“Not An Act of Terrorism”: “Boston Bombing” Victims Not Getting Benefits

AUTHOR

September 12, 2014 1:47pm PST

As its been about 18 months since the “Boston Bombings,” the trauma experienced on that day is still relatively fresh. However, Obama has recently poured salt in to wounds of those injured on that day as victims are now being denied benefits on account of the declaration that the incidents of that day were, “not an act of terrorism.”

Now, as one could imagine, this would be easy to confuse given that Obama stated shortly thereafter the attacks:

“Any time bombs are used to target innocent civilians it is an act of terror.”

Of course, as Obama’s been able to thus far weasel his way through any issues that have presented themselves as obstacles, he’s done it once again. Now, based on a technicality, the administration has clarified that although the incident was an act of terror, it was not an act of terrorism.

Immediately after 9/11, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act was passed in which people are covered on an insurance basis against a “man-caused” disaster (i.e. terror attack). Amongst those finding themselves having been effected by the attacks, 22 companies in the area were covered by the insurance and submitted claims.

(See also: Law Scholars Saying Obama’s Declaration Of War Unconstitutional)

However, because of the law, as it stands, the fact that only $1.9 million in claims have been submitted, it doesn’t reach the $5 million minimum in which the law deems an act of terror. So beside all the other aspects that would clearly define this as an act of terror – you know, the blowing up bombs, killing people, destroying buildings – they all don’t matter because, as things like this tend to boil down to, its all about the money.

After all, according to the law, take a peek at what the physical description outlines a terror attack as:

  • “Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;”
  • “Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and”
  • “Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.”

Sounds pretty solid right? Apparently not as the government is sticking to their guns on this one. Feel free to share your outrage in the comments below? Don’t the Americans who fell victim to this atrocity deserve a bit more respect than they’re being given

comments

You must login in order to leave a comment.