Fort Hood victims and heros feel neglected

[Dominarch's Hope]

http://news.yahoo.com/fort-hood-hero-sa ... ories.html

Three years after the White House arranged a hero's welcome at the State of the Union address for the Fort Hood police sergeant and her partner who stopped the deadly shooting there, Kimberly Munley says President Obama broke the promise he made to her that the victims would be well taken care of.

"Betrayed is a good word," former Sgt. Munley told ABC News in a tearful interview broadcast on "World News with Diane Sawyer" and "Nightline."

"Not to the least little bit have the victims been taken care of," she said. "In fact they've been neglected."

There was no immediate comment from the White House about Munley's allegations.

Thirteen people were killed, including a pregnant soldier, and 32 others shot in the November 2009 rampage by the accused shooter, Major Nidal Hasan, who now awaits a military trial on charges of premeditated murder and attempted murder.

The broadcast report also includes dramatic new video, obtained by ABC News, taken in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, capturing the chaos and terror of the day.

Munley, since laid off from her job with the base's civilian police force, was shot three times as she and her partner, Sgt. Mark Todd, confronted Hasan, who witnesses said had shouted "Allahu Akbar" as he opened fire on soldiers being processed for deployment to Afghanistan.

As Munley lay wounded, Todd fired the five bullets credited with bringing Hasan down.

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 is treating the incident as "workplace violence" instead of "combat related" or terrorism.

READ a Federal Report on the FBI's Probe of Hasan's Ties to al-Awlaki

Al-Awlaki has since been killed in a U.S. drone attack in Yemen, in what was termed a major victory in the U.S. efforts against al Qaeda.

Munley and dozens of other victims have now filed a lawsuit against the military alleging the "workplace violence" designation means the Fort Hood victims are receiving lower priority access to medical care as veterans, and a loss of financial benefits available to those who injuries are classified as "combat related."

READ the Fort Hood Victims' Lawsuit

Some of the victims "had to find civilian doctors to get proper medical treatment" and the military has not assigned liaison officers to help them coordinate their recovery, said the group's lawyer, Reed Rubinstein.

"There's a substantial number of very serious, crippling cases of post-traumatic stress disorder exacerbated, frankly, by what the Army and the Defense Department did in this case," said Rubinstein. "We have a couple of cases in which the soldiers' command accused the soldiers of malingering, and would say things to them that Fort Hood really wasn't so bad, it wasn't combat."

Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said the Department of Defense is "committed to the highest care of those in our military family."

"Survivors of the incident at Fort Hood are eligible for the same medical benefits as all servicemembers," said Little. "The Department of Defense is also committed to the integrity of the ongoing court martial proceedings of Major Nidal Hasan and for that reason will not at this time further characterize the incident."

Secretary of the Army John McHugh told ABC News he was unaware of any specific complaints from the Fort Hood victims, even though he is a named defendant in the lawsuit filed last November which specifically details the plight of many of them.

"If a soldier feels ignored, then we need to know about it on a case by case basis," McHugh told ABC News. "It is not our intent to have two levels of care for people who are wounded by whatever means in uniform."

Some of the victims in the lawsuit believe the Army Secretary and others are purposely ignoring their cases out of political correctness.

"These guys play stupid every time they're asked a question about it, they pretend like they have no clue," said Shawn Manning, who was shot six times that day at Fort Hood. Two of the bullets remain in his leg and spine, he said.

"It was no different than an insurgent in Iraq or Afghanistan trying to kill us," said Manning, who was twice deployed to Iraq and had to retire from the military because of his injuries.

An Army review board initially classified Manning's injuries as "combat related," but that finding was later overruled by higher-ups in the Army.

Manning says the "workplace violence" designation has cost him almost $70,000 in benefits that would have been available if his injuries were classified as "combat related."

"Basically, they're treating us like I was downtown and I got hit by a car," he told ABC News.

For Alonzo Lunsford, who was shot seven times at Fort Hood and blinded in one eye, the military's treatment is deeply hurtful.

"It's a slap in the face, not only for me but for all of the 32 that wore the uniform that day," he told ABC News.

Lunsford's medical records show his injuries were determined to be "in the line of duty" but neither he nor any of the other soldiers shot or killed at Fort Hood is eligible for the Purple Heart under the Department of Defense's current policy for decorations and awards.

Army Secretary McHugh says awarding Purple Hearts could adversely affect the trial of Major Hasan.

"To award a Purple Heart, it has to be done by a foreign terrorist element," said McHugh. "So to declare that soldier a foreign terrorist, we are told, I'm not an attorney and I don't run the Justice Department, but we're told would have a profound effect on the ability to conduct the trial."

Members of Congress, including the chairman of the House Homeland Security committee, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, say they will introduce legislation to force the military and the Obama administration to give the wounded and dead the recognition and honors they deserve.

"It was clearly an act of terrorism that occurred that day, there's no question in my mind," McCaul told ABC News. "I think the victims should be treated as such."

Former Sgt. Munley says she now believes the White House used her for political advantage in arranging for her to sit next to Michelle Obama during the President's State of the Union address in 2010.

Munley says she has no hesitation now speaking out against the President or taking part in the lawsuit, because she wants to help the others who were shot that day and continue to suffer.

"We got tired of being neglected. So this was our last resort and I'm not ashamed of it a bit," said Munley. She is also raising money for a movie about Fort Hood, and says some of the proceeds will go to the victims.

There is also a video. But I am not sure how to grab it and embed it. Just follow the link.

[Knife]

Blah, they're bitching about a fucking medal? Or was this just a political hit piece that all Muslims who do shitting things are 'enemy combatants' and terrorists?

I'm unclear what they want? Raced over to Walther Reed? What didn't they get that a grunt in Afghanistan didn't besides a fucking medal?

[Keevan_Colton]

Blah, they're bitching about a fucking medal? Or was this just a political hit piece that all Muslims who do shitting things are 'enemy combatants' and terrorists?

I'm unclear what they want? Raced over to Walther Reed? What didn't they get that a grunt in Afghanistan didn't besides a fucking medal?

Seems that it covers that in the article, given that they get reduced benefits since this is not classed as combat injuries.

[Knife]

Seems that it covers that in the article, given that they get reduced benefits since this is not classed as combat injuries.

The article says:

Munley and dozens of other victims have now filed a lawsuit against the military alleging the "workplace violence" designation means the Fort Hood victims are receiving lower priority access to medical care as veterans, and a loss of financial benefits available to those who injuries are classified as "combat related."


Some of the victims "had to find civilian doctors to get proper medical treatment" and the military has not assigned liaison officers to help them coordinate their recovery, said the group's lawyer, Reed Rubinstein.

Why would a domestic affair qualify as terrorists or as combat related anymore than any other douche going on a shooting spree any where else? Ft Hood isn't a combat zone.

article also wrote:

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 is treating the incident as "workplace violence" instead of "combat related" or terrorism.

"It was no different than an insurgent in Iraq or Afghanistan trying to kill us," said Manning, who was twice deployed to Iraq and had to retire from the military because of his injuries.

Makes me think it's a political hit job.

[Dominarch's Hope]

So domestic affairs dont qualify as terrorism now? What was Oklahoma then?

And simple workplace violence is kinda stupid.

[Aaron MkII]

So domestic affairs dont qualify as terrorism now? What was Oklahoma then?

And simple workplace violence is kinda stupid.

Come on, even I understand what's being said here.

What is being said is that this particular act doesn't qualify as domestic terrorism, not that others don't.

[Knife]

So domestic affairs dont qualify as terrorism now? What was Oklahoma then?

And simple workplace violence is kinda stupid.

Anymore than douche bag in Connecticut was a terrorists.

Lets put it another way, do you feel comfortable designating large swaths of the USA as a combat zone?

[Block]

So domestic affairs dont qualify as terrorism now? What was Oklahoma then?

And simple workplace violence is kinda stupid.

Anymore than douche bag in Connecticut was a terrorists.

Lets put it another way, do you feel comfortable designating large swaths of the USA as a combat zone?

It depends on what his goal was in the Ft. Hood shooting. If it was to force some sort of political change, then yes, it should be designated terrorism. If it's because he's a crazy fuck, then no.

[Dominarch's Hope]

So domestic affairs dont qualify as terrorism now? What was Oklahoma then?

And simple workplace violence is kinda stupid.

Anymore than douche bag in Connecticut was a terrorists.

Lets put it another way, do you feel comfortable designating large swaths of the USA as a combat zone?

It happened on a military base and the guy is said to have done in the name of religion?


Counts for abortion clinic bombings too to some degree.

[xthetenth]

If you're going to try to justify calling it combat, it's going to be something like "while carrying out duties as uniformed officers of the US armed forces, they were attacked as such." That sort of definition would be reinforced by insurgencies where there isn't necessarily a state of war or anything.

[Sea Skimmer]

Why would a domestic affair qualify as terrorists or as combat related anymore than any other douche going on a shooting spree any where else? Ft Hood isn't a combat zone.

But the people killed and wounded were specifically targeted out of everyone else on the vast entire base as personal processing to go to a combat zone.

Makes me think it's a political hit job.

I'm not really sure what you mean by that, but his emails were numerous and investigated by the FBI prior to the shooting.

[weemadando]

Wait, he's still awaiting trial? More than three years on?

[Sea Skimmer]

The trial sort of started last year, and has been constantly delayed ever since, as well as before, by a series of defense motions, and then a long string of hearings and rulings over Hasan's refusal to follow military dress codes in the courtroom. I think that still isn't totally settled. Hasan actually wants to plea guilty but US military law does not allow this in death penalty cases.

[Themightytom]

So domestic affairs dont qualify as terrorism now? What was Oklahoma then?

And simple workplace violence is kinda stupid.

Anymore than douche bag in Connecticut was a terrorists.

Lets put it another way, do you feel comfortable designating large swaths of the USA as a combat zone?

Or we could put it yet another way, do you feel comfortable claiming that New York on September 11th wasn't a terrorist attack?

[Knife]

So domestic affairs dont qualify as terrorism now? What was Oklahoma then?

And simple workplace violence is kinda stupid.

Anymore than douche bag in Connecticut was a terrorists.

Lets put it another way, do you feel comfortable designating large swaths of the USA as a combat zone?

Or we could put it yet another way, do you feel comfortable claiming that New York on September 11th wasn't a terrorist attack?

I don't really. It was an act of war by a paramilitary outfit backed by a shitball country. I steer clear of 'terrorist' anything, it has become too vague to be useful as a term.

[Themightytom]

I don't really. It was an act of war by a paramilitary outfit backed by a shitball country. I steer clear of 'terrorist' anything, it has become too vague to be useful as a term.

"Eh I prefer to ignore inconvenient terms"
Got it. Thanks for wasting my time.

[Knife]

I don't really. It was an act of war by a paramilitary outfit backed by a shitball country. I steer clear of 'terrorist' anything, it has become too vague to be useful as a term.

"Eh I prefer to ignore inconvenient terms"
Got it. Thanks for wasting my time.

LOL.

If those guys over there are terrorists, these guys over here are terrorists, a couple standing over there terrorists, then the work loses meaning. Define terrorist. Then lets make sure that term doesn't apply to 80 different things you didn't intend for it to mean. Did the shit ball do it because he was crazy? Did he do it because he was some super secret James Bond spy undercover, and stuck a magnificent blow for Islam? If he is a terrorists, was the Connecticut shooter a terrorist, how about the Washington sniper kid? Abortion bombers? The nut ball who shot the abortion doctor? Frankly the word terrorist gets tossed around as easily as hero does.

[Captain Seafort]

Define terrorist.

Easy. Terrorism is an act of violence committed by a non-state actor with the intent of influencing a state to do or not do something the non-state actor wants or doesn't want it to do. A terrorist is an individual who commits acts of terrorism.

[Themightytom]

LOL.

If those guys over there are terrorists, these guys over here are terrorists, a couple standing over there terrorists, then the work loses meaning.

You are generalizing for your own convenience. What are the shared attributes of "those guys" and "These guys" and the "A couple standing over there." You're not even willing to come up with a substantive argument.

Define terrorist.

Captain Seafort did it very effectively. You could have, if you bothered to crack a dictionary, but my suspicion isn't that you are incapable, it's that you are dishonest. You know your position is untenable, and the more concrete you are about it, the more clear it's going to be that you haven't thought any of this through.

Then lets make sure that term doesn't apply to 80 different things you didn't intend for it to mean.

Uh yes, let's, I'm up for it. I can tell that you are not, because:

Did the shit ball do it because he was crazy?

You keep using the term shitball as an adjective. You are clearly a hypocritical asshole, claiming that the word terrorism is so broadly misused as to be unusable while all the while inventing applications for words of your own.

Did he do it because he was some super secret James Bond spy undercover, and stuck a magnificent blow for Islam? If he is a terrorists, was the Connecticut shooter a terrorist, how about the Washington sniper kid? Abortion bombers? The nut ball who shot the abortion doctor? Frankly the word terrorist gets tossed around as easily as hero does.

It DOES get tossed around, by intellectually apathetic people like you, who would rather engage in moral parsimony instead of taking responsibility for the opinions you throw around. You admitted you didn't even KNOW what the Fort Hood victims were after speculating that they just wanted medals, but leaped to conclusions before bothering to find out, even though it was written in the article. You're still trying to justify a position you know was wrong to begin with to save face. Again Thanks for wasting my time.

[Knife]

Define terrorist.

Easy. Terrorism is an act of violence committed by a non-state actor with the intent of influencing a state to do or not do something the non-state actor wants or doesn't want it to do. A terrorist is an individual who commits acts of terrorism.

So how does that work if Major Nidal Hasan was part of the US army? He was a state actor acting against his state. Sounds more like a rebel.

[Knife]

Hmm, re read thread. I do appear to be emotional about this so I bow out and concede all points. My apologies.

[Themightytom]

Hmm, re read thread. I do appear to be emotional about this so I bow out and concede all points. My apologies.

That was amazingly reasonable, what site am I on??