“The evidence will clearly show that I am the shooter...We in the mujahideen are imperfect beings trying to establish a perfect religion...I don’t think what I did was wrong because it was for the greater cause of helping my Muslim brothers” - Nidal Malik Hasan, in his statements made before Presiding Judge Tara Osborn during his court martial.
Muslim jihadist Nidal Malik Hasan, Major, U.S. Army and an American citizen, shouted “Allahu Akbar” (Arabic for “God is great”) just prior to his rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, on November 5, 2009. This phrase has been reported by witnesses to be the outcry of Muslim extremists prior to their acts of terror.
A quick recap: from 2009 through 2013, three attacks (the Arkansas recruiting station shooting, Hasan's shooting spree at Ft. Hood and the Boston Marathon bombing), were committed by Muslim terrorists within the U.S. during President Obama's two terms in office. The carnage from these attacks resulted in a total of 19 killed and more than 300 wounded. It is a failure by him and his administration to declare any of these attacks as terror-related when all had indeed been caused by Muslim fanatics.
But President Obama called these incidents “workplace violence”. So from whence did this term come and why did he attribute it to the deaths and wounded caused by Muslim extremists?
“Workplace Violence” was mentioned by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (under the auspices of the Department of Justice) in their 2001 report entitled, Violence in the Workplace, 1993-99. The 12-page report discussed how violence in the workplace declined 44% compared to all violent crime over the period from 1993 to 1999.
After the Hasan's massacre, Robert Gates, the then Secretary of Defense, established the “Department of Defense Independent Review Board Related to Fort Hood” to investigate the incident and to make recommendations to identify and address possible deficiencies in current policies in the U.S. Army. Their report was entitled, Protecting the Force: Lessons Learned From Fort Hood. Workplace violence is mentioned this report 17 times.
There are two problems though. First, the Department of Justice published a report on March 2011 entitled, Workplace Violence, 1993-2009, wherein they defined “Workplace violence - Nonfatal” as “violence (rape/sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault) against employed persons age 16 or older that occurred while they were at work or on duty.“ Then they distinguish a different category of 'Workplace homicide – Homicide of employed victims age 16 or older who were killed while at work or on duty. “
Secondly, President Obama's continued use of workplace violence as the cause of the Fort Hood shootings is also contradicted by Title 22 of the U.S. Code, Section 2656f(d) which defines terrorism as “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.” Does this not appropriately apply to these three events?
Therefore, it is inconceivable that any sensible person could extrapolate workplace violence to be violence caused by Muslim jihadists wherever it took place. But that's what President Obama did.
His decision, implemented by his administration and the Department of Defense, resulted in a total lack of compassion towards the families of all the deaths and wounded in these three attacks. The only conclusion for their actions is what can be called “The Obama Doctrine”:
No Muslim attack within the boundaries of the U.S. will be acknowledged to have occurred during my presidency.
This is the reason Obama said “no” to all of the victims of the first Fort Hood shooting. Therefore, all of the wounded military and veterans will not receive Purple Hearts, sorely needed benefits such as medical and psychological treatment, as well as physical therapy necessary for a full recovery. This means they are denied benefits other soldiers receive when they get combat-related injuries. And, of course, civilians are not included in this incidence.
Three events have occurred since Hasan's massacre: first, 148 victims and family members filed a lawsuit against the government on November 5, 2012, the third anniversary of Hasan's massacre at Ft. Hood. They all want compensation for the attack, in many cases, to help repay for their out-of-pocket expenses for medical care and associated costs for recovery.
Two, on September 12, 2013, Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) introduced S. 1500, “Honoring the Fort Hood Heroes Act.” The bill was referred to committee, but the website that tracks all legislation says the prognosis is “1% chance of being enacted”. A similar bill was introduced into the House by Rep. John Carter (R-TX) and also assigned to a committee. It's prognosis for passing is “4%”.
And, three, as reported by the Military Times on April 15, 2014, Congress got involved with the first Ft. Hood shooting in another way. Members of the House Appropriations Committee saw fit to include in their fiscal 2015 veterans and military construction bill a measure directing the Department of Defense to provide “a detailed analysis of the benefits and medical care the victims … would receive now and into the future if this event were classified as an act of terrorism.” Fortunately, the bill had bipartisan support.
So, will the House and the Senate pass these bills and will President Obama sign any of them? All the participants in the lawsuit are hoping so and, in the mean time, holding their breaths.
Note: In what is an unbelievable insult to all, and news not widely disseminated, Muslim extremist Hasan received two milestones in his military career while awaiting his execution in his jail cell at Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas: in a small ceremony, he was promoted to Lieutenant Colonel and he received the Legion of Merit - both while standing in front of a “framed letter from Osama bin Laden congratulating Hasan on his “successful slaughter of dozens of infidels.”