Three years after Major Nidal Hassan opened fire in a personnel center on Fort Hood, Texas, the Obama regime has yet to declare the incident is what it obviously is: an act of terrorism. Rather, according, to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta:
“the department is dealing with the threat of violent Islamist extremism in the context of a broader threat of workplace violence.”
Unfortunately, this is not trivial.
Because the incident is not considered an act of terrorism, the victims do not get combat-related special compensation that provides disability pay for medically retired servicemembers. Manning, who was shot six times, was recently denied such benefits.
The victims are also ineligible for Purple Hearts or medals for valor.
Stalnaker said her husband, Sgt. Rex Stalnaker, feels diminished by the government denying he suffered through a terrorist attack, and it causes him to doubt the importance of what he did that day. As a medic, Stalnaker treated many of the victims and was one of the last to leave the building. His uniform was soaked in blood.
The coalition has the support of two Republican congressmen from Texas, who wrote a letter this month to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta asking for the designation.
“Based on all the facts, it is inconceivable to us that the DoD and the Army continue to label this attack ‘workplace violence’ in spite of all the evidence that clearly proves the Fort Hood shooting was an act of terror,” Reps. John Carter and Michael McCaul wrote.
Should the government classify the shooting as terrorism, the victims and their families could be eligible for compensation and benefits similar to those received by families of 9/11 victims.
When viewed in the context of Obama refusing to call the attack in Benghazi terrorism for about two weeks after the attack one wonders why the reluctance. Unless he is afraid of being held to account for his lackluster record in protecting the United States and US interests.