In London, two men brutally hacked an Army soldier to death while screaming “Allahu Akbar” and it’s immediately classified as a terrorist attack on the very same day.
At Fort Hood in 2009, Maj. Nidal Hasan shot and killed 13 people while screaming “Allahu Akbar,” and it was called a case of workplace violence, and now, more than three years later, “an alleged criminal act of a single individual.”
If you recall, authorities learned very quickly that Hasan was in contact with now-deceased al-Qaida terrorist cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.
This ridiculous politically correct classification in the Fort Hood shooting prompted U.S. Reps. Tom Rooney, Chaka Fatta and Frank Wolf to write a letter to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel complaining that, not only did political correctness prevent Hasan from being investigated before the attack, but a “workplace violence” versus “combat-related” classification has negatively affected the benefits and medical treatment of the survivors. Not to mention preventing the heroes from that day from qualifying for the Purple Heart award.
ABC News published the May 6 letter, which said:
The Army’s preferential treatment of Major Hasan – notwithstanding his open extremism and support for religious violence – and the FBI’s refusal to interview Hasan or notify his superiors of his multiple communications with the notorious terrorist leader Anwar al-Awlaki, apparently because of political sensitivities in the Washington Field Office, led to the Fort Hood attack. Frankly, we are deeply concerned that the same considerations of “political correctness” that caused the horrible toll of deaths and injuries at Fort Hood have also informed the Army’s decision to deem his attack an act of “workplace violence.”
According to ABC News, Army attorney Lt. Gen. Dana Chipman replied to Rooney saying, “[T]he available evidence in this case does not, at this time, support a finding that the shooting at Fort Hood was an act of international terrorism. Rather, the evidence, thus far, indicates that this was the alleged criminal act of a single individual.”
The ABC report explained further:
As reflected in Chipman’s letter, the Department of Defense has consistently said that in addition to a supposed lack of evidence, it would be irresponsible to call the Fort Hood attack “terrorism” because it “may have a negative impact on the ongoing judicial process” for Hasan.
The letter also denied that the Defense Department had made a decision to classify the attack as “workplace violence” and said, “[N]o benefit has been denied to any of the victims based on any such classification” — two claims to which the survivors object stringently.
One of those survivors is Kimberly Munley, the police officer credited with helping to take Hasan down. She called Chipman’s newest letter “disgraceful” and “another direct slap in the face,” ABC reported.
“It is clear that the Army and the government will continue to not take responsibility for allowing a known terrorist to slip through the ranks while having multiple associations with the now-deceased Anwar al-Awlaki and has complete disregard for those injured on that horrifying day,” Munley told the news network.
Thirteen people were killed in the Fort Hood attack, including a pregnant soldier, and 32 were wounded. Hasan was charged with multiple counts of premeditated and attempted murder and continues to await trial.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.