Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

The proposed livestream of Nidal Hasan’s execution has reignited debate over justice, deterrence and public accountability, with critics comparing American justice to ISIS propaganda.

The US Military will livestream the execution of Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan.

Hasan, one of America’s most notorious Islamic terrorists, is due to be killed by firing squad in December.

Pity it’s taken so long.

Justice or Barbarism?

Hasan murdered 13 people and wounded more than 30 others in the 2009 Fort Hood massacre.

The military psychiatrist announced that he had switched sides and sworn allegiance to Al-Qaeda.

He opened fire on fellow American soldiers while shouting “Allahu Akbar” — an act of ideological savagery that left families shattered and a nation struggling to understand how a US soldier could turn his weapon on the people he was supposed to serve.

Staff Sgt Patrick Zeigler, his wife Jennifer, and their son, Liam, enjoy a moment in the sun together outside Fort Hood’s Survivor Outreach Services building while waiting for the verdict in the court-martial of Maj. Nidal Hasan, who was accused of carrying out the 5 November 2009 shooting rampage that killed 13 and wounded 32; 26 August 2009. Zeigler was getting cleared to attend Officer Candidate School when he was shot four times in the incident, including once in the head which necessitated the removal of 20 percent of his brain. Hasan was found guilty less than an hour after this photo was taken and, two days later, he was sentenced to death. (US Army photo by Sgt. Ken Scar, 7th Mobile Public Affairs Detachment)

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said that he wanted to ensure “people are able to watch” the execution because,

“ … people need to understand that there’s serious consequences for these types of things.”

Naturally, the left has accused Hegseth of barbarism.

I disagree.

Hiding every consequence is not proof of moral sophistication.

ISIS Propaganda and State Justice Are Not the Same

Critics also argue that Trump’s America is now no better than ISIS, which infamously filmed and distributed the vision of its murders.

But the comparison is morally illiterate. It mistakes the presence of a camera for the absence of civilisation.

Let me suggest three reasons the left has got this entirely wrong:

First, the purpose is different.

ISIS filmed executions to terrorise civilians, recruit fanatics and advertise its power.

A state broadcasting a lawful execution would be communicating the consequences of a crime, not recruiting people to commit one.

Jeffrey and Sheryll Pearson pause to look at the portrait of their son, Pfc Michael Pearson, before the start of the Fort Hood Purple Heart and Defense of Freedom Medal Ceremony Friday, 10 April, at III Corps Headquarters, Fort Hood, Texas. (US Army photo by Daniel Cernero, III Corps and Fort Hood Public Affairs)

Of course, you can argue that the US is turning Hasan into a martyr by shooting him dead.

I have little sympathy for that argument. Islamists might claim not to fear death, but they do respect strength.

Those who cry that Hasan will become a martyr never seem to worry about the message weakness sends to caliphate wannabes. Why is it that the danger of encouraging terrorists only becomes urgent when someone proposes discouraging them?

Due Process, Accountability and the Message to Terrorists

Second, the process is different.

But wait. The distinction between justice and murder is not erased merely because both involve a dead man.

ISIS murdered captives after sham proceedings, often with sadistic theatricality.

A lawful execution following a 25-year judicial process, with legal rights and accountability, is nothing like what ISIS did.

And finally, the message is different.

ISIS glorified the killer and humiliated the victim.

A public execution, properly presented, would do the opposite.

It would deny the murderer the last word and remind would-be imitators that the state will not simply absorb the blows and issue another statement expressing concern.

When Consequences Become More Controversial Than Crimes

What will be fascinating will be to see how Australia’s eSafety czar responds.

Will she threaten online platforms, demand takedowns or issue another stern lecture about harmful content?

What, precisely, would be the offence, though? Showing a consequence rather than a crime?

The message to America’s enemies, foreign and domestic, should be unmistakable: the US military is an effective and uncompromising fighting force.

It can defend its people, punish those who murder them and refuse to sanitise evil merely because confronting it makes polite society uncomfortable.

Justice need not be cruel. But it should be unmistakable.

And after years of watching institutions agonise over the sensitivities of everyone except the victims, unmistakable consequences are a very welcome change.

___

Republished with thanks to The James Macpherson Report. Image courtesy of John Byerly/Wikimedia Commons.