Ok, why no beard?

[Crackpot]

I don't think he chose the orange jumpsuit as casual wear RR.

[loCAtek]

Exceptions are very rare and for highly specialized and qualified individuals.

The military withdrew the wearing of a beard in uniform, shortly after the Vietnam war; in one part to boost morale and pride in appearance; and in second part due to safety concerns regarding the increasing use of fire-fighting equipment and gas masks.

After the events of the USS Forrestal (CV-59) fire, it was decided that it would be Naval policy that every US sailor would be trained in combating a ship board fire with fire fighting specialty equipment, such as an OBA Oxygen Breathing Apparatus.

Also, the military in general was facing increasing threats from CPR chemical-biological-radiological attacks; and now every serviceman is required to be trained in MOPP Mission Oriented Protective Posture.

In donning an OBA or gas mask, a tight seal is critical, and facial hair can prevent the seal from closing properly. Even the tiniest opening can compromise readiness.

About the only members who are exempted from these regulations are certain classes of Sikhs, who hold special skills; and SEALS on specific missions that require stealth and/or Psych Ops (blending in with the locals). ...but the SEALS get away with everything.

Some argue that Israelis face all these concerns, and many still wear beards. That situation is dealt with by issuing petroleum jelly, or its equivalent, that has to be worked liberally into the facial hair before donning any gear.

The US felt this was too time consuming and instead ordered that servicemen had to be clean shaven on duty.

[Big RR]

On duty. that's the point--he is under arrest and imprisoned, no longer "on duty". While I don't know army prison regulations, I would imagine that the military has the ability to force him to shave the beard in prison (unless, perhaps, he falls within specific exceptions). But I am just saying that the wearing of a beard is a small thing, and focrcing him to shave serves no useful purpose other than ticking off the people who fervently hold the religious beliefs he claims he has now found, much as the forced shaving of the beards of imprisone jewish men by the nazis often inflamed observant jews learning of it almost as much as the forced labor and violence perpetrated against them.

Allowing him to keep the beard costs nothing, and can serve to demomnstrate that we will treat the religious beliefs of others with respect--not for the type of people the religious adherents are, not for the type of man he is, but because of the type of people we are. To do less demeans us as Americans.

[Grim Reaper]

It's not just because he's in prison, they could have simply stopped him from getting started on the beard. It's now that he's about to go on trial that he needs to get rid of it.

Also, one of the reasons raised is that the beard makes it more difficult for witnesses to identify him since he was clean shaven during the attack.

[Big RR]

Also, one of the reasons raised is that the beard makes it more difficult for witnesses to identify him since he was clean shaven during the attack.

If that's the case, there are ways it could be handled without forcing him to shave. It would also depnd on whether he is going to contest the IDs and say he was not there at all.

[Grim Reaper]

It doesn't sound like he's going to contest anything. In fact, he wanted to plead guilty. But since he faces the death penalty if convicted, they have to conduct a trial in order to be as absolutely certain as possible that they have the right person.

I'd rather he just rot in jail for the rest of his life, that way he could have all the time in the world to grow his beard and reflect upon his actions that resulted in his incarceration.

[Lord Jim]

since he faces the death penalty if convicted, they have to conduct a trial in order to be as absolutely certain as possible that they have the right person.

And to officially find that he was legally sane at the time of the crime...

There has been no military court DP carried out since 1961 (there's one pending that could happen fairly soon) but this is one of two recent cases where I think the odds are very good that it will be imposed. (the other being that sociopath who wandered off his base and carried out a massacre in an Afghan village.)

Under the rules, the execution has to be approved by the President after the sentence is handed down, but I can't imagine anyone likely to be President when that happens, (Obama or Romney) failing to do so in either of these cases.

[Big RR]

You're probably right Jim; I don't think either Obama or Romney has come out against the death penalty.

[loCAtek]

On duty. that's the point--he is under arrest and imprisoned, no longer "on duty". While I don't know army prison regulations, I would imagine that the military has the ability to force him to shave the beard in prison (

Actually he is still on duty; his arrest did not put him on leave or liberty, and he will not be discharged from the service unless it is part of his sentencing (which it probably will*). The only thing that changed were his orders; Major Hasan last duty was canceled and new orders were written up that he serve 'on medical/legal hold'. This is probably the reason why he was allowed to grow the beard; he is technically still in recovery.

I recall when I was on active duty, meeting a few people who were on legal hold for various reasons. They still had to wear the proper uniform (Usually, their basic working uniform: dungarees back then, or sometimes coveralls were the assigned uniform of the day), and were allowed to do some maintenance and repair work, etc. Under legal hold, they had to report to the Master-at-Arms for muster thrice daily, while not allowed any liberty at all. Failing to report to muster, meant brig time.


When Hasan has to appear in trial, since he is being charged under the UCMJ; he will have to be in uniform and meet all standards.


*Hasan's 'Big Chicken Dinner' or Bad Conduct Discharge, will follow any and all prison time he is sentenced to serve. In order to be held in a military facility, he will have to have some kind of rank, but most convicts are knocked down to E-1 without any chance of promotion. If he is sentenced to life or CP, then his discharge will be carried out posthumously, with no benefits or pension given to any next of kin.

[loCAtek]

FWIW If a serviceman is arrested by civilian authorities while on leave or liberty, and held in jail, past his return to duty date; then he/she will be charged with AWOL.


...and probably given a Big Chicken Dinner.

[Big RR]

Lo--when I said "on duty" I meant it in the sense that he had to don a uniform and appear somewhere to work; he is being held in a jail and does not wear a unform, hence my statement.

I have also quickly looked at UCMJ regualtions and it does appear that he could be made to appear in uniform and clean shaven at his hearing; the regualtions say the board has the right to force this. However, I would also think the Board has the right to permit him to appear out of uniform, and in the instant situation, for the reasons I emtnioned above, I think this makes sense. I think back to the Chicago 7 trial and the way it was made a mockery by the judge overreacting t the defendants' antics--even to the point of having one bound and gagged. It made a mockery of the American jduicial system, and turned the public opinion. Here, the same thing could happpen, and it's in the board's interest to appear fair and impartial.

Of course, it would have to be done correctly, and defense counsel would have to sign off on it (so he couldn't later thry to get naother hearing claiming the board was prejudiced by his appearance), but I would think it could be done (a friend of mine who is a former JAG defense attorney agrees it could be done, and told me that he wnet to a number of hearings and summary courts martial where the defendants did not appear in uniform after they refused to).

[loCAtek]

I can defer to the JAG, but the Major is pushing it..

AN ANTONIO, TEXAS - U.S. military prosecutors urged an appeals court on Wednesday to allow accused Fort Hood gunman Major Nidal Hasan to be forcibly shaved if he continues to refuse to remove his beard for his court martial, saying the beard could inflame a jury panel to his detriment.

Hasan is accused of opening fire at a deployment center at Fort Hood, Texas, on Nov. 5, 2009 and faces 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder in the shooting at the sprawling Army base.

He faces the death penalty if convicted of murder. A practicing Muslim, 41-year-old Hasan grew a beard as an expression of his religious beliefs, his attorneys said. But the facial hair is in violation of Army grooming regulations.

“The current rules for courts martial impose an obligation upon the accused to appear in the proper uniform during court martial, and an accused service member who refuses to present a proper military appearance may be compelled to do so,” military prosecutors told the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in a 31-page brief.

Hasan has been repeatedly ordered removed from the courtroom by the presiding judge, Colonel Gregory Gross, because of his beard and has been held in contempt of court five times and ordered to pay a $1,000 fine.

Last week, Gross appeared ready to order soldiers to forcibly shave Hasan, but the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces stepped in, saying it would decide whether Gross has the authority to compel Hasan to be clean-shaven.

The court martial, which was due to begin on Monday, will be delayed until the appeals court issues its ruling.

The Court of Appeals previously rejected Hasan’s request for a “religious accommodation” to wear a beard. Such an exemption has been granted to some men who follow the Sikh faith.

Gross has made it clear that allowing him to wear a beard during the court martial would be grounds for appeal, something military prosecutors stressed in the filing.

“Simply because the accused voluntarily chooses to wear a beard does not mean the military judge must ’take the dare’ and run the risk that the accused will further inflame the panel to his own detriment,” the prosecutors said.

They pointed out that the panel, the military term for a court martial jury, will be made up of officers who may be upset with the sight of a fellow officer “out of uniform.”

Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, was preparing for military deployment to Afghanistan when he allegedly opened fire at a Fort Hood deployment center.

During the shooting, he was paralyzed from the chest down by bullet wounds inflicted by civilian police officers.
Poll

Also, I agree it is in Major Hasan's best interests to appear in uniform, and not in an unkempt beard, otherwise he presents himself as a picture of an 'extreme fundamentalist' or terrorist; when modern Islam does not insist on beards, only sects such as the Taliban and Al Qaeda do.

[oldr_n_wsr]

You know what? I don't really care if he wears a beard or is forced to shave. Tuff shit to him. He killed how many soldiers and while I can understand his rights and all, tuff shit. Do as you are told, present yourself before the court, and plead your case all within the rules. If military justice has different rules for the appearance of defendents, well tuff shit, adhear to them. You signed up for the military, nobody forced you to enlist, now deal with it.

[Big RR]

Oldr--generally I agree with you; however, forcing him to shave his beard (or frocibly shaving it from him) will antagonize some people who, to now, are silent and have no extreme beef with the US. And for what? To make a point that need not be made? He is in custody and is likely to remain so for the rest of his life (which may be longer or shorter depnding on the sentence). It may be a problem on apppeal as Lo pointed out in her linked article, but I do think that could be handled by the court by proving he chose to appear this way on his own.

As I said above, things like forced shaving tend to antagoniize people who believe the beards are religiously important even more than an execution would; pictures of nazis forcibly shaving orthodox jewish men were used to stress their brutality in a way that the killings did not (much the same as Michael Vick being reviled for his treatment of animals even more than other football players who endangered people by driving drunk, who forced themselves on unwilling women, who picked up minors at bars, etc.). Somehow, things like this seem to stir up people even more. I just don't think it's worth it.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Somehow, things like this seem to stir up people even more. I just don't think it's worth it.

Normally I would say I agree with you but in the events of the last day or so I am of the mind of "fuck them". (<---- yes I did curse)

Much like people have argued (in either this forum or others, I can't remember) that it is the person being offended's problem if one curses and they take offense to the curse.

If those on teh outside put as much effort into helping the guy rather than being offended that the murderer has to shave his beard, then maybe they would accomplish something.

Admittedly I don't know where I am going with this, but it seems we (citizens and the government of the USA) are bending over backwards not to offend people who do not deserve defending as they would just as soon cut out our hearts, as soon as we extend a hand, and find an excuse for it afterwards.

[Big RR]

I understand your feelings oldr, but remember, we have to live in a world where people hold different beliefs than we do, and it makes no sense to alienate the the truly religious muslims who do not bomb buildings or hate us, and wear beards as a sign of their deveotion to/covenenant with god/alla. Maybe some would "just as soon cut out our hearts", but most would not (just as most are not 9/11 hijackers or suicide bomers; just as most christians don't bomb abortion clinics). If we can prosecute this guy without looking like jerks, I think we should. It's not a matter of "bending over backwards", it's just a matter of realizing that religious beliefs of others are often as dearly held as our own, if not more so; why give offense when you don't need to?

[oldr_n_wsr]

we have to live in a world where people hold different beliefs than we do, and it makes no sense to alienate the the truly religious muslims who do not bomb buildings or hate us, and wear beards as a sign of their deveotion to/covenenant with god/alla.

I think those people understand that this guy is a nut and deserving of whatever punishment and "restrictions" he is put under while he awaits trial, especially if he is a "born again Muslim" who only now found religion (and a hatred of the USA).

And again, to those who have just recently found offense to this guy not being allowed to grow a beard (or keep the beard) FUCK YOU!!!!. I didn't hear your voices decrying his shooting of 13(?) people in the name of Islam which is supposed to be a religion of peace. (and I have next to zero knowledge of Islam and it's techings only that I hear it is a religion of peace, but then again do not all religions teach peace and tolerance?)

[Sue U]

do not all religions teach peace and tolerance?)

Peace, yes; tolerance, not so much.

[Big RR]

oldr--I'm pretty sure you know that we don't even know if most of those people you write of even knew of the shootings or, if they did, that they didn't condemn them. Just because a heinous act is done in the "name of islam" does not make it accepted among muslims, even conservative ones who chose to wear a beard. And, whether the guy is a nut or totally misguided person does not mean he can't be otherwise devoted to his religion. As for "helping the guy" what would you have had them do--people who have never met him and may not even live in the same country?

Again, the guy deserves to be prosecuted, but why attack islam as well? Must we sink to the level of the jerks who insist that we do it out of spite?

Sue--sadly you are correct. And even peace is up for grabs. I would think any supreme being would hang his/her/its head in shame for what's being done in his/her/its name by people of many religious groups.

[loCAtek]

BigRR, I don't think Islam will suffer if this suspect's demands aren't met.

According to various accounts, Hasan joined the Army shortly after graduating High School in 1988, and became a devout Muslim in 1998 or 2001; at which time, he apparently did not request a 'uniform' waver, or at least accepted the Army's regulations on beards, at that time.


Neither did he request one by 2009, when he was told he was to deploy to Afghanistan.


All of his 'religious' beliefs on facial hair, failed to fully manifest, until after he was incarcerated for multiple homicides; which indicates to me at least, that his actions and grooming standards are not completely motivated by his choice of religion, nor by Islam. In fact, I think his faith is demostrated more by his actions than by his attire.


The change in his appearance from soldier to hajji, seems manipulative at best, and insulting to the Islam faith at least. A true Muslim would not be involved in such a deceptive masquerade.