Nicolai Haugsted
Pete Hegseth faces criticism after making a false claim about Barack Obama’s response to the deadly Fort Hood shooting.
The deadly shooting at Fort Hood remains one of the most painful episodes in modern American military history, with the families of 13 victims having spent years fighting for recognition of what happened.
More than a decade after the massacre, disagreements over how the attack was classified continue to fuel political arguments in Washington.
Now, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has revived the controversy while discussing the planned execution of the man responsible.
But his attempt to criticize former President Barack Obama’s handling of the tragedy included a claim that the historical record does not support, according to The Guardian.
Hegseth takes aim at Obama
During a Thursday interview with conservative commentator Jack Posobiec on Real America’s Voice, Hegseth discussed the upcoming execution of Nidal Hasan, the former Army psychiatrist convicted of carrying out the November 2009 attack.
Hasan killed 12 soldiers and one civilian at the Texas military installation.
The defense secretary confirmed that Hasan is scheduled to face a firing squad later this year, before shifting his attention to the Obama administration.
“It was a radical Islamist terror attack,” Hegseth said.
He then challenged the former president’s description of the massacre.
“Remember what Obama called it? ‘Workplace violence,'” Hegseth claimed.
The assertion was misleading because it attributed a specific description to Obama that the available record does not establish he personally used.
Hegseth continued his criticism while Posobiec nodded in agreement.
“I mean, that’s what we’re up against. That’s the worldview we’re up against, it’s ‘workplace violence,'” the defense secretary said.
The remarks revisited a long-running dispute about the military’s official classification of the attack, rather than an established quotation from Obama himself.
A controversy that began with the victims’ families
The Fort Hood shooting occurred on November 5, 2009, when Hasan opened fire on fellow service members and civilians at the base.
The Army major had communicated with Anwar al-Awlaki, a cleric who later became a prominent al-Qaida propagandist.
Hasan subsequently characterized the killings as retaliation for American military operations in Muslim-majority countries.
For relatives of the victims, the aftermath brought another battle.
Military authorities initially declined to recognize the soldiers killed or wounded as casualties of combat or terrorism for purposes of certain military honors and benefits.
Because the victims were not deployed to a combat zone at the time, they did not initially qualify for Purple Heart medals under the applicable criteria.
Families challenged that decision, arguing that the classification denied their loved ones appropriate recognition and associated benefits.
Their lawsuit also criticized Obama for failing to characterize the massacre as terrorism.
A federal court ultimately dismissed the case in 2019.
However, the controversy surrounding the military’s administrative treatment of the victims was not the same as proof that Obama personally called the shooting “workplace violence.”
Obama’s own words tell a different story
Hegseth’s criticism also overlooked public remarks Obama made while still serving as president.
During a May 2013 address at the National Defense University, Obama discussed the dangers posed by radicalized individuals operating within the United States.
He specifically connected the Fort Hood shooting to violent extremism.
“Deranged or alienated individuals – often US citizens or legal residents – can do enormous damage, particularly when inspired by larger notions of violent jihad,” Obama said.
“And that pull towards extremism appears to have led to the shooting at Fort Hood and the bombing of the Boston Marathon.”
The remarks came during a broader discussion of terrorism and national security.
Although Obama did not use the precise phrase “act of terrorism” in that passage about Fort Hood, he explicitly associated the shooting with violent jihad and radicalization.
His public statements therefore complicate Hegseth’s suggestion that the former president simply dismissed the massacre as an ordinary workplace incident.
Victims eventually received military honors
The treatment of the Fort Hood victims changed during Obama’s second presidential term.
Congress revised the eligibility rules for the Purple Heart, expanding recognition to certain victims of attacks inspired or motivated by foreign terrorist organizations.
The revised criteria also addressed cases in which an attacker had communicated with a foreign terrorist organization before committing the violence.
Hasan’s communications with al-Awlaki became relevant to that determination.
In 2015, the military awarded Purple Hearts and other decorations to victims and survivors of the Fort Hood shooting.
The decision addressed a central grievance that families had raised for years.
It also demonstrated that the military’s eventual treatment of the massacre differed significantly from the earlier classification at the heart of the political dispute.
Trump adds another disputed allegation
Hegseth was not the only senior administration official to invoke Obama while discussing the Fort Hood attack.
During remarks Wednesday night, President Donald Trump made a separate allegation concerning what Obama supposedly knew before the shooting.
Trump claimed that the former president had received emails from Hasan outlining his intentions but failed to intervene.
The allegation is unsupported by the documented account presented in the source reporting.
Hasan’s communications with al-Awlaki had attracted scrutiny, but that is not evidence that Obama personally received advance warnings describing a planned massacre.
Trump’s claim and Hegseth’s subsequent remarks have consequently renewed scrutiny of how administration officials describe the events surrounding the 2009 attack.
