Obama Adm. Refuses Benefits to Victims of Hasan

[East of Eden]

According to Obamathink, this wasn't terror, it was 'workplace violence'. Question for debate: Does anyone want to defend this lunacy?

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/fort-hood ... N41Qm80WSo

[Wyvern]

"Enemy-related injuries which justify the award of the Purple Heart include injury caused by enemy bullet, shrapnel, or other projectile created by enemy action; injury caused by enemy placed land mine, naval mine, or trap; injury caused by enemy released chemical, biological, or nuclear agent; injury caused by vehicle or aircraft accident resulting from enemy fire; concussion injuries caused as a result of enemy generated explosions."

"The most recent Purple Hearts presented to civilians occurred after the terrorist attacks at Khobar Towers, Saudi Arabia, in 1996—about 40 U.S. civil service employees received the award for their injuries."

[Were the Khobar Towers a combat zone?]

"It is not intended that such a strict interpretation of the requirement for the wound or injury to be caused by direct result of hostile action be taken that it would preclude the award being made to deserving personnel."


What you and Obama won't admit is that Hassan is a self-declared enemy of the US, and a soldier of jihad on the same side as all the other jihadists groups. If you picked 10 normal Ameriacans as random and asked whether it was terror or workplace violence, what would they say?

You may have noticed that in every case in the definition it requires the injury to be caused by an enemy. Last I checked Hasan is a member of the US Army and as such this would be considered a case of friendly fire.

Wrong again, this is the definition of friendly fire:

"Friendly fire is an attack by a military force on friendly forces while attempting to attack the enemy, either misidentifying the target as hostile, or due to errors or inaccuracy. Such attacks often cause injury or death. Fire not intended to attack the enemy, such as negligent or malicious discharge, or deliberate firing on one's own troops for disciplinary reasons, is not called friendly fire."

There was nothing accidental about it, Hassan intended to kill as many American soldiers as possible, and he was/in an embedded enemy soldier, just like his brethren in the Afghan Army who shoot our soldiers. Hassan is a self-declared enemy of the US, and the only reason he wasn't given a dishonorabe discharge before this happened was political correctness.

You didn't answer my question, were the Khobar Towers a combat zone?

Okay, according to you then this attack was a malicious discharge and still does not qualify for a purple heart. You still don't seem to understand that Major Hasan is a member of the US Army and as such this is an entirely internal matter except for people like you that are attempting to politicize the matter in order to villify our president.

As far as the Khobar towers attack, you decided you did not have to answer my question about your stand on gays in the military so I see no reason I need to answer your off topic question.

[East of Eden]

"Enemy-related injuries which justify the award of the Purple Heart include injury caused by enemy bullet, shrapnel, or other projectile created by enemy action; injury caused by enemy placed land mine, naval mine, or trap; injury caused by enemy released chemical, biological, or nuclear agent; injury caused by vehicle or aircraft accident resulting from enemy fire; concussion injuries caused as a result of enemy generated explosions."

"The most recent Purple Hearts presented to civilians occurred after the terrorist attacks at Khobar Towers, Saudi Arabia, in 1996—about 40 U.S. civil service employees received the award for their injuries."

[Were the Khobar Towers a combat zone?]

"It is not intended that such a strict interpretation of the requirement for the wound or injury to be caused by direct result of hostile action be taken that it would preclude the award being made to deserving personnel."


What you and Obama won't admit is that Hassan is a self-declared enemy of the US, and a soldier of jihad on the same side as all the other jihadists groups. If you picked 10 normal Ameriacans as random and asked whether it was terror or workplace violence, what would they say?

You may have noticed that in every case in the definition it requires the injury to be caused by an enemy. Last I checked Hasan is a member of the US Army and as such this would be considered a case of friendly fire.

Wrong again, this is the definition of friendly fire:

"Friendly fire is an attack by a military force on friendly forces while attempting to attack the enemy, either misidentifying the target as hostile, or due to errors or inaccuracy. Such attacks often cause injury or death. Fire not intended to attack the enemy, such as negligent or malicious discharge, or deliberate firing on one's own troops for disciplinary reasons, is not called friendly fire."

There was nothing accidental about it, Hassan intended to kill as many American soldiers as possible, and he was/in an embedded enemy soldier, just like his brethren in the Afghan Army who shoot our soldiers. Hassan is a self-declared enemy of the US, and the only reason he wasn't given a dishonorabe discharge before this happened was political correctness.

You didn't answer my question, were the Khobar Towers a combat zone?

Okay, according to you then this attack was a malicious discharge and still does not qualify for a purple heart. You still don't seem to understand that Major Hasan is a member of the US Army

He is a self-described soldier of radical Islam, and an ally of the Taliban, all while embedded in the US Army. So that means it wasn't a terror attack? He would have been given a dishonorable discharge a long time ago if not for political correctness.

and as such this is an entirely internal matter except for people like you that are attempting to politicize the matter in order to villify our president.

Yes, your guy can do no wrong except for the IRS scandal, the Benghazi scandal, the AP scandal, etc., etc. Silly me to even question him.

As far as the Khobar towers attack, you decided you did not have to answer my question about your stand on gays in the military so I see no reason I need to answer your off topic question.

Wait, you declared my comment on gays to be irrelevant to the OP, while my question to you is clearly not. Care to man up and answer it?

[Wyvern]

Okay, according to you then this attack was a malicious discharge and still does not qualify for a purple heart. You still don't seem to understand that Major Hasan is a member of the US Army[/quote]

He is a self-described soldier of radical Islam, and an ally of the Taliban, all while embedded in the US Army. So that means it wasn't a terror attack? He would have been given a dishonorable discharge a long time ago if not for political correctness.[/quote]Just because you do not want to accept it he was a member of the US army in good standing at the time of the attack and no amount of monday morning quarterbacking on your part will change that simple fact. By the definitions you have provided this attack would be categorized as a malicious discharge and as such not qualify for a purple heart.

and as such this is an entirely internal matter except for people like you that are attempting to politicize the matter in order to villify our president.

Yes, your guy can do no wrong except for the IRS scandal, the Benghazi scandal, the AP scandal, etc., etc. Silly me to even question him.

Wow with so many scandals to choose from it's a wonder that you have to create so many more.

As far as the Khobar towers attack, you decided you did not have to answer my question about your stand on gays in the military so I see no reason I need to answer your off topic question.

Wait, you declared my comment on gays to be irrelevant to the OP, while my question to you is clearly not. Care to man up and answer it?

Care to explain the relevance your question has to the OP? If you do not have to answer my questions why do you think I have to answer yours? Answer mine first and I will gladly respond to yours.

[East of Eden]

To answer your previous question on how have soldiers been harmed by this terror attack not being called terror:

"Purple Heart recipients can qualify for reduced medical costs, preferential treatment for many state and federal government jobs, tuition waivers at some universities and special license plates. Family members can receive some of the benefits.

The families of the dead and survivors of the shootings have sued the government for those benefits, in addition to seeking damages from the government and Hasan.

Pentagon officials “are twisting themselves into a pretzel� to avoid saying the attack was terrorism, said Neal Sher, an attorney for the plaintiffs in a civil suit against the government and Hasan.

Survivors of the shootings have had to deal with numerous injuries and trauma. Manning, a medic who had served two tours in Iraq unscathed, knew he had little time after being shot because his lung started to collapse and was filling with blood. He played dead to escape more bullets.

Surgeons had to remove Manning’s intestines and operate to treat a subsequent infection from a staple in his belly. Bullets remain behind his left kidney and in his right thigh, according to the legal filing against the government and Hasan.

At the time of the attack, Manning was an activated reservist, making much less than he would have made as a federal civilian employee. Because the shooting was classified as workplace violence, Manning has lost about $40,000 in compensation and “significant� retirement benefits, according to the legal filing."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-1 ... spute.html

[Wyvern]

To answer your previous question on how have soldiers been harmed by this terror attack not being called terror:

"Purple Heart recipients can qualify for reduced medical costs, preferential treatment for many state and federal government jobs, tuition waivers at some universities and special license plates. Family members can receive some of the benefits.

The families of the dead and survivors of the shootings have sued the government for those benefits, in addition to seeking damages from the government and Hasan.

Pentagon officials “are twisting themselves into a pretzel� to avoid saying the attack was terrorism, said Neal Sher, an attorney for the plaintiffs in a civil suit against the government and Hasan.

Survivors of the shootings have had to deal with numerous injuries and trauma. Manning, a medic who had served two tours in Iraq unscathed, knew he had little time after being shot because his lung started to collapse and was filling with blood. He played dead to escape more bullets.

Surgeons had to remove Manning’s intestines and operate to treat a subsequent infection from a staple in his belly. Bullets remain behind his left kidney and in his right thigh, according to the legal filing against the government and Hasan.

At the time of the attack, Manning was an activated reservist, making much less than he would have made as a federal civilian employee. Because the shooting was classified as workplace violence, Manning has lost about $40,000 in compensation and “significant� retirement benefits, according to the legal filing."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-1 ... spute.html

According to the definitions you provided this incident is more properly categorized as a malicious discharge and as such does not qualify for the purple heart. Until you can explain why this is not a malicious discharge anything else you might say in this regard is pointless.

[East of Eden]

To answer your previous question on how have soldiers been harmed by this terror attack not being called terror:

"Purple Heart recipients can qualify for reduced medical costs, preferential treatment for many state and federal government jobs, tuition waivers at some universities and special license plates. Family members can receive some of the benefits.

The families of the dead and survivors of the shootings have sued the government for those benefits, in addition to seeking damages from the government and Hasan.

Pentagon officials “are twisting themselves into a pretzel� to avoid saying the attack was terrorism, said Neal Sher, an attorney for the plaintiffs in a civil suit against the government and Hasan.

Survivors of the shootings have had to deal with numerous injuries and trauma. Manning, a medic who had served two tours in Iraq unscathed, knew he had little time after being shot because his lung started to collapse and was filling with blood. He played dead to escape more bullets.

Surgeons had to remove Manning’s intestines and operate to treat a subsequent infection from a staple in his belly. Bullets remain behind his left kidney and in his right thigh, according to the legal filing against the government and Hasan.

At the time of the attack, Manning was an activated reservist, making much less than he would have made as a federal civilian employee. Because the shooting was classified as workplace violence, Manning has lost about $40,000 in compensation and “significant� retirement benefits, according to the legal filing."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-1 ... spute.html

According to the definitions you provided this incident is more properly categorized as a malicious discharge and as such does not qualify for the purple heart. Until you can explain why this is not a malicious discharge anything else you might say in this regard is pointless.

Huh? Are you still in denial that this criminal's motivation was radical Islam?

He just recently renounced his US citizenship and soldier's oath.

http://unitedpatriotsworldwide.com/vini ... democracy/

[Wyvern]

To answer your previous question on how have soldiers been harmed by this terror attack not being called terror:

"Purple Heart recipients can qualify for reduced medical costs, preferential treatment for many state and federal government jobs, tuition waivers at some universities and special license plates. Family members can receive some of the benefits.

The families of the dead and survivors of the shootings have sued the government for those benefits, in addition to seeking damages from the government and Hasan.

Pentagon officials “are twisting themselves into a pretzel� to avoid saying the attack was terrorism, said Neal Sher, an attorney for the plaintiffs in a civil suit against the government and Hasan.

Survivors of the shootings have had to deal with numerous injuries and trauma. Manning, a medic who had served two tours in Iraq unscathed, knew he had little time after being shot because his lung started to collapse and was filling with blood. He played dead to escape more bullets.

Surgeons had to remove Manning’s intestines and operate to treat a subsequent infection from a staple in his belly. Bullets remain behind his left kidney and in his right thigh, according to the legal filing against the government and Hasan.

At the time of the attack, Manning was an activated reservist, making much less than he would have made as a federal civilian employee. Because the shooting was classified as workplace violence, Manning has lost about $40,000 in compensation and “significant� retirement benefits, according to the legal filing."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-1 ... spute.html

According to the definitions you provided this incident is more properly categorized as a malicious discharge and as such does not qualify for the purple heart. Until you can explain why this is not a malicious discharge anything else you might say in this regard is pointless.

Huh? Are you still in denial that this criminal's motivation was radical Islam?

He just recently renounced his US citizenship and soldier's oath.

http://unitedpatriotsworldwide.com/vini ... democracy/

You don't seem to get it, at the time of the attack he was an officer in the US army in good standing and as such according to the definitions you provided this incident is properly categorized as a malicious discharge and still does not qualify for the purple heart. Anything the suspect does after the attack has no bearing on the attack itself so I have no idea why you keep trying to insert it into the conversation.

I will say it again since you seem to have ignored it, until you can explain why this attack is not a malicious discharge anything else you might say on the subject is completely irrelevant. No amount of monday morning quarterbacking or sob stories on your part will change this simple fact.

[East of Eden]

To answer your previous question on how have soldiers been harmed by this terror attack not being called terror:

"Purple Heart recipients can qualify for reduced medical costs, preferential treatment for many state and federal government jobs, tuition waivers at some universities and special license plates. Family members can receive some of the benefits.

The families of the dead and survivors of the shootings have sued the government for those benefits, in addition to seeking damages from the government and Hasan.

Pentagon officials “are twisting themselves into a pretzel� to avoid saying the attack was terrorism, said Neal Sher, an attorney for the plaintiffs in a civil suit against the government and Hasan.

Survivors of the shootings have had to deal with numerous injuries and trauma. Manning, a medic who had served two tours in Iraq unscathed, knew he had little time after being shot because his lung started to collapse and was filling with blood. He played dead to escape more bullets.

Surgeons had to remove Manning’s intestines and operate to treat a subsequent infection from a staple in his belly. Bullets remain behind his left kidney and in his right thigh, according to the legal filing against the government and Hasan.

At the time of the attack, Manning was an activated reservist, making much less than he would have made as a federal civilian employee. Because the shooting was classified as workplace violence, Manning has lost about $40,000 in compensation and “significant� retirement benefits, according to the legal filing."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-1 ... spute.html

According to the definitions you provided this incident is more properly categorized as a malicious discharge and as such does not qualify for the purple heart. Until you can explain why this is not a malicious discharge anything else you might say in this regard is pointless.

Huh? Are you still in denial that this criminal's motivation was radical Islam?

He just recently renounced his US citizenship and soldier's oath.

http://unitedpatriotsworldwide.com/vini ... democracy/

You don't seem to get it, at the time of the attack he was an officer in the US army in good standing and as such according to the definitions you provided this incident is properly categorized as a malicious discharge and still does not qualify for the purple heart. Anything the suspect does after the attack has no bearing on the attack itself so I have no idea why you keep trying to insert it into the conversation.

I will say it again since you seem to have ignored it, until you can explain why this attack is not a malicious discharge anything else you might say on the subject is completely irrelevant. No amount of monday morning quarterbacking or sob stories on your part will change this simple fact.

So why do the victims disagree with you? It is very telling that you dismiss their views as 'sob stories'. I respect their opinion much more than armchair internet experts. What you ignore is this creep is motivated by radical Islam, and is no different than an Al Queda operative. It is unbelievable that that obvious fact is not recognized as terrorism. Are the Afghan army killers who shoot our soldiers not part of a terror movement? After all, they are members of the army of our ally, right? Why did CIVLIANS in the Khobar Towers bombing get a Purple Heart but not the Ft. Hood victims? Maybe Khobar Towers was just a malicious explosion? What about embedded Vietcong in South Vietnamese units who attacked us, are those wounded soldiers not qualified for a Purple Heart?

According to this definition from Wikipedia, Ft. Hood qualifies for a Purple Heart, as Hasan is a self-declared enemy of the US:

"The Purple Heart is awarded in the name of the President of the United States to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving under competent authority in any capacity with one of the U.S. Armed Services after April 5, 1917, has been wounded or killed. Specific examples of services which warrant the Purple Heart include any action against an enemy of the United States; any action with an opposing armed force of a foreign country in which the Armed Forces of the United States are or have been engaged; while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party; as a result of an act of any such enemy of opposing armed forces; or as the result of an act of any hostile foreign force. After 28 March 1973, as a result of an international terrorist attack against the United States or a foreign nation friendly to the United States, recognized as such an attack by the Secretary of the Army, or jointly by the Secretaries of the separate armed services concerned if persons from more than one service are wounded in the attack."

[Wyvern]

To answer your previous question on how have soldiers been harmed by this terror attack not being called terror:

"Purple Heart recipients can qualify for reduced medical costs, preferential treatment for many state and federal government jobs, tuition waivers at some universities and special license plates. Family members can receive some of the benefits.

The families of the dead and survivors of the shootings have sued the government for those benefits, in addition to seeking damages from the government and Hasan.

Pentagon officials “are twisting themselves into a pretzel� to avoid saying the attack was terrorism, said Neal Sher, an attorney for the plaintiffs in a civil suit against the government and Hasan.

Survivors of the shootings have had to deal with numerous injuries and trauma. Manning, a medic who had served two tours in Iraq unscathed, knew he had little time after being shot because his lung started to collapse and was filling with blood. He played dead to escape more bullets.

Surgeons had to remove Manning’s intestines and operate to treat a subsequent infection from a staple in his belly. Bullets remain behind his left kidney and in his right thigh, according to the legal filing against the government and Hasan.

At the time of the attack, Manning was an activated reservist, making much less than he would have made as a federal civilian employee. Because the shooting was classified as workplace violence, Manning has lost about $40,000 in compensation and “significant� retirement benefits, according to the legal filing."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-1 ... spute.html

According to the definitions you provided this incident is more properly categorized as a malicious discharge and as such does not qualify for the purple heart. Until you can explain why this is not a malicious discharge anything else you might say in this regard is pointless.

Huh? Are you still in denial that this criminal's motivation was radical Islam?

He just recently renounced his US citizenship and soldier's oath.

http://unitedpatriotsworldwide.com/vini ... democracy/

You don't seem to get it, at the time of the attack he was an officer in the US army in good standing and as such according to the definitions you provided this incident is properly categorized as a malicious discharge and still does not qualify for the purple heart. Anything the suspect does after the attack has no bearing on the attack itself so I have no idea why you keep trying to insert it into the conversation.

I will say it again since you seem to have ignored it, until you can explain why this attack is not a malicious discharge anything else you might say on the subject is completely irrelevant. No amount of monday morning quarterbacking or sob stories on your part will change this simple fact.

So why do the victims disagree with you? It is very telling that you dismiss their views as 'sob stories'. I respect their opinion much more than armchair internet experts. What you ignore is this creep is motivated by radical Islam, and is no different than an Al Queda operative. It is unbelievable that that obvious fact is not recognized as terrorism. Are the Afghan army killers who shoot our soldiers not part of a terror movement? After all, they are members of the army of our ally, right? Why did CIVLIANS in the Khobar Towers bombing get a Purple Heart but not the Ft. Hood victims? Maybe Khobar Towers was just a malicious explosion? What about embedded Vietcong in South Vietnamese units who attacked us, are those wounded soldiers not qualified for a Purple Heart?

According to this definition from Wikipedia, Ft. Hood qualifies for a Purple Heart, as Hasan is a self-declared enemy of the US:

"The Purple Heart is awarded in the name of the President of the United States to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving under competent authority in any capacity with one of the U.S. Armed Services after April 5, 1917, has been wounded or killed. Specific examples of services which warrant the Purple Heart include any action against an enemy of the United States; any action with an opposing armed force of a foreign country in which the Armed Forces of the United States are or have been engaged; while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party; as a result of an act of any such enemy of opposing armed forces; or as the result of an act of any hostile foreign force. After 28 March 1973, as a result of an international terrorist attack against the United States or a foreign nation friendly to the United States, recognized as such an attack by the Secretary of the Army, or jointly by the Secretaries of the separate armed services concerned if persons from more than one service are wounded in the attack."

You can bring up anything else you want but until you can explain why this attack is not a malicious discharge according to the definitions you provided the victims do not qualify for a purple heart.

[East of Eden]

To answer your previous question on how have soldiers been harmed by this terror attack not being called terror:

"Purple Heart recipients can qualify for reduced medical costs, preferential treatment for many state and federal government jobs, tuition waivers at some universities and special license plates. Family members can receive some of the benefits.

The families of the dead and survivors of the shootings have sued the government for those benefits, in addition to seeking damages from the government and Hasan.

Pentagon officials “are twisting themselves into a pretzel� to avoid saying the attack was terrorism, said Neal Sher, an attorney for the plaintiffs in a civil suit against the government and Hasan.

Survivors of the shootings have had to deal with numerous injuries and trauma. Manning, a medic who had served two tours in Iraq unscathed, knew he had little time after being shot because his lung started to collapse and was filling with blood. He played dead to escape more bullets.

Surgeons had to remove Manning’s intestines and operate to treat a subsequent infection from a staple in his belly. Bullets remain behind his left kidney and in his right thigh, according to the legal filing against the government and Hasan.

At the time of the attack, Manning was an activated reservist, making much less than he would have made as a federal civilian employee. Because the shooting was classified as workplace violence, Manning has lost about $40,000 in compensation and “significant� retirement benefits, according to the legal filing."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-1 ... spute.html

According to the definitions you provided this incident is more properly categorized as a malicious discharge and as such does not qualify for the purple heart. Until you can explain why this is not a malicious discharge anything else you might say in this regard is pointless.

Huh? Are you still in denial that this criminal's motivation was radical Islam?

He just recently renounced his US citizenship and soldier's oath.

http://unitedpatriotsworldwide.com/vini ... democracy/

You don't seem to get it, at the time of the attack he was an officer in the US army in good standing and as such according to the definitions you provided this incident is properly categorized as a malicious discharge and still does not qualify for the purple heart. Anything the suspect does after the attack has no bearing on the attack itself so I have no idea why you keep trying to insert it into the conversation.

I will say it again since you seem to have ignored it, until you can explain why this attack is not a malicious discharge anything else you might say on the subject is completely irrelevant. No amount of monday morning quarterbacking or sob stories on your part will change this simple fact.

So why do the victims disagree with you? It is very telling that you dismiss their views as 'sob stories'. I respect their opinion much more than armchair internet experts. What you ignore is this creep is motivated by radical Islam, and is no different than an Al Queda operative. It is unbelievable that that obvious fact is not recognized as terrorism. Are the Afghan army killers who shoot our soldiers not part of a terror movement? After all, they are members of the army of our ally, right? Why did CIVLIANS in the Khobar Towers bombing get a Purple Heart but not the Ft. Hood victims? Maybe Khobar Towers was just a malicious explosion? What about embedded Vietcong in South Vietnamese units who attacked us, are those wounded soldiers not qualified for a Purple Heart?

According to this definition from Wikipedia, Ft. Hood qualifies for a Purple Heart, as Hasan is a self-declared enemy of the US:

"The Purple Heart is awarded in the name of the President of the United States to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving under competent authority in any capacity with one of the U.S. Armed Services after April 5, 1917, has been wounded or killed. Specific examples of services which warrant the Purple Heart include any action against an enemy of the United States; any action with an opposing armed force of a foreign country in which the Armed Forces of the United States are or have been engaged; while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party; as a result of an act of any such enemy of opposing armed forces; or as the result of an act of any hostile foreign force. After 28 March 1973, as a result of an international terrorist attack against the United States or a foreign nation friendly to the United States, recognized as such an attack by the Secretary of the Army, or jointly by the Secretaries of the separate armed services concerned if persons from more than one service are wounded in the attack."

You can bring up anything else you want but until you can explain why this attack is not a malicious discharge according to the definitions you provided the victims do not qualify for a purple heart.

They certainly do, you must be reading a different definition from the one I posted.

What's a 'malicious discharge'? Some new category invented by the Obama administration?