Terrorism Pays: Nidal Hasan Has Received More Than $278,000 in Salary Since His Fort Hood Terror Attack

Posted by on May 21, 2013 at 8:59 am

Fortunately he hasn’t been affected by the Obama Sequester yet. Otherwise he might have to declare hardship. You really want to become enraged? Some of his victims are being denied benefits.

The Department of Defense confirms to NBC 5 Investigates that accused Fort Hood shooter Major Nidal Hasan has now been paid more than $278,000 since the Nov. 5, 2009 shooting that left 13 dead 32 injured. The Army said under the Military Code of Justice, Hasan’s salary cannot be suspended unless he is proven guilty.

If Hasan had been a civilian defense department employee, NBC 5 Investigates has learned, the Army could have suspended his pay after just seven days.

Personnel rules for most civilian government workers allow for “indefinite suspensions” in cases “when the agency has reasonable cause to believe that the employee has committed a crime for which a sentence of imprisonment may be imposed.”

Meanwhile, more than three years later soldiers wounded in the mass shooting are fighting to receive the same pay and medical benefits given to those wounded in combat.

Retired Army Spc. Logan Burnett, a reservist who, in 2009, was soon to be deployed to Iraq, was shot three times when a gunman opened fire inside the Army Deployment Center.

“I honestly thought I was going to die in that building,” said Burnett. “Just blood everywhere and then the thought of — that’s my blood everywhere.”

Burnett nearly died. He’s had more than a dozen surgeries since the shooting, and says post-traumatic stress still keeps him up at night.

Burnett is now fighting a new battle; only this one is against the U.S. Army.

The Army has not classified the wounds of the Ft. Hood victims as “combat related” and declines to label the shooting a “terrorist attack”,

The “combat related” designation is an important one, for without it Burnett and other shooting victims are not given combat-related pay, they are not eligible for Purple Heart retirement or medical benefits given to other soldiers wounded either at war or during the Sept. 11, 2001 attack on the Pentagon.

As a result, Burnett, his wife Torey, and the families of other Fort Hood victims miss out on thousands of dollars of potential benefits and pay every year.

This is an absolute outrage, but we can’t say we’re surprised.



Tags: ,

12 Responses to “Terrorism Pays: Nidal Hasan Has Received More Than $278,000 in Salary Since His Fort Hood Terror Attack”

  1. Blue Hen on 21/21/13 at 9:30 am

    If they do that, then they admit that there is a problem. And that domestic terrorism occurred, and that it occurred due to radicalized muslims. As has been amply demonstrated, this administration lies about matters great and small, and runs over its freinds. I certainly has no time for its perceived enemies (service personnel).

  2. leilani on 21/21/13 at 10:06 am

    And remember boys & girls, the President has been saying to all that will listen that it was “Republican budget cuts” which prevented him providing even the minimal security Amb. Stevens had repeatedly requested for State Dept. employees in Libya.

    While he was showering the criminally corrupt chief of the Tax Exempt office at the IRS – the one entrusted with the task of turning that agency into Barack Obama’s personal STASI – with 100K bonuses, while he was lavishing taxpayer financed financial rewards upon the terrorist who committed mass murder on a US military base on US soil, while he himself was regularly jetting off to five star golf resorts for a quick round in between putting an hour or two at the Oval Office, this President insists he just didn’t have enough in the piggy bank to provide any protection at all to US personnel under direct threat of imminent attack in Libya and so it was Republicans in Congress who should be held responsible for the deaths of the four men who were assassinated at Benghazi.

  3. Nick Shaw on 21/21/13 at 10:11 am

    You know, this is as big a story as the Benghazi coverup.
    Think about it.
    The administration is / was going to great pains to blame the deaths of Americans on anything other than islam. They would rather have us believe that we have done something that caused these people to lose their self control and, as such, we deserved what we got.
    This situation has to be brought to the floor of the House.
    We need to keep hitting this administration with every bit of sleaziness possible until even the dullest of Skeeter voters say, ” Uhhh, that can’t be right.”.

  4. It's those damn kids! on 21/21/13 at 10:19 am

    When Obama says , “support the troops”…i am pretty sure he means the other side.

  5. MT Geoff on 21/21/13 at 11:29 am

    Let’s review the situation, please.
    Major Hassan has been accused of a crime but he hasn’t been convicted of anything. I agree the process has taken at least two years too long. Still, under military law, his pay can’t be tampered with until he is convicted. This is an important protection for enlisted personnel especially; if a PFC is accused of a crime, her pay continues until the case is resolved. I had a co-worker who was accused of theft and later cleared, but it took several months. Without his pay, his family would have suffered greatly.
    In Hassan’s case, I’d guess most of his pay has gone to his lawyers.
    Had Hassan’s case been resolved with reasonable expedition, his pay would have stopped when he was convicted.
    In terms of benefits: Hassan’s act was morally an act of terror but it does not meet the legal definition. Does politics play a role in that? I dunno. But anyone who has been disabled by Hassan’s cruelty is entitled to the normal benefits of a disabled servicemember or civilian employee and those are generally more generous than civilian workers’ comp benefits. Those benefits may be less than combat-related benefits; if so, the goal would be to change the law.

  6. it's those darn kids. on 21/21/13 at 11:47 am

    I tend to disagree with his attack not meeting the requirements for “terrorism”.

    Specifically, and generally speaking, a person yelling “Allahu Akbar!” while attacking, killing US service men and women point to what would be called terrorism.

    United States Law Code – the law that governs the entire country – contains a definition of terrorism embedded in its requirement that Annual Country reports on Terrorism be submitted by the Secretary of State to Congress every year. (From U.S. Code Title 22, Ch.38, Para. 2656f(d)

    (d) Definitions
    As used in this section—
    (1) the term “international terrorism” means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than 1 country;
    (2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;

    Please note (d)(2)

  7. Blue Hen on 21/21/13 at 12:18 pm

    Yeah, let’s review.

    1. He deliberately opened fire on unarmed people in a gun free zone, while screaming allah ackbar.
    2. There’s a paper trail of e-mails linking him to a terrorist espousing immam.
    3. If he had been screaming about the IRA, we wouldn’t be debating this.
    4. Dr. Amy Bishop snapping out (again) and killing co-workers at a college because she was denied tenure is workplace violence.

    The radicalized hasan shooting unarmed service personnel and civilian defense workers while cheering for allah while US forces are deployed in half a dozen muslim countries….an act of terrorism. Was he controlled by some group or cell? Dunno. Was he a self winding Paradise seeker? Probably, and he wouldn’t be the first.

    If these people were injured or killed in a terrorist attack, then they should receive recognition and benefits stemming from that. Since you obviously haven’t noticed, the current administration doesn’t care one whit for “moral” cases.

  8. Vic Kelley on 21/21/13 at 12:30 pm

    A few months ago they made a federal case out of hasan being able to keep his beard or not. That made me think priorities were out of whack. Now it’s revealed that he’s been getting paid all this time. Unreal.

  9. MT Geoff on 21/21/13 at 1:18 pm

    Howdy friends
    Please note I’m not defending Hassan. I think justice calls for his execution and I think it should already have happened. He is entitled to the the full process of law, though, and that includes receiving his pay until he’s convicted. As a side note, the court-martial could fine him in addition to a sentence of imprisonment or execution, but there aren’t likely to be any assets to pay a fine.
    As for the benefits: this incident didn’t occur in a battle zone. Hassan acted as a radicalized Muslim but that doesn’t mean the incident matched the requirement for specific benefits. The injured and disabled are still entitled to an array of appropriate benefits, as they should be. Just one item: the injured military would not have been charged any form of leave while recovering and I don’t think the injured civilian employees were either. Not a perk, only what should happen.
    Hassan is vile. The management of his prosecution has been inept, or else he’s got an incredible shyster for an attorney, maybe both. I’m only saying that the case has to be evaluated according to facts and law — for the protection of all servicemembers.