They pursued the police tenaciously. They called in with tips about the murders. They even postponed scheduled executions in order to try and pierce Chief Charles Moose’s resistant mindset. “Check out Montgomery,” they counseled. When a mere mention of “Montgomery” failed to get Moose’s antlers moving in the right direction, well, they spent a dime on another call, this time providing explicit directions to the Alabama local. Silly snipers; not knowing that homeless Africans are a protected species, they loitered in parking lots in their Chevy Caprice, hoping to get noticed, and all but flagged down a police car. Hell, they even penned their notes in Ebonics.
The serial slayers went beyond the call of duty in trying to get caught; Chief Moose, on the other hand, did his best to adhere to the Look Away Doctrine, now imperiling American lives. When eyewitness reports about dark complexions began to surface, the lachrymose (or should I say lachrymoose) Chief moved quickly to stem them. With his long anti-racial profiling pedigree, Moose refused to unfairly “paint some group,” unless, of course, the group was white. “I’ll talk to the devil himself to keep another person alive,” the Chief promised, but forgot to specify that unless the devil was a lone, can’t-get-laid, loser white male, then he—Chief Moose—would have no truck with him. Moose simply refused to consider that Beelzebub might not be white, and adamantly steered the investigation away from any Black Muslim and in the direction of “white guys with guns.”
Still, people in DC are honking happily for The Moose, and the serial profilers in the media concur. “They were wrong on all counts,” wrote WorldNetDaily’s Paul Sperry: “Number of suspects, physical description and motive.” So, why, for crying out loud, are they still at it? Their textbook abstractions were as colossally stupid as the anchors and producers who solicited these. Yet, no sooner was their folly exposed than the media cognoscenti, confidence unshaken, continued unapologetically to dilate on this or that pop-psychological aspect of the case. Never had the commentators been willing to view the deadly duo’s religious and racial composites as any more than superfluous white noise.
The question remains, how did such an investigation fail to take into consideration the larger geopolitical context? Bill O’Reilly of the Fox News Network was certainly waylaid by political correctness when, following the snipers’ arrest, representatives of the Council on American-Islamic Relations appeared on The Factor. The two men proceeded to aggressively brand any apprehension about Muslims in mainstream communities as an expression of racism. O’Reilly, unfortunately, accepted their rendition.
It’s quite possible that the violence in our midst and abroad is all Honky’s imperial, racist fault. By all means, examine to your heart’s content the school of thought that claims that wherever and whenever the proverbial Noble Savage is restless, it’s a sign that Honky messed with his biorhythms. But for Pete’s sake, separate your theory of culpability from the common cause civilized people must share: preventing the loss of innocent lives.
In so doing, one cannot run from reality. Regardless where one’s sympathies lie, regardless of how one views the cause of Muslim insurrections the world over, one must surely recognize that, for whatever reason, they are at the center of practically every bloody conflict in the world today. Is it possible that Muslims are right and that the “infidels” in Lebanon, Israel, India, Russia, Sudan, Indonesia, The Ivory Coast, Kenya, Nigeria, all deserve to be visited by Jihad? Sure it is. But here on terra firma, the reality remains that Muslims are more prone to beheading reporters, making snuff movies, stoning women or blowing up innocents as they go about their daily chores.
In author Peter Brimelow’s Socratic style, let me further inquire if it’s at all possible that without sniper John Lee Malvo—the murderous muse who allegedly picked off many of the victims—some of the deceased might have had a sporting chance? Is Brimelow wrong when he wryly points out in Alien Nation that criminal aliens “accounted for over 25 percent of the federal prison population in 1993,” and that “they represent its fastest-growing segment”?
Here’s another piece of the puzzle: Whatever your theory about difference in the propensity for crime among racial groups, the fact is that, while “blacks make up only 12 percent of the American population, they make up 64 percent of all violent arrests.” Brimelow and myself might be traitors to the politically correct crowd, but we are faithful to the facts. You must be too; your very survival hinges on it.
In the hunt for a mass murderer, it is rational, not racist, to take into account the higher propensity for crime among certain groups, the combustible larger geopolitical context, and the extent to which high-crime communities have embraced radical ideologies and conflicts. Moose’s investigation left out this context.
©By ILANA MERCER
October 30, 2002