers like me can find them, commit them to memory and use them in our daily lives to avoid a crisis. My ex once went five years between meltdowns -- and that was after years of having weekly ones. We managed that at home. We didn't have all the resources of the US military to draw from.

What happened at Ft. Hood?

[paulsby]

51. there are all sorts of concerns

such as privacy, civil liberties (to include free speech, etc.) that limit what the military (yes, even in the military - people have rights) can do.

the evidence simply is not in (imo) imo on whether there were significant enough factors to, for instance, require hasan to undergo mental competency testing, interviews, etc.

in my agency, there is a legal standard that must be met. that is also true of the military.

[EFerrari]

53. Therapists are required by their employers to have check ups.

What happened?

I guess what I mean is, it doesn't matter so much to me if this guy thought he was bin Laden's best friend.

Where were the people tasked with supervising him?

[paulsby]

55. i don't think we know at this point

maybe he had his checkups and passed.

we simply don't know

[EFerrari]

57. That's what matters to me. So, either this guy did get check ups and passed them

which is a problem for his chain of command or, he didn't get them which is a problem or he got them and didn't pass them which is also a problem.

[paulsby]

58. if he did pass them, he would not be the first

homicidal assmunch that did.

psychological tests (i've taken many - MMPI, etc.) are very blunt instruments.

[EFerrari]

66. A psychotic person unravelling is pretty obvious

to someone who even half knows what they're looking at. You don't need a test key.

It doesn't look like anyone was interested, let alone, paying attention.

[paulsby]

71. and we don't know that he was psychotic

i totally agree that psychotics are pretty easy to recognize.

i only know he was a murderous assmunch. i certainly don't know he was psychotic

[EFerrari]

82. Well, showing up at work to kill a bunch of people is not normal human behavior.

This man didn't stand to gain personally in anyway and the Koran prohibits killing innocents.

What's left?

[aranthus]

86. Actually, it is.

Soldiers do it all the time. People kill other people for all sorts of reasons, and many of them are quite sane and rational. As for what's left beside personal gain, there is the radical Islamist ideology to which this man evidently subscribed.

[EFerrari]

88. No, it's not normal behavior to go to work and shoot people.

[Syntheto]

59. Whas dis, bro....

...dat be considered a fallacious appeal to authority in order to win an argument.

Seriously, who knows or cares what you know or what your degree is, or what your degrees are? You could be head bottle washer or second barista as far as anybody really knows. If you were really important, you'd be on Cable news, holding forth.

You're not on Cable news, ergo, to paraphrase John Mellencamp, "Your opinion means nothin'".

And an opinion is just like an asshole, excuse me, 'anus' or better yet, 'sphincter' in the fact that everybody has one.

Your degree doesn't change the basic geometry of your asshole, or your opinion.

Whatever you post here, ultimately comes down to expressing your opinion. You just expressed the opinion that you have a degree and that settles the debate.

Wrong.

[paulsby]

61. except it's not. you can't even read

i'm not saying "believe me because i went to grad school for counseling psychology". i'm not claiming to be an expert. but i am relying in part ON my education.

also, you fail at reading comprehension (how typical) . i did not claim to have a degree.

iow, your entire post is based on a false premise that comes from your lack of skillz at reading comprehension

you come off looking pretty ridiculous

regardless of my education, it is readily accepted in and outside the FIELD of psychology, that psychology is a soft science with weak predictive ability.

i have many years experience as a cop. i will rely in part, on that experience in discussions of relevance (crime, drug use, etc.). i have years experience in strength training (and am a nationally ranked athlete). i will rely on that experience for relevant topics. i have not claimed expert knowledge in either, although i have testified as an expert witness, but i digress

to analogize, if astrophysics had similar predictibility, we never would have landed on the moon, or more correctly, we most likely would have missed.

hth

[C_Lawyer09]

78. A 1,000 times thank you

For sharing that nugget of information

[BootinUp]

69. It seems from various early reports

that this guy was giving off plenty of signals that he did not belong in the military, didn't want to serve over there period. His associates and superiors are responsible for not dealing with that problem. They were too concerned with other issues to deal with a problem that was obvious in my opinion, even though they could not predict what eventually happened.

[paulsby]

6. how true

he's making a prediction and a blanket condemnation of muslims in general.

if a far right wackjob said what he said, we'd call him an anti-muslim bigot.

so, is hasan an example of the prototypical "self-hating" ... in this case... muslim?

sounds like it.

"you can;'t trust us muslims to fight for our country" . that IS what he is saying

then, he tries to prove it by murdering a dozen of his fellow soldiers.

how ironic

[paulsby]

4. interesting that, as a muslim, he mirrors the far right anti-muslim argument

that muslims can't be trusted to serve in our military

that's not a rightwing position, that's a far far rightwing position

and he agrees with that viewpoint

i could cut the irony with a friggin' ladle

[EFerrari]

9. You're misrepresenting what he said.

But how surprising is that.

[paulsby]

11. oh, please enlighten me

cause i am not misrepresenting anything...

[EFerrari]

13. Yes, you are. His position is not right or left wing. It's common sense:

"It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims," he said in the presentation.

As a shrink, his job in part is to predict and mitigate negative consequences of stress on soldiers. He was just obnosing, aka observing the obvious.

[paulsby]

15. you failed

i said he was espousing the same thing as the far far right

he is

he is saying that muslims can't be trusted in the military, at least as far as fighting other muslims is concerned.

i didn't say HE was far right, or far left, or far anything.

i said that he, as a muslim, was echoing the argument of the far right.

i made no statement whatsoever about his political leaning (left or right) because i have no knowledge of that

[EFerrari]

16. Nope. His words are right there for you to read. n/t

[paulsby]

19. and his words support my case hth

[EFerrari]

25. He was talking about stress reduction and avoiding crisis.

You're talking about something else entirely.

[paulsby]

27. he warned about adverse events

and then proceeded to get all "adverse" on the innocent soldiers at ft. hood

for pete's sake, it's clear as hell

[EFerrari]

28. Yes, he did warn about adverse events. It's too bad no one listened to him.

That's as clear as hell to me.

[paulsby]

29. and lots of people on the far right

warned about adverse events, too

and this wasn't the first adverse event either. there was a muslim soldier who threw a grenade into a tent of soldiers back in 2003.

(there was also the recruiter shooting, but that was done by a civilian muslim)

the far far right warned about further "adverse events" after that incident, too

neither hasan, or the guy who threw the grenade are representative of muslims in general.

it would have been wrong to ban muslims from combating other muslims back then, and it's still wrong, despite what hasan says.

what's especially ironic about hasan's warning, is that he said you can't trust muslims, then he took it upon HIMSELF to try to prove that.

talk about self-hating lol

he is saying that muslims can't be trusted to serve their country and serve honorably in the military, when the enemy happens to be of the muslim faith

[EFerrari]

34. Someone much more trained than I am might say

that this individual was saying something about the internal conflict he already felt.

And no, he didn't say that. You are projecting all over his statements but, whatever.

[paulsby]

38. yes, he did say that

hth

[EFerrari]

39. Then please show me the words. Thanks. n/t

[paulsby]

41. i already have

hth

he said that we could expect adverse events if muslims were sent to fight other muslims.

[EFerrari]

45. Right. And the rest is yours. n/t

[WriteDown]

32. And if they had removed him...

there would undoubtedly have been screams of discrimination.

[paulsby]

40. ironic, that!

and so true.

frankly, i'm not at all sure that prior to the shooting, there was sufficient cause TO remove him.

if they could have confirmed the internet postings lauding suicide bombers, that might have done it.

[eilen]

52. I don't think so, he wanted to be removed. they wouldn't let him go. nt

[WriteDown]

56. Not remove him from the military...

Remove him from medical school and any chance of promotion. The acrimony would be deafening.

[C_Lawyer09]

80. Rocket Scientist

Most of how people spend their day in the military is discussing adverse events.

[robinlynne]

18. can't be trusted. no he said it is stupid to send muslims off to kill muslims.

not that muslims can't be trusted. that is coming from YOU. just that common sense says that it is hard for people to justify to themselves going off to kill innocent people, especially when it looks like a war against muslims, not a just war. . Remember the WMDs that weren't there?

[paulsby]

20. he said exactly what i said he said

he said it should be done to avoid "adverse events"

do you really want to play games in regards to what he means/meant by ADVERSE EVENTS.

especially considering what happened in ft. hood. now THAT was an adverse event

[robinlynne]

21. you said shouldn't be trusted. he is saying exactly the opposite. he is saying the

policy of sending muslims overseas to fight innane wars shouldn't be trusted, that it is a bad system.

[paulsby]

23. no, he is saying

that if muslims are sent overseas to fight muslims, we will have "adverse events"

that means he is saying we cannot trust US muslims to fight other muslims.

if you tell yer mommy "there's going to be an adverse event if you don't monitor my drinking habit", you are saying you can't be trusted to drink responsibly

when you say you can't trust somebody to do something (in this case, fight for your country), you are saying just what hasan said, you are saying that if you tell/make somebody do X, they won't do it, and bad stuff will happen.

sorry, but you are trying to explain away the ironic fact that hasan's argument mirrors the far right. you can't trust muslims to fight for their country.

this was similar to the argument used against kennedy (as a catholic)

[robinlynne]

30. are you a republican?

[paulsby]

31. are you? classic evasion techinique. accuse the person who disagrees with you

of nefarious alliances and intent.

it's a sophomoric debating tactic.

you could do better.

heck, my 12 yr old niece could do better

[robinlynne]

35. then why do you think it is a "good" thing to "fight for your country" in Iraq

where our soldiers are simply fighting for oil. THAT IS THE POINT. The war is wrong. NOt a soldier who says it is worng to go fight that war. That is why I asked you. not evasion. Your words "cant trust a muslim to fight for our country" is extreme right wing stuff. you dont seem to realize that. you think it is normal to think this way? It is not, among us. We do not believe the Iraq war is "fighting for our country". We believe it is a stupid loss of life for greed. Iraq held no threat to us, at all. Don't you know that?

[paulsby]

37. i didn't say that

you can go off on the tangent all you want. i have never supported the iraq war. i am clear on this.

fwiw, hasan wasn't being sent to iraq anyway. he was being sent to AFGHANISTAN.

regardless of whether he supported that war or not, he had the responsibility to do his duty.

this guy wasn't a conscientious objector, so your entire paragraph is TOTALLY irrelevant to the point being discussed.

if he thought the war in afghanistan was unjust, he could refuse to go and serve time in the brig. that would have at least been understandable.

whether or not one supports the iraq war (i don't), shooting a bunch of innocent soldiers is not justified by opposition to same, or by opposition to being sent to afghanistan, or to a twisted interpretation of islam

[robinlynne]

42. Yes he was, he not only requested CO status to not go to the war, he suggested that be permissable f

for muslims in general. So it is not about "you can't trust muslims". It is about "The army is fucking up by not letting soldiers out who want out"! He most certainly did request to leave the army, in order to not deploy, which was denied. I'm not saying the guy was a pacifist, a real CO. I'm just saying what happened.

[paulsby]

44. here's a hint for you

conventional understanding of CO status, means that he would have been able to GO to war, he just could not serve in a combat role.

CO's routinely served as medics, for instance.

and being a psychiatrist would not be acting in a combat role
and i see no evidence he was against war qua war. he frigging signed up for the military. he may not have liked THIS war, but that's just tough luck for him.

the army cannot let people out who want out. that's almost heckler's veto-esque.

it rewards people for refusing to go. no military can operate effectively with such a policy.

imagine if you could enter the military, get all the benefits (and hasan had many, such as a good education), and then when a war broke out and you were forced to go, then you could cry "kings X" and get an out

note also that in justifying CO status, there must be a history of same in most cases. they are very suspicious when all the evidence comes from very recent events. it suggest manufacture.

if we gave muslims an out for fighting other muslims, we would be setting up a double standard.

no other religion gets an "out" in regards to fighting people of their own faith.

NONE

it is true that some religions are pacifist. but god knows that aint true about islam

quakers? sure. islam? not so much

the army would be tacitly agreeing that muslims are different from everybody else, and not subject to the same rules

how paternalistic would THAT be?

and what about all the muslims that DO serve honorably, and help blow away those taliban pieces of shit?

[robinlynne]

64. fight em over there, right? I get your position......heard it somewhere before.

[C_Lawyer09]

91. let me pose this question to you

Ms. lack of historical perspective. Which President, and his NSA came up with the containment doctrine which set the precedent for our invasion of Iraq, and provided the neo-con platform? Hint, it wasn't a Republican. And how about a little intellectual honesty, verus crying Republican if somebody doesn't agree with you.

[cali]

48. Don't want to go to war? Don't join the military. period.

[louis-t]

7. I've never heard of soldiers of any other religion

refusing to fight because they might have to kill a person of their own religion. Protestant US soldiers in WWII didn't refuse to fight Germans. US soldiers of Japanese descent were not required to fight in the Asian theater by reason of descent, not religion. I've never heard of a case in the Korean War where South Koreans refused to fight North Koreans because they might be the same religion. The Civil War had members of the same families on opposite sides. Just an observation.

[EFerrari]

10. US residents and citizens of Japanese descent had to fight from the camps

where they were penned up in order to be allowed to fight at all.

[The Croquist]

26. The War with Mexico is an example

There were several hundred US soldiers either Irish Catholic immigrants or descendants of immigrants who deserted and fought for Catholic Mexico against the US. About 50 were executed after being captured.

[louis-t]

79. Is it verified that they all deserted because of religion?

I know that Irish weren't treated too well here.

[forum slut]

12. I was stationed at fort hood. there were shootings all the time that you never heard about

That place is like the wild wild wild west. Fact is, if I had to pick one word to describe my initial reaction to this event, it would be "unsurprised".

[EFerrari]

14. After all the reports of neglect and negligence that our service people

and their families endure, it doesn't seem surprising. :(

[forum slut]

68. it's a highly charged atmosphere to begin with made all the worse by

high levels of testosterone, stress, fatigue, frustration, anger, and psychotic perceptions.

[WriteDown]

33. I was stationed at Fort Hood too...

What you don't here about is the large number of vampire and werewolf attacks. They're unreported though. :eyes:

[forum slut]

67. before I shiiped out o Bosnia in 1998, there were at least half a dozen shootings

there was a soldier execeuted gangland style in the barracks right across from first cav HQ. In front of my barracks there was a soldier shot with a handgun. there was another incident involving an AK 47 and another involving a shotgun. There was a large cache of explosives found on top of one of the barracks which subsequently disapeared. there was a freaking riot that had to be broken up by the MPs. Plus there were more violent assaults than I can even remember. and then there were all the accidents e.g. helicopters being shot at during gunnery, artillery rounds landing in people's back yards, soldiers drowning while crossing water obstacles,when we got to Bosnia, a soldier shot another soldier in the chest with his service pistol and another US soldier was shot in the thigh with a US machine gun by another US soldier. Like I said, the wild wild wild west. never heard of any vampires or wearwolves though. :eyes:

[WriteDown]

76. Bosnia?

Werewolf and vampire attacks are through the roof in that area. Unfortunately, like you said they are unreported.

[elocs]

36. Did the British send devout Catholic troops into Northern Ireland?

In this country we are so used to people being a "token" whatever religion, a lapsed Catholic. I am sure there are those who are token Muslims, but for those who are devout Muslims it is not too hard to imagine that they would have trouble being in a war where Muslims are the enemy even if they are not pulling the trigger. In our justice system those who are involved in a crime are considered accessories even if they do not pull the trigger. The armed forces really should have given Muslims fighting against Muslims some consideration on an individual case by case basis.

This reminds me of a story I heard on the radio about an area of Afghanistan that had been quiet. The people there got along well with the coalition troops. Then one day a firefight broke out with members of the Taliban. The people of the village picked up arms and fought FOR the Taliban and not the coalition troops. Afterwards they were asked about it and said that it was the most exciting thing to happen in their village in years and so they had to get involved and of course they were not going to fight on the side of unbelievers. When push came to shove they chose to fight with their fellow Muslims.

This guy clearly said he had a problem participating in a war as a Muslim when it was a war against other Muslims. In hindsight it seems the military should have listen rather than teaching him the lesson that he would go where they sent him (please do not read this to mean that it excuses his crimes because it does not).

[cali]

49. then don't fucking join the military. duh.

and sorry, but German Americans fought Germans. Italian Americans fought Italians. The paternalism you display toward Muslims is disgusting.

[SacramentoBlue]

54. The sad part is there are more potential stress-victims that may strike

Stress caused by the atrocities of war can really mess up a person's mind.

[Psephos]

73. Did you ACTUALLY just imply Hasan is a VICTIM?

He's a treasonous MURDERER who wrecked or ended the lives of dozens of people he didn't even know.

He VOLUNTEERED to join the Army.

The people Hasan SHOT are the victims.

:banghead:

[underpants]

60. Not an excuse for anyone to do what he did

[hollowdweller]

62. Muslims have been killing fellow Muslims before Mohammed was even cold.

Anybody remember Iraq vs Kuwait?

Iraq VS Iran?

Probably the majority of terrorisim is Muslim vs Muslim

I disagree with the guys argument.

Wonder if he shot any muslims in his attack himself?

People often use religion as an excuse, but then also have no qualms when it's not a factor to murder their co religionists when they have some other difference.

[wordpix]

63. "allow Muslims [sic] Soldiers the option of being released as 'Conscientious objectors' "

He should have been allowed CO status and then served his required time in schools or poor communities.

[The Croquist]

74. Maybe he shouldn't have volunteered or resigned up

A policy of letting soldiers pick and choose whom to fight is crazy. Maybe we shouldn't make cops arrest suspects of their same religion, color or from their same home town. Whats the difference?

When he joined the military he agreed to fight for his country. He didn't agree to fight for his country if it was convenient for him. We trained him for the military not to work in schools or poor communities. When he joined he gave up his right to choose what the military told him to do. It was in the contract.

[wordpix]

77. you cannot expect a young person to be the same & think the same 6 yrs. later

If someone at 20 thinks the military would be a good career, and it will pay the bills for education, he signs up. After 6 yrs. or so, it might not look the same.

My point is, it would have been better for him to have a viable option, rather than go off the deep end.

[slackmaster]

85. Major Hasan is 39 years old

If he enlisted six years ago, he was 33. Not 20.

[EFerrari]

89. 1997. n/t

[C_Lawyer09]

93. Agreed, but

Did Lt. Watada stand by his principles? Yes. Did he go to war? No. Did he kill random Soldiers, or anybody for that matter? No. Stop framing the discussion as if a Major lacked viable options.

[C_Lawyer09]

81. Are you kidding me?

What kind of precedent does that set? Would the CO status be for Muslims only or anybody that complained? There is a reason why the UCMJ is different than civilian law. Talk about a slippery slope, he was a Field Grade Officer for Christ sake!

[BrightKnight]

83. Mr. Hasan is just another Charles Whitman. He is NOT a CO!

There is a long generally honorable and at times heroic tradition of conscientious objectors.

Conscientious objectors do not go on shooting sprees. They do not shoot an unarmed pregnant women multiple times.

Mr. Hasan never filed for CO status.

As a doctor and a Major there is no way he would be doing any kind of fighting. Conscientious Objectors are often given medical jobs.

He was pushing for a release before they decided to send him to Afghanistan.

If he had taken an interest in doing his job his Commanding Officer might have found a way to keep him.

He did not have a problem letting the Army pay for his education even when he was writing this paper.

He is just another Charles Whitman and I do not buy his BS.

[slackmaster]

84. CO status is something you establish pro-actively in order to avoid being drafted into service

It's not a way of getting out of service that you volunteered for.

[humbled_opinion]

65. The only difference between Hasan and the 911 highjackers is

that Hasan used a gun instead of an airplane. Hasan was from Jordan, right? Lets go get us another one of them muslim countries.... More meat for the grinder....:puke: :sarcasm:

[twitomy]

70. I hope they also charge him with hate crimes as well as murder.

Seems to be a classic case of it here.

[Gin]

72. he got what he wanted...hes out of the army...but his ass is grass...

How is that going for ya doc?

[The Croquist]

75. He will be tried in a military court

I don't think they do hate crimes in military court. Regardless he can only be shot dead once.

[twitomy]

90. Yeah too bad....NT

[conscious evolution]

87. He was worried about mutiny

amongst the troops?
Interesting.

[slackmaster]

92. Sounds like projection

IMO

[EFerrari]

94. Yep. Just like that. He was telegraphing his stuff for years

and nobody stepped up to deal with it.