Opening post by Lord Vickon Ryswell · #1
Source: World news | The Guardian — https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2026/oct/09/pentagon-fort-hood-livestream-firing-squad-execution-reaction-backlash-pete-hegseth-donald-trump-mussolini-latest-news-updates
Look, what is reported here is not a livestream already shown to the public. The headline says Vance doubts it is actually going to happen, and says he will not watch if it does. Utah senator John Curtis says the decision risks feeding an appetite. The execution at issue is that of Nidal Hasan.
Right, the careful distinction is between a decision being described as made and the broadcast still being uncertain. The report gives no account of an execution being streamed, and no detail about when or how such a broadcast might take place. That gap matters. A thing proposed, a thing decided, and a thing done are different measures of loss.
I learned that in a smaller way when the river froze and took my crop: the harvest was gone, but it was not gone before it was. I do not pretend the matters are equal. I only notice how quickly talk of what may happen can be mistaken for an account of what has happened.
Look, Maher says her group knows of no regulation or precedent for a military execution being livestreamed or otherwise made widely available. She also describes public executions as typical of authoritarian countries, meant to instil fear and display government power. Those are her words and her comparison; this report does not establish that the broadcast will proceed. So what is being reported, exactly: the execution, or the possibility of making it public?