JBond

UDFA
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
2
Why does the regime insist on calling this workplace violence rather than a terrorist attack?

The Department of Defense is making it clear: The military opposes awarding Purple Hearts to the victims of the Fort Hood shooting.

A Pentagon position paper, delivered to congressional staff on Friday and obtained by ABC News, says giving the award to the Fort Hood victims could "irrevocably alter the fundamental character of this time-honored decoration" and "undermine the prosecution of Major Nidal Hasan [the alleged Fort Hood shooter] by materially and directly compromising Major Hasan's ability to receive a fair trial."


The Department prepared the paper in response to legislation introduced by Rep. John Carter, (R.-Texas), the Congressman whose district includes Fort Hood. The Fort Hood Families Benefits Protection Act would award both military and civilian casualties of the Fort Hood attack combatant status.

Carter re-introduced the legislation in February in the wake of an ABC News investigation detailing claims by victims that they have been neglected by the military. In a report that aired on "World News with Diane Sawyer" and "Nightline," former police sergeant Kimberly Munley, who helped stop the Ft. Hood shooting, said she felt "betrayed" by President Obama and that he broke a promise to make sure the victims would be well taken care of.

There has been no comment from the White House about Munley's allegations.

Thirteen people were killed, including a pregnant soldier, and 32 others wounded in the Nov. 5, 2009 rampage at the Army base in Killeen, Texas. Hasan now awaits a military trial on charges of premeditated murder and attempted murder. After numerous delays, that trial is now set to begin with jury selection on May 29.

Despite extensive evidence that Hasan was in communication with al Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki prior to the attack, the military has denied the victims a Purple Heart and has treated the incident as "workplace violence" instead of "combat related" or terrorism. Last month, a spokesman for recently appointed Defense Secretary, Chuck Hagel, told ABC News the Department's position had not changed under his leadership.

In a February statement, Rep. Carter said the Fort Hood Families Benefits Protection Act "would award the military and civilian casualties of the 2009 Fort Hood attack the same status that was awarded to the casualties of the Pentagon attack on Sept. 11, 2001. All of the casualties would be eligible for the Purple Heart Award or the Department of Defense civilian equivalent."

In a new statement to ABC News, Carter said, "After additional investigation into the potential implications of pre-trial publicity, I am postponing any future publicity on these bills at this stage of Maj. Hasan's trial. However, the victims of this tragic shooting fully quality for compensation pay and purple heart recognition."

"The DOD position paper is dead wrong to oppose this legislation," Carter said. "These victims deserve recognition and compensation for the injuries and loss of life from a direct attack on a U.S. military installation."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/purpl...entagon/story?id=18845771&page=2#.UVn70xfOGSo
 

JBond

UDFA
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
2
I agree with the Pentagon.

Please elaborate. You agree he was not a terrorist and that the soldiers he murdered and maimed should not receive recognition for their injuries? Why? How is that POS even alive at this point? I will happily pay for the bullet. I would be happy to pull the trigger.
 
Messages
2,450
Reaction score
0
Please elaborate. You agree he was not a terrorist and that the soldiers he murdered and maimed should not receive recognition for their injuries? Why? How is that POS even alive at this point? I will happily pay for the bullet. I would be happy to pull the trigger.

Due process? He hasn't had a trial yet.
 

Jon88

Pro Bowler
Messages
19,523
Reaction score
0
There were no red flags before this stupid fuck opened fire on everyone?

BTW, they should have killed him. Now we have to pay for his imprisonment for the rest of his life unless he gets the death penalty.
 
Messages
46,859
Reaction score
5
Please elaborate. You agree he was not a terrorist and that the soldiers he murdered and maimed should not receive recognition for their injuries? Why? How is that POS even alive at this point? I will happily pay for the bullet. I would be happy to pull the trigger.

I don't believe it was a terrorist act.
 

Jon88

Pro Bowler
Messages
19,523
Reaction score
0
I loved how he refused to shave his beard for the trial thinking we would cave into his demands like every other country in the world would have done. We said if he didn't shave it we would forcibly shave it off.
 
Messages
2,450
Reaction score
0
Not that anyone asked you but go on. Please continue. Why has he not had a trial yet? Do you know anything about this topic?

You asked why he is still alive, and I gave you am answer. As to why he hasn't had a trail yet, I'm not sure why but there could be hundreds of factors. I just read they have switched judges at least once. Major Nidal Hasan refused to comply with army regs that forced a delay. There were questions around wether or not the trail was delayed for the election (not sure what difference that would have made). The point being is that there could be a hundred different reasons.
 
Messages
46,859
Reaction score
5
What is your definition of a terrorist act?

I haven't followed this case. From what I remember, it was just an angry muslim guy who was pissed at how he was treated at work by his superiors who came in and shot people and stuff.
 

JBond

UDFA
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
2
You asked why he is still alive, and I gave you am answer. As to why he hasn't had a trail yet, I'm not sure why but there could be hundreds of factors. I just read they have switched judges at least once. Major Nidal Hasan refused to comply with army regs that forced a delay. There were questions around wether or not the trail was delayed for the election (not sure what difference that would have made). The point being is that there could be a hundred different reasons.

A timeline. Not sure exactly what it all means, but at least there is a solid record of what has happened.

http://www.forthoodpresscenter.com/go/doc/3439/1229091/

Just curious, do you believe it was a terrorist act and should those he killed and maimed (allegedly) be awarded a purple heart? There is no reason to go in circles about nothing if we agree on the basics. I know there has to be a trial yada, yada, yada, but our current administration kills American citizens without a trial, without revoking their citizenship or even an indictment, for being alleged terrorists on an ongoing basis. What makes this one so different? There are plenty of eyewitnesses. There is a documented history of fanaticism. He was in contact with other terrorists. So why is this different?
 
Messages
2,450
Reaction score
0
A timeline. Not sure exactly what it all means, but at least there is a solid record of what has happened.

http://www.forthoodpresscenter.com/go/doc/3439/1229091/

Just curious, do you believe it was a terrorist act and should those he killed and maimed (allegedly) be awarded a purple heart? There is no reason to go in circles about nothing if we agree on the basics. I know there has to be a trial yada, yada, yada, but our current administration kills American citizens without a trial, without revoking their citizenship or even an indictment, for being alleged terrorists on an ongoing basis. What makes this one so different? There are plenty of eyewitnesses. There is a documented history of fanaticism. He was in contact with other terrorists. So why is this different?

I would like to wait for the trail but it sounds like it may have been an act if terrorism. I think the soldiers should because they were injured in the line if duty. I thought someone said earlier that purple hearts were going to be given to civilians I didn't realize civilians could get a Purple Hearts. If they can I think the trail should happen first.
 

MetalHead

In the Rotation
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
There were no red flags before this stupid fuck opened fire on everyone?

BTW, they should have killed him. Now we have to pay for his imprisonment for the rest of his life unless he gets the death penalty.

There were plenty of red flags on this asshole.
Every single officer who was north of him in his chain of command should be held accountable under UCMJ action.

They knew he was unfit for duty,and did nothing.
 

MetalHead

In the Rotation
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
I haven't followed this case. From what I remember, it was just an angry muslim guy who was pissed at how he was treated at work by his superiors who came in and shot people and stuff.

Oh,I have and it was a terrorist act.
First,he had direct communication via email with Senior Al Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki.
His allegiance was not to USA,but to Islam.
He shouted "Allahu Akbar" before opening fire on unarmed soldiers,killing 13 and wounding 37.

But yeah,it was not terrorism.
 
Top Bottom