US to livestream Fort Hood shooter’s execution: Is that legal?

The Pentagon's plan to livestream the execution of Nidal Hasan, the former army psychiatrist who killed 13 people at Fort Hood, has sparked intense political backlash in the United States. Lawmakers from all sides have condemned the decision, branding it "disturbing" and comparing it to the tactics of terror groups. Critics argue that public executions are a medieval practice that America has long since rejected, and that streaming a man's death for entertainment is unbecoming of the U.S. military.

The controversy has even spilled over into political debates, with some politicians accusing the Pentagon of pandering to radical Islamists by making Hasan's execution a spectacle. However, supporters of the plan maintain that publicizing the execution is necessary to send a clear message that such heinous crimes will not be tolerated, and that viewers need to understand the consequences of terrorist attacks.

Regardless of one's stance on the death penalty, there is widespread agreement that public executions are incompatible with American values. The U.S. has not conducted a public execution since 1936, and the last firing squad execution in the military was during World War II. The decision to livestream Hasan's execution is seen as a step backwards, one that could potentially glorify violence and set a dangerous precedent.

The Pentagon faces intense pressure to reverse its decision, with calls for Secretary of Defense to step in and halt the plan. The military's leadership must now grapple with the fallout from this controversial move, as it risks alienating both supporters and opponents of the death penalty, and raising uncomfortable questions about the role of the U.S. military in executing criminals.