By Brad Miner
On December 3, Nidal Malik Hasan will be executed by firing squad. The execution will take place at the scene of his crimes, the U.S. Army’s Fort Hood base near Killeen, Texas, where on November 5, 2009, Hasan, an Army physician, murdered 13 people and wounded more than 30. There is no doubt about his guilt.
From death row, he wrote to the leader of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, asking to be made a “citizen” of the caliphate, and said he had renounced his U.S. citizenship. Al-Baghdadi died in 2019 when, cornered by U.S. agents, he detonated a suicide vest and killed himself along with two of his own children. Dr. Nidal never married and has no children.
As he attacked his victims, Hasan was heard shouting “Allahu Akbar!” The Army and the Department of Defense initially described the shooting as “workplace violence.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says Hasan’s execution will be livestreamed on the internet. (I use the word “Defense” and not “War” because no legal change has yet been made to the department’s name.)
My view is that, according to Catholic tradition (and despite Pope Francis’s catechetical tweaks), Hasan’s execution is justified. After all:
Whoever sheds the blood of a human being,
by a human being shall that person’s blood be shed;
for in the image of God
did God make humankind. (Genesis 9:6)
And:
Would you have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval; for it is God’s servant for your good. But if you do what is wrong, you should be afraid, for the authority does not bear the sword in vain! It is the servant of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer. (Romans 13:3-4)
No need to belabor the point. Opinions differ on the morality and efficacy of capital punishment. Pope Francis, in his August 2018 revision of the Catechism (nos. 2266/2267), called the death penalty “inadmissible” because it is “an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person.” In a sense, that may be true. That the death penalty enjoyed the Church’s approval for two thousand years is indisputable.
In any case, what concerns me is the “livestreaming” of the “event.” I agree with the estimable Gavin Ashenden that the planned livestream “is undesirable and tragically in poor taste.”
And Vatican Secretary of State Pietro Parolin (at an event honoring St. John Henry Newman) said: “It is truly incomprehensible that anyone would want to use this method in our day. […] Certainly, it is unacceptable to turn death into a spectacle.”
I would add that it is impossible to know what consequences livestreaming an execution will have, except to say they may well be explosive: among the American people and among jihadists.
In Furman v. Georgia (1972), Thurgood Marshall argued that the American people, if fully informed about the execution process, and even more so if they witnessed one, would reject the death penalty. A livestreamed firing squad will test the “Marshall hypothesis” in ways he never imagined. It could even lead to the abolition of executions in the United States, an outcome I suspect “conservatives” like Mr. Hegseth have not considered.
Hasan’s situation is already well known to Islamic extremists, who celebrated his murderous rage and have kept him in mind ever since. I would be surprised if counterterrorism experts had not detected renewed jihadist chatter about retaliation against the Great Satan, and you can be sure that ISIS, Al Qaeda, or Al Shabab will make good use of the livestream of Hasan’s execution, resulting in the deaths of more innocents.
That justice must be done to Nidal Malik Hasan is indisputable; that it need not be accompanied by a dogged craving for publicity, with chest-thumping, should be equally obvious.
When U.S. Special Forces captured and killed Osama bin Laden on May 2, 2011, Al Qaeda vowed revenge on U.S. soil. That never happened. But they did retaliate… in Pakistan:
On May 13, 2011, two suicide bombers attacked a Frontier Corps training center in Charsadda and killed about 80 people, mostly young recruits. The Pakistani Taliban explicitly claimed it as revenge for bin Laden.
On May 22, 2011, militants stormed the PNS Mehran naval air base in Karachi in a prolonged siege that destroyed aircraft and killed at least ten security personnel. It, too, was claimed as revenge.
We should not assume that the jihadist response to Hasan’s public execution will be distant, nor should we be indifferent to the suffering it will cause, wherever it occurs. And it will occur.
It seems to me that the United States handled bin Laden’s death the right way. His execution was carried out in great secrecy and is regarded as a legitimate attack on an enemy commander. In other words, a justifiable act of war. The Obama administration buried him at sea and refused to release photos of the corpse. President Obama publicly stated that he did not want the images used for incitement or propaganda.
How many boys will watch the livestream of Hasan’s execution? Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who heads the Archdiocese for the Military Services, put it precisely:
Can the harm of exposing the young and impressionable to a livestream be repaired in the year of the 250th anniversary of our independence? The U.S. Armed Forces generally enjoy a good reputation in the world. Does it really have any value to put them in the same category as terrorists by broadcasting to the entire world the image of a man being executed in a wheelchair? Does this decision reflect the dignity of the human person?
The current administration has tended to engage in impulsive displays of strength because it seems to believe that Americans have gone “soft.” I do not believe we are soft. Do you?
Above all, I believe the American people want sensible government, and the sensible measure to do justice to Hasan should be a swift, private execution, followed by a terse statement: “Today the United States executed Nidal Malik Hasan for the premeditated murder of thirteen people on November 5, 2009. No further information will be released, including the disposition of his remains.”
About the Author
Brad Miner is senior editor of The Catholic Thing and senior fellow at the Faith & Reason Institute. A former literary editor of National Review, he had a long career in the publishing industry. His books include Sons of St. Patrick, written with George J. Marlin, and his bestseller The Compleat Gentleman, also available in audio format (read by Bob Souer). Mr. Miner has served on the board of Aid to the Church in Need USA.