------------------------- Via Workers World News Service Reprinted from the Nov. 14, 2002 issue of Workers World newspaper -------------------------
"BELTWAY SNIPER" CASE: MEDIA TRY NOT TO EMBARRASS PENTAGON By Pam Parker Washington, D.C. As the U.S. government prepares to go to war yet again, the question on many people's minds about the "Beltway Sniper" case is still not being asked by the media. Are the 10 people killed in the Washington, D.C., area delayed "collateral damage" from the last Gulf War? John Muhammad cleared land mines and qualified as an expert with the M-16 rifle while serving in the Gulf War before being honorably discharged in 1994. The person arrested with him and also charged with murder in the case, 17-year-old John Lee Malvo, emigrated to the United States from Jamaica. He was undocumented and homeless. Six out of the 10 murders occurred in Montgomery County, Md., an affluent suburb of Washington, D.C. Nearly four times as many murders occurred in D.C. proper during this same three-week period, but were given very little attention. Muhammad's conversion to Islam is offered as an explanation for his "hatred of America," and Malvo's immigrant status has been used to justify the racist policies of the INS against other immigrants. As usual, the accused have already been tried and convicted in the media. Meanwhile, very little attention has been paid to the fact that, over the past 50 years, the vast majority of serial killers and domestic snipers have been veterans of the U.S. military. IGNORING THE OBVIOUS Although there was endless speculation about the psychological makeup of the shooter(s), for weeks most "experts" stayed away from making the obvious connection between sniper training and the armed forces or the police. Some actually offered the view that similar training could be acquired over the Internet or by playing video games. Many working class youth join the military to acquire marketable skills or for other economic security. In exchange they sign away their freedom and are many times forced to slaughter working people of other countries--who have much in common with them. So how does the Pentagon turn young people into killers? According to an article in the Oct. 25 Toronto Globe and Mail, David Grossman, a former U.S. military psychologist, says that soldiers are taught to remove themselves from human suffering by a process called "disengagement." This process breaks down the natural human aversion to kill. The military increased these training tactics in reaction to soldiers' hesitancy to kill when commanded. The military implemented this training specifically to increase the "trigger pull ratio." This training is specifically tailored for infantry soldiers, snipers and other military personnel who may have to kill people up close. Serial killings were all but unheard of 50 years ago. Could it be a coincidence that this tactic of "disengagement" appeared at about the same time? A sampling of the most notable snipers shows a clear connection between military training and the propensity to take innocent lives. Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, and Robert Flores, a 41-year-old nursing student who recently opened fire on several professors and classmates before killing himself in Tucson, Ariz., were both Gulf War veterans, like John Muhammad. During a six-week period this summer, four special forces soldiers returning from the war in Afghanistan brutally murdered their spouses. Two also killed themselves. Jeffrey Dahmer; David Berkowitz--dubbed by the press the Son of Sam--and Charles Whitman, who killed 16 people and injured 31 others in a 1961 sniper shooting rampage from the top of a tower in Austin, Tex., were all military veterans. In fact, the very first documented serial killer, Howard Unruh, was a 28-year-old veteran of WW II who shot 13 of his New Jersey neighbors in 1949. However, connections like these were ignored by the media in favor of racist stereotypes regarding Muslims. Racism is also the undercurrent of the breakneck "rush to justice." So far Maryland, Alabama, Virginia, Louisiana and the federal government are battling over who should try Muhammad and Malvo. The issue is not which jurisdiction was most affected, but which is most likely to impose a swift death sentence. If the decision were based solely on which community was most affected, Maryland would be the obvious choice. The other authorities, however, argue that since Maryland implemented a moratorium on death sentences and has "liberal" appellate court judges who have only imposed three death sentences since 1976, the state is an unacceptable choice. Maryland Attorney General Douglas Gansler counters that Maryland will indeed seek the death penalty in Muhammad's case, even though he's unable to sentence the juvenile Malvo to death. Forget the fact that current Maryland law says that even if the moratorium is lifted, the death penalty may apply only to multiple murder cases committed at one time. The state of Virginia offers new "anti-terrorism" laws that enable the state to seek the death penalty for juveniles. It also holds anyone related to a capital offense culpable. It promises that even if it is shown that Malvo did not pull the trigger and he is a juvenile, these factors would not save him in Virginia. U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft, while leveling 20 federal charges against Muhammad, left no doubt as to his motivations: "I believe that the ultimate sanction should be available here." Forget the fact that murders are generally tried under state laws. Whatever happened to "states' rights"? Wasn't that the cornerstone of right-wing rhetoric for years? No matter. Prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney's Office invoked the Hobbs Act as a way to subject the pair to the federal death penalty. The Hobbs Act states that it is a crime to "obstruct, delay or affect" interstate commerce through robbery or extortion. The U.S. prosecutor is attempting to use the accusation that the two asked for $10 million as justification for the charge. The federal government was allegedly so anxious to try the case that a federal agent interrupted an interrogation by county prosecutors and whisked Muhammad off to Baltimore. Which raises another question: Were these investigators getting Muhammad to talk about his motive for the shootings? And might that be embarrassing to the military? - END - (Copyright Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but changing it is not allowed. For more information contact Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] Support the voice of resistance http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php) ------------------ This message is sent to you by Workers World News Service. To subscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
