Sad and Pathetic Political Correctness - Again

[gthaustex]

Ft. Hood shooting victims were formally denied Purple Heart medals last Friday. Political correctness run amok, even within the military, based on this administration's attempt to claim no terrorist attacks on U.S. soil during Obama's reign...

Political correctness crosses a line when it no longer conveys stupidity but pathetic weakness to our enemies.

Last Friday, the U.S. Army formally decided not to award Purple Heart medals to the victims of the 2009 Fort Hood shooting, which claimed 13 lives and wounded 32 people. The Army preposterously claims that handing out medals would damage Major Nidal Hasan’s “ability to receive a fair trial.”

The Army issued a “position paper” in which it expressed concern that awarding the medal to the shooting victims “would set the stage for a formal declaration that Major Hasan is a terrorist.” This is because the Purple Heart is awarded to those who have been “wounded or killed in any action against an enemy of the United States.”

But Hasan clearly was a terrorist. A Muslim, he consulted with a radical overseas imam and shouted “Allahu Akbar” before beginning his deadly rampage. The FBI and Congress have found his carnage to be an act of terrorism, while the Obama administration insists it was an incident of “workplace violence.”

Hasan faces the death penalty if he is convicted by a military jury on 13 specifications of premeditated murder. His court martial is set to begin in July.

Neal Sher, a New York lawyer who represents the Fort Hood victims, called the Army’s findings “rubbish.” “These victims have been given the back of the hand by their government,” he claimed. I’ll go further. In its absurd ruling the Obama administration has given them a kick in the gut.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/34 ... -john-fund

[sdmahoney]

If it were claimed that he was a terrorist fighting for an organization we are at war with, and he attacked a military target, could he use that as a defense? We generally don't put enemy soldiers on trial for attacking our soldiers. Just a thought.

[Charles L. Cotton]

What I don't know about military "law" would fill volumes. If the report is correct and it would have even the slightest chance of providing a defense to this mass murderer, then I agree with the decision, if the medals can be awarded after his trial.

Chas.

[Purplehood]

Wouldn't it be permissible under current law/policy to simply launch a drone with Maj. Hasan as the target and eliminate the controversy?

[JALLEN]

Here is the criteria:

. The Purple Heart is awarded in the name of the President of the United States to any member of an Armed Force or any civilian national of the United States who, while serving under competent authority in any capacity with one of the U.S. Armed Services after 5 April 1917, has been wounded or killed, or who has died or may hereafter die after being wounded

(1) In any action against an enemy of the United States.

(2) In 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.

(3) 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.

(4) As a result of an act of any such enemy of opposing armed forces.

(5) As the result of an act of any hostile foreign force.

(6) 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.

(7) After 28 March 1973, as a result of military operations while serving outside the territory of the United States as part of a peacekeeping force.

I think the problem might be that the deaths and wounds were inflicted by a US Army officer. If he had been just some religious loon who somehow got on base, it might be different.

I think one ought to be eligible if the services of a psychiatrist are furnished, but that is just me and not the policy of the government.

[Acer]

I think the problem might be that the deaths and wounds were inflicted by a US Army officer. If he had been just some religious loon who somehow got on base, it might be different.

terrible situation, but I think the above statement is the real crux of the issue as far as Purple Heart commendations go.

[gthaustex]

Here is the criteria:

. The Purple Heart is awarded in the name of the President of the United States to any member of an Armed Force or any civilian national of the United States who, while serving under competent authority in any capacity with one of the U.S. Armed Services after 5 April 1917, has been wounded or killed, or who has died or may hereafter die after being wounded

(1) In any action against an enemy of the United States.

(2) In 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.

(3) 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.

(4) As a result of an act of any such enemy of opposing armed forces.

(5) As the result of an act of any hostile foreign force.

(6) 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.(7) After 28 March 1973, as a result of military operations while serving outside the territory of the United States as part of a peacekeeping force.

I think the problem might be that the deaths and wounds were inflicted by a US Army officer. If he had been just some religious loon who somehow got on base, it might be different.

I think one ought to be eligible if the services of a psychiatrist are furnished, but that is just me and not the policy of the government.

So you are saying that #6 above would not apply in this case, even if Hasan were declared as an international terrorist working at the behest of al-Qaeda or some such? His communications before the attack and his actions during would indicate that he was IMHO.

[baldeagle]

What I don't know about military "law" would fill volumes. If the report is correct and it would have even the slightest chance of providing a defense to this mass murderer, then I agree with the decision, if the medals can be awarded after his trial.

Chas.

Charles, I get the logic, but wouldn't it also extend to his appeals? If that's the case, then you couldn't award the medals until he had exhausted all his appeals and been executed. Otherwise he would have grounds for a new appeal asserting that the entire case against him was a fraud designed to make it possible to convict him. (I'm assuming they will execute the scumbag. They'd better.)

[Charles L. Cotton]

What I don't know about military "law" would fill volumes. If the report is correct and it would have even the slightest chance of providing a defense to this mass murderer, then I agree with the decision, if the medals can be awarded after his trial.

Chas.

Charles, I get the logic, but wouldn't it also extend to his appeals? If that's the case, then you couldn't award the medals until he had exhausted all his appeals and been executed. Otherwise he would have grounds for a new appeal asserting that the entire case against him was a fraud designed to make it possible to convict him. (I'm assuming they will execute the scumbag. They'd better.)

I'm not sure about anything related to the military. I just don't want to see anything done that gives him a shot at avoiding the death penalty.

Chas.

[gthaustex]

I just don't want to see anything done that gives him a shot at avoiding the death penalty.

Chas.

Agreed. However they have to maneuver it to assure he departs this world. Hopefully that is he reason they are reluctant to award anything. With this administration I just don't see it, but maybe....

[JALLEN]

Here is the criteria:

...........

(6) 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.(7) After 28 March 1973, as a result of military operations while serving outside the territory of the United States as part of a peacekeeping force.

I think the problem might be that the deaths and wounds were inflicted by a US Army officer. If he had been just some religious loon who somehow got on base, it might be different.

I think one ought to be eligible if the services of a psychiatrist are furnished, but that is just me and not the policy of the government.

So you are saying that #6 above would not apply in this case, even if Hasan were declared as an international terrorist working at the behest of al-Qaeda or some such? His communications before the attack and his actions during would indicate that he was IMHO.

Apparently the incident has not been "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." If the perp were an imposter, pretending to be a military officer but really a enemy combatant, that might affect how they are looking at it.

That fact that the perp is a serving Army officer makes it a bit muddled. Suppose he were a Jehovah's Witness, or a Presbyterian instead? I think that is significant. Despite the fact that the perp is a military officer and the victims were all military or employees, it is apparently deemed a crime under UCMJ rather than military action contemplated by the regulations.

I don't think anyone thought when drafting the regs that it might be awarded for "blue-on-blue" incidents.

[philip964]

If during World War II, a US army soldier turned traitor and decided to kill US soldiers after a great deal of communication with the Nazi's, would the soldiers he killed or wounded be eligible for the Purple Heart?

[JALLEN]

What I don't know about military "law" would fill volumes. If the report is correct and it would have even the slightest chance of providing a defense to this mass murderer, then I agree with the decision, if the medals can be awarded after his trial.

Chas.

Charles, I get the logic, but wouldn't it also extend to his appeals? If that's the case, then you couldn't award the medals until he had exhausted all his appeals and been executed. Otherwise he would have grounds for a new appeal asserting that the entire case against him was a fraud designed to make it possible to convict him. (I'm assuming they will execute the scumbag. They'd better.)

Execute him? They can't even make him shave to show up in proper uniform. Army Regs prohibit beards etc, and he refuses to shave, on religious grounds.

[mamabearCali]

Once upon a time I heard of high school principals that knew how to handle people that refused to be clean shaven! Not saying we should do that now, just saying we have gone soft.

[JP171]

the supposition that because he was a serving Army Officer the purple heart is off the table are about the gist of it. in response to Mamma, he should be shaved, be it under duress or not, he is still a member of the US Military, no branch allows beards of the type he is wearing in garrison, they will be required to go to a barber and even held down in a chair to shave. however a judge in the JAG Corps has said he can wear his beard, me I would hold him down and shave his sorry tail with a rusty butter knife till all the hair was gone even if took half the skin off his sorry face to do it