By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
WASHINGTON — Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula threatened Monday, Oct. 12, to execute American captives if the United States carries out the scheduled death sentence of Nidal Malik Hasan, the former Army psychiatrist convicted of killing 13 people and wounding 32 others during a 2009 shooting at Fort Hood, Texas.
The warning comes less than a week after the Army formally scheduled Hasan’s execution by firing squad for Dec. 3, following President Donald Trump’s approval of the death sentence. It also follows an earlier message from an al-Qaida supporter in Yemen suggesting that Hasan’s execution could provoke attacks against American military personnel and the hijacking of U.S. commercial aircraft.
In a statement released Monday, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, commonly known as AQAP, warned that American citizens taken hostage by the terrorist organization could face execution in retaliation for Hasan’s death.
“The day America makes this decision,” the organization said, “it will have made a decision to execute whoever among you falls captive to us.”
The threat was first reported Monday by the Washington Examiner, which identified the statement as coming from AQAP, the Yemen-based branch of the international terrorist network.
The organization also expressed support for Hasan and referenced an Omani attacker involved in an unsuccessful attempt to strike Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport earlier this month. The statement sought to connect Hasan’s approaching execution with the group’s broader campaign against the United States and its allies.
The warnings have introduced additional security concerns surrounding an execution that has already generated controversy over the Trump administration’s proposal to broadcast the event publicly. Although the statements contain explicit threats, authorities have not publicly identified a corresponding operational plan or evidence establishing that an attack against American citizens or aircraft is imminent.
The latest message followed an earlier online warning documented by the Middle East Media Research Institute, an organization that monitors extremist communications and translates material published in foreign languages.
In an Oct. 7 report from its Jihad and Terrorism Threat Monitor, MEMRI described a Telegram message attributed to an al-Qaida supporter based in Yemen who suggested that executing Hasan could lead to the “hijacking of American planes and the killing of American soldiers.”
The supporter cited a March 2010 statement by Osama bin Laden, the former al-Qaida leader killed by American forces in Pakistan in May 2011. In that earlier warning, bin Laden threatened retaliation against American military personnel if the United States executed certain al-Qaida prisoners, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the accused principal architect of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
The Homeland Security Today account of the extremist message described the post as a warning rather than evidence of a confirmed operation. The distinction is important because supporters of terrorist organizations frequently use online communications to encourage violence or amplify threats without demonstrating the capability to carry them out.
AQAP’s subsequent statement Monday was more direct, threatening the lives of Americans who might fall into the organization’s custody. The group has a history of supporting international terrorist plots and remains a designated foreign terrorist organization under U.S. law.
The threats are tied to the approaching execution of Hasan, whose attack at Fort Hood on Nov. 5, 2009, remains one of the deadliest mass shootings at an American military installation.
Hasan, then an Army major working as a psychiatrist, opened fire inside the Soldier Readiness Processing Center, where military personnel were preparing for deployment and receiving medical services. Thirteen people were killed, including 12 soldiers and one civilian employee, while 32 others were wounded.
Hasan was shot by responding police officers and left paralyzed from the waist down. He subsequently faced a military court-martial involving 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder.
During the proceedings, Hasan acknowledged carrying out the shooting and represented himself after dismissing his defense attorneys. He described his actions in ideological terms, claiming that he believed he was acting in defense of Muslims against American military operations overseas.
A military jury convicted Hasan in August 2013 and sentenced him to death. His conviction and sentence subsequently underwent years of appellate review before the military justice system concluded its review process.
Before the attack, Hasan had communicated with Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born extremist cleric associated with al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. Al-Awlaki became a prominent English-language propagandist for the organization and encouraged violence against the United States before he was killed in an American drone strike in Yemen in 2011.
Those communications became an important part of investigations into Hasan’s radicalization and the circumstances preceding the Fort Hood shooting.
The planned execution follows a formal decision by Trump earlier this month.
According to the U.S. Army’s Oct. 7 announcement, the president approved Hasan’s death sentence on Oct. 2. Acting Army Secretary Adam Telle subsequently directed that the execution take place Dec. 3 at 1 p.m. Central time at Fort Hood, using a firing squad.
Under military law, the president must approve a death sentence before it can be carried out. The Army said the presidential approval followed completion of the military appellate process, including the Supreme Court’s March 31, 2025, decision declining to review Hasan’s conviction.
The execution would mark the first carried out by the U.S. military since 1961 and the first military execution by firing squad since World War II.
Despite the scheduled date, legal proceedings could still affect whether the execution takes place as planned. Hasan retains the ability to seek federal civilian court review, which could result in additional litigation and a postponement.
The Death Penalty Information Center’s examination of the case notes that further legal challenges remain possible even after the military appeals process has concluded.
The method of execution and the administration’s intention to broadcast it have become separate sources of controversy.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has publicly supported making the execution available for viewing, arguing that the punishment should demonstrate the consequences of committing a mass killing against American service members.
The Pentagon confirmed last week that preparations were underway for a livestream of the execution, although officials have not publicly identified the platform that would carry the broadcast or provided complete details about how access would be managed.
A War Department official reiterated the administration’s announced plan Monday.
“The secretary is correct. It will be livestreamed. Details will follow,” the official told the Washington Examiner.
However, Trump subsequently indicated that he had not made a final decision on whether the execution should be publicly broadcast, introducing uncertainty about the administration’s ultimate plans.
“There are two thoughts: Don’t show it and show it,” Trump told reporters Saturday.
The president suggested that publicizing the punishment could discourage future attacks but said he would make the final determination about the broadcast.
The difference between the Pentagon’s announcement and Trump’s remarks has left the status of the livestream unresolved, even as the military continues preparing for the scheduled execution.
The Associated Press reported that Pentagon officials had confirmed plans for a livestream, while subsequent statements from the president indicated that he was still considering the issue.
The proposal has drawn criticism from lawmakers, religious leaders and relatives of victims who question whether broadcasting the execution would serve a legitimate public purpose.
Some opponents have warned that a public broadcast could be exploited by terrorist organizations seeking propaganda material or attempting to portray Hasan as a martyr.
Others have argued that the families of those killed at Fort Hood should not be subjected to an international spectacle surrounding the person responsible for their relatives’ deaths.
Those concerns have become more prominent following AQAP’s explicit threat of retaliation.
The organization has attempted to portray Hasan as a figure deserving support, a position that reflects its extremist ideology rather than any legal justification for his actions.
The conviction against Hasan was based on evidence presented during military judicial proceedings, and the approaching execution follows the sentence imposed by the court-martial.
The terrorist group’s statements do not alter the legal basis for the conviction or establish grounds for threatening unrelated American citizens.
The Associated Press also reported criticism from the Catholic Church’s military archbishop, who questioned both the use of a firing squad and the potential public broadcasting of the execution.
Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who oversees Catholic ministry to American military personnel, urged Catholic soldiers who might be assigned to an execution team to seek exemption from participating.
Broglio’s position reflects the Catholic Church’s opposition to capital punishment, while his comments about the proposed livestream raised additional questions about the dignity of the proceedings and their potential effects on the military’s international reputation.
Relatives of Fort Hood victims have also expressed differing views.
Some have welcomed the prospect of Hasan’s sentence finally being carried out after years of appeals, viewing it as the completion of a lengthy legal process. Others have questioned whether a public broadcast would provide closure or instead direct additional attention toward the convicted killer.
According to People’s reporting on victims’ families, Keely Vanacker, whose father, civilian employee Michael Grant Cahill, was killed in the attack, opposed turning the execution into a public event.
Her concerns centered on the emotional effects of the broadcast and the possibility that public attention would focus more heavily on Hasan than on the people he killed and the families affected by the shooting.
The debate has also expanded beyond the United States.
Australian officials and lawmakers have raised concerns that a livestream could appear on major social media platforms, potentially exposing children and other viewers to graphic footage.
The Guardian reported Monday on objections from Australian political figures, including calls for technology companies to prevent the broadcast from reaching audiences in Australia.
Those reactions underscore the unusual circumstances surrounding the planned execution, which would combine a rarely used military punishment with the possibility of worldwide distribution through digital platforms.
The newly reported al-Qaida threats add a national security concern to the debate over how the execution should be conducted.
AQAP has previously been linked to attempts to attack international aviation and American interests, making threats involving aircraft and military personnel particularly sensitive.
However, extremist statements must be distinguished from verified intelligence about operational capabilities or imminent attacks. Public warnings can be intended to intimidate governments, attract supporters or influence political decisions without necessarily indicating that a specific attack has been organized.
The available reporting does not identify a planned airline hijacking, a specific American hostage currently facing execution or an operational timetable associated with the organization’s latest message.
Federal authorities have not publicly announced that the threats require changes to the Dec. 3 execution schedule.
For the military, the immediate responsibility remains carrying out the sentence in accordance with applicable law while addressing legal challenges and security considerations.
For the administration, the controversy has created competing questions about deterrence, transparency and the potential consequences of broadcasting an execution involving a convicted attacker associated with extremist ideology.
Hegseth has maintained that a public execution would demonstrate accountability for Hasan’s crimes, while Trump has said he will ultimately decide whether the event should be shown.
The new threats could become part of that consideration, although there has been no public indication that the president has changed his position in response to AQAP’s statement.
Hasan remains scheduled for execution Dec. 3 at Fort Hood, where the 2009 shooting killed 13 people and permanently affected dozens of surviving victims and their families.
The terrorist organization threatening retaliation has not provided evidence of an imminent operation, and the warnings remain statements of intent rather than confirmed preparations for an attack.
Nevertheless, the threats illustrate how extremist groups continue invoking the Fort Hood massacre more than 16 years later, using Hasan’s approaching execution to threaten American citizens and military personnel while the Trump administration determines whether the punishment will be carried out before a worldwide audience.
Original article
Comments