By David Stephen
Sedona, AZ — There is a recent report in The Washington Post, Counterterrorism officials vetted Guard shooting suspect before he entered U.S., stating that, “The Afghan national accused of shooting two National Guard members near the White House this week underwent thorough vetting by counterterrorism authorities before entering the United States, according to people with direct knowledge of the case.”
If the United States would vet individuals of certain provenance to keep out threats, does the effort cease after they are on the US homeland?
There is a recent report on NBC News, Noem says National Guard shooting suspect was ‘radicalized’ in the U.S., stating that, “Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Sunday on NBC News’ “Meet the Press” that authorities believe the suspect in the National Guard shooting was radicalized in the U.S. and that the asylum process for migrants would resume once the administration has dealt with a backlog of applications under new standards following the attack.”
“NBC News has reported that the suspect was among a group of the most extensively vetted Afghans who worked alongside U.S. forces. He would have been vetted again when he applied for asylum, according to multiple officials. He was granted asylum in April during the Trump administration.”
“In a separate interview on ABC News’ “This Week,” Noem said the suspect “could have been radicalized” in the U.S.”
If the individual was radicalized in the United States, shouldn’t there be continuity in outreach to help the mind stay in shape, against any cloud that might form on the mind — or instigated — to result in risks?
There is a recent story on NPR, Afghan suspect in D.C. National Guard attack appeared to suffer personal crisis, stating that, “But the volunteer who worked with Lakanwal and other Afghan refugees in Washington state told NPR they saw no sign of radicalization. Instead they described an individual who seemed to be experiencing a deepening personal crisis, complicated by Lakanwal’s poor English-language skills and deepening cultural isolation. The volunteer said there were no organized resources for refugees beyond their initial welcome.”
Mental Health Pamphlets
One of the major goals of the counterterrorism units at the DHS and FBI should be what to do about continuous mind safety for those who may be deemed risky, either for radicalization or mental ill-health.
Simply, there has to be continuous mind support for refugees and others, in ways to ensure that they are at least keeping within safe distances of mind against acting out, harmfully at others or themselves.
Mental health pamphlets would provide displays of what goes on in the mind, especially about caution, consequences, taking breaks, as well as alternatives.
Simply, to continually support safety for refugees and some people deemed risky, it is possible to provide them mental health pamphlets, to boost cognitive reframing and restructuring, not just by phrases, but showing them displays of the mind, with stations and relays, especially destinations during experiences and where the mind must not linger to prevent the risk of — prompt to — hurtful action.
There can also be digital health versions of these pamphlets, where it can be customized depending on what the risks are and so forth.
The objective is to ensure that safety continues, even after vetting to avoid problems and much else.
It is possible to start work on the first phase of these pamphlets soon, and then by January 1, 2026 it is out and shipped, ensuring to stay ahead of wherever threats might emanate, including possible areas like solving firearm suicides, mass shootings, gun violence and much else. It will also be useful in Australia, after the shooting at Hanukkah event on Sydney’s Bondi Beach.
Conceptual brain science provides a new opportunity for progress against risks at the source, the human mind, such that regardless of the state, form, tool or others, risks are likely mitigated.
3 Comments
No vetting in the world will root out individuals who feel betrayed by their own government. Especially the ones who have served their country with blood sweat and tears. The shooter in this case was an Afghan National who served in units run by the SOF & CIA. He risked his life and his family’s safety to do so all the while believing the false promises and lies he was told about making a better life for he and his family. Then he was abandoned by them, then located and allowed to flee to the US with more false promises where he found himself the target of mass ICE deportations. Killing two innocent Guardsmen was NOT the answer but anyone with eyes ears and a heart can see why he got to that dark place. I’ve seen his story play out time and time again with veterans of wars based upon lies and false promises. From our own Vietnam Veterans, Iraqi Guard during Desert Storm, the valiant PPK and Yazidi Kurds to Commando’s who fought in the 90’s war in Bosnia.
To “vet” these individuals one would have to do so at the point and time they begin to feel betrayed not when hired to do our country’s dirty work. But what would that achieve other than more affirmation of having been betrayed and lied to?
the focus of the article was just on mental health spiral, it is true however that reality can be complicated
I understand, just making some clarification on the Afghan National named in your piece. Wasn’t picking your piece apart. I meant to separate the Kurds from the veterans of the Bosnian war but inadvertently combined the two through lack of punctuation. The Kurds were not in Bosnia but Al Qaeda, ISIS and many other Islamic terror groups were present there.