In “Modern Terrorism and Psychological Trauma” (published by Richard Altschuler & Associates, Inc. 2007),
I quote a poem by William Blake titled “The Sick Rose”:
“O rose, thou art sick.
The invisible worm,
That flies in the night
In the howling storm:
Has found out thy bed
Of crimson joy;
And his dark love
Does thy life destroy.”
I then proceed to discuss a novel construct in trauma theory: “The role of the Caretaker”:
In order to reach his victim, the predator has to cross the barrier imposed by the caretaker. To successfully achieve this, he sometimes may assume the role of “Trickster” -a vital Archetype in Jungian Psychology.
To further explain how this dynamic is exploited in modern terrorism, I use an example of something we all know about: The pedophile.
In order to reach the innocent child, the predator will sometimes pose as a baby-sitter, counselor or in some other helping role. He may even be a doctor or nurse, such as the one in the award-winning movie “Misery”, starring Cathy Bates.
The unsuspecting victim is thereby lured into the perpetrator`s den where he or she is abused, tortured (such as in the Chabad House in Mumbai), or even killed. This all occurs as a result of the negligence of the caretaker.
While civilized societies have established barriers to prevent such misfortune, skilled predators have shown their creativity in bypasssing the weaknesses, let alone gaping holes, of the negligent caretaker.
As a result of this caretaking failure, the caretaker now becomes the enabler in this toxic triad.
Caretakers, including various regulating agencies, dare not be negligent in their duty to protect the public!
After years of practice in trauma and forensic psychiatry, I describe in my book how criminal investigators often “uncover a trail of warnings and missed opportunities” only after the tragedy has occurred.
Whether it be a child or spousal abuse situation, or even assaults perpetrated against societies on a grand scale such as the attacks on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, predators have shown how nimbly they manipulate the deficiencies of the apathetic caretaker.
A function that has proven to be effective in containing the spread of fear in society following a terrorist attack has been accurate and rapid information-sharing. This was demonstrated by James Rubin and colleagues following the bombings in London in 2005 (British Medical Journal 331:606-612). They found that communicatiing with the victim during a terror attack protected against trauma reactions, and those survivors who lost communication suffered substantially more from stress-induced symptoms later.
However, in order to “protect” the public from mass-hysteria the media often appears to be more than willing to spin the story according to what they are told to say.
While the intention may be noble, I have found that in the case of national tragedies, the public prefers, and deserves, to be told the real story. This serves both to restore trust and maintain accountability.
An example of breakdown in communication was the Chernobyl disaster, where hundreds of thousands of Ukranians were needlessly exposed to lethal doses of irradiation because of the Soviet government`s "cover-up".
Another example of media complicity with governement occurred in Jerusalem in March 2008, when a Muslim from East Jerusalem entered the Yeshiva "Merkaz Harav", assassinated eight students and wounded thirty five, five critically. Some of the students were as young as fourteen years.
The yeshiva had been founded in Jerusalem in 1924 by Rabbi Yitzhak Kook, Israel`s first Chief Rabbi.
Within hours, real-life footage appeared on “YouTube” showing a distraught army-reservist holding the assassin’s AK 47 assault rifle in the air and screaming “This gun was given to him by Shimon Peres!”.
Those of us familiar with the case know this to be true.
But within hours the live-footages were pulled, during which time the authorities were able to spin the story in a way that was more compatible with the "peace" paradyme.
By the following day the news outlets had morphed the terrorist into a "disgruntled employee" who had become unhinged.
This sanitized version was far more palatable and politically correct.
Returning to Nidal Malik Hasan:
If Al Quada bombed government buildings in Pakistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan in the past ten days; and then demonstrated that they could just as easily penetrate the main military base on the U.S. homeland, this would send quite a scary message.
But the facts remain that Hasan had left heavy footprints regarding indicating how dangerous he was for at least a year.
At Walter Reed Medical Center, where he spent six rears in training, he was assessed as being incompetent (at best) before he was shipped off to Fort Hood.
According to the Washington Post, he had been in communication with an Imam, Anwar al-Awlaki for a year.
Awlaki`s personal web site encouraged Muslims across the world to kill U.S. troops and later praised Hasan.
In the months leading up to the September 11 attacks al-Awlaki had been in contact with two of the September 11 hijackers.
Military officials were aware of communications between Hasan and al-Awlaki.
Despite this, no formal investigation was opened.
In his personal life, Hasan was against the idea of any war against Muslims. He also happened to be sympathetic to suicide-bombings.
I have trained numerous psychiatrists and other therapists in treating victims of trauma.
Aside from learning a multiplicity of skills in Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, an effective Trauma Therapist has to also posses unique personal assets and resources, the most important one being that of “empathy”.
Given his sympathy for the enemy, one wonders how he was able to feel sympathetic for his wounded colleagues.
When a victim’s life has been shattered by the physical or emotional wounds of combat, the trauma therapist becomes the surrogate “good caretaker” by providing a safe “holding environment” for the victim through the relationship.
If Hasan was a qualified “trauma therapist” his function would be to re-establish a sense of "safety in the present" for trauma victims.
His admiration for radical Islam, and his friendship with Awlaki should have been red flags indicating that this "caretaker" could not possibly perform these dichotomous roles: showing empathy for the victim while personally sharing the ideology of the enemy.
Not only was Hasan not a caretaker, he was a predator in the making. Whats more, Intelligence Agencies knew about it and did nothing!
The repeated break-downs in our ability to identify and track-down the Hasans`s amongst us are an inevitable outcome of a culture of tolerance.
But where are the watchdogs?
The disconnect between the collective consciousness of America and the dangers posed by its dark, secretive enemy carries ominous implications for everyone.
