On Tuesday, John Muhammad, more commonly known as the Beltway Sniper, was put to death by the Commonwealth of Virginia. Muhammad was a member of the Army’s 84th Engineering Company. He was honorably discharged from the military in 1994 after suspicion that he threw a rogue grenade did not lead to an indictment.uhammad’s execution occurred five days after the Nov. 5 horror at Fort Hood, Texas. Maj. Nidal Hasan killed 12 soldiers and one civilian; he was armed with motives and radical intentions similar to those of the Beltway Sniper. This most recent catastrophe presents an opportunity to re-examine the military’s approach to radicalism within its ranks.Hasan reportedly delivered a troubling presentation to senior physicians at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in June 2007 while he was a senior-year as a resident in psychiatry there. During the lecture, which was originally intended to be a presentation on medical topics, he warned of “adverse events,” such as suicide bombings, if Muslim members of the U.S. military were not granted honorable discharges for any personal objections to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.As early as December 2008, Hasan began regular contact about psychiatric research with Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen and radical Muslim cleric with alleged ties to al-Qaida. FBI officials learned of the exchanges as they occurred. Psychiatrists at Walter Reed reportedly discussed the possibility of Hasan being psychotic, according to The Washington Post. They hesitated initiating his dismissal because of potential image problems for the U.S. military and its approach to Muslim soldiers.In retrospect, Hasan’s behavior seems suspicious at best and overtly dangerous at worst. It’s likely that few could have used this string of suspicious behavior to predict a violent attack on the scale of the shootings at Fort Hood, but these red flags caught the attention of some. FBI officials’ tracking of Hasan’s exchanges with al-Awlaki and the Walter Reed psychiatrists’ concerns could have been acted upon. It seems Hasan’s superiors opted to stay silent for fear of being seen as prejudiced.President Obama, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano have all discouraged a backlash against Muslim members of the military, and we stand with them. Prejudice should not be tolerated – the hate crimes perpetrated against Muslim-Americans after the Sept. 11 attacks should serve as a grim reminder for us all.While cases like Hasan’s remain the exceptions to the rule, officials must ensure that these sorts of rogues are never given the chance to commit atrocities in the first place. Condemning outliers like Hasan does not constitute prejudice toward Muslim members of the U.S. military. Religious sensitivity should have been a factor in any investigation into Hasan’s behavior, but the safety of the military personnel at Fort Hood should have held equal – if not greater – weight. Because of an insufficient investigation, that safety was compromised on Nov. 5. As it looks forward, U.S. military officials ought to ensure that concerns over their image don’t get in the way of military security.*To send a letter to the editor on a recent campus issue or Hoya story or a viewpoint on any topic, contact [opinionthehoya.com](opinionthehoya.com). Letters should not exceed 300 words, and viewpoints should be between 600 to 800 words.*”