Maryland Plans to Charge Muhammad, Malvo With 6
Murders Wires
Saturday, Oct. 26, 2002 

ROCKVILLE, Md. Maryland will be the first state to file first-degree
murder charges against two men suspected of killing 10 people and
wounding three others in a three-week sniper shooting rampage that
terrorized the Washington area.

"As a group, the prosecutors involved in the investigation remain united
in the cause to ensure that justice is served, that these men are held
accountable for the acts they allegedly committed," Montgomery
County State's Attorney Douglas L. Gansler said Friday.

Prosecutors in Maryland are expected to file six counts of first-degree
murder against John Allen Muhammad, 41, and John Lee Malvo, 17,
who are both being held in federal custody in Baltimore. Muhammad
and Malvo were arrested early Thursday. 

Later Thursday they were taken to Baltimore, where Malvo was
arraigned in U.S. District Court as a material witness to the sniper
shootings. Muhammad, an Operation Desert Storm veteran, was
charged with federal firearms violations. Federal officials refused to
name Malvo because of his age, but other agencies had made his
name public. 

Gansler said prosecutors would seek the death penalty against
Muhammad. They are unable to seek the death penalty against Malvo
because he is a juvenile.

Gansler made the announcement from the front steps of the
Montgomery County Circuit Court after a meeting with prosecutors
from counties in Virginia and the District of Columbia where some of
the killings took place. Gansler said trying the case first in Maryland
made sense because Montgomery County was the community "most
affected and most impacted by the shootings." Six of the 10 homicides
occurred in Montgomery County, with four deaths on Oct. 3 occurring
within less than a two-hour time span. 

"The case began, ended and was centered in Montgomery County,"
Gansler said.

Alabama Files Murder Charges

Alabama police officials filed murder charges Friday against
Muhammad in the case of a liquor store shooting that left one woman
dead and another seriously injured. Officials there said they would seek
the death penalty. 

Montgomery, Ala., Chief of Police John Wilson said two women were
shot with a pistol just after closing the store for the evening. One
woman, Claudine Parker, 52, died and Kellie Adams, 24, was seriously
wounded, the chief said. Wilson said one of his officers positively
identified Muhammad as the assailant found standing over the body of
the slain store employee. 

Laws differ among the jurisdictions regarding the death penalty.
Maryland, Virginia and Alabama have the death penalty, but the District
of Columbia does not. If convicted, Malvo would not face the death
penalty in Maryland because it does not execute juveniles. Upon
conviction, he would be eligible for the death penalty in Virginia and

Maryland: We're Too Liberal to Execute Malvo

"Obviously we have different views in Maryland and Virginia on whether
to apply the death penalty to a juvenile. We don't feel the death penalty
is appropriate for juveniles," said Gansler.

"Virginia has executed 86 people since capital punishment was
reinstated in the United States in 1976 - more than any state but Texas.
In the same period, Alabama has executed 23. Maryland has put just
three people to death, and all executions have been suspended under a
moratorium imposed in May by Gov. Parris Glendening," Fox News
Channel reported.

Glendening said Friday he expected that his ban would be lifted by the
time the sniper case was over. 

Federal officials who are holding both men have not yet decided
whether they would pursue charges against them. If they do, federal
charges would supersede those filed by local jurisdictions. 

Mohammad and Malvo are set to appear in federal court Tuesday. 

Copyright 2002 by United Press International.

All rights reserved. 

Back to Main News Page


Two Men Arrested in Sniper Case 

NewsMax Wires, NewsMax Staff
Thursday, Oct. 24, 2002 

WASHINGTON -- Police arrested two men in connection with the
Washington area serial sniper investigation at a Maryland rest stop,
authorities said early Thursday. 

Maryland State Police arrested John Allen Muhammad and his stepson,
John Lee Malvo, both sought for questioning in relation to the shootings
that have left 10 people dead and three others wounded since Oct. 2. 

Although the official word is that the men are only "persons of interest,"
a report in the Associated Press early this morning cites a law
enforcement source close to the investigation as saying, "I'm confident
that these are indeed the people" sought in the killings. 

"The evidence is all there and because of things we've received in the
communications," the AP source said. "It fits together with evidence
they've collected in the last couple days." 

Federal sources reportedly revealed to the Seattle Times that
Muhammad and Malvo may have voiced anti-American sentiments
after the Sept. 11 attacks. Included in the Times report is a mention that
both men had a reputation of being sympathetic towards the men who
hijacked jetliners over Washington, New York and Pennsylvania.

The two men were spotted shortly before 3:30 a.m. ET while they were
sleeping in a car that matched a police description at a rest stop off I-70
in Frederick County, Md. 

They were arrested after police had closed off a seven-mile stretch of
the highway. A motorist and a rest stop attendant recognized the car
described late Wednesday by Montgomery County Police Chief
Charles Moose, a blue 1990 Chevrolet Caprice with New Jersey
license plates, and alerted authorities. 

"They were taken into custody without incident," Maj. Greg Shipley of
the Maryland State Police said. "No resistance." He said authorities
were seeking a search warrant to examine the automobile. 

Police issued a federal arrest warrant late Wednesday for Muhammad,
also known as John Allen Williams, on federal firearms violations. 

Police said late Wednesday he should be considered "armed and
dangerous." But they emphasized that no one should assume
Muhammad is involved with the sniper shootings.

'Pertinent Information 

Muhammad "may have information pertinent to our investigation,"
Moose told reporters. Moose also said Muhammad was traveling with a

The chief did not elaborate on the minor, but law enforcement sources
identified him as Malvo, 17, a Jamaican citizen. 

Moose then directed another message to the sniper linked to the
attacks that have killed 10 people over the past three weeks. 

"You have indicated you want us to say and do certain things," he said,
reading from a drafted message.

"You've asked us to say 'we have caught the sniper like a duck in a
noose.' We understand hearing us say this is important to you." 

"However, we want you to know how difficult it has been to understand
what you want because you have chosen to use only notes, indirect
messages and calls to other jurisdictions," Moose added. "Let's talk
directly. We are waiting for you to contact us."

Links to Tacoma, Wa. and Montgomery, Ala. 

FBI agents served a warrant earlier Wednesday in Tacoma, Wash., at
the request of the D.C.-area task force investigating the sniper attacks. 

The source said that the search of a back yard in Tacoma was based
on "evidence that could lead to a clue that investigators hope could lead
to another clue." Muhammad served at Fort Lewis, Wash., an Army
base near Tacoma. 

The residence was once occupied by a soldier stationed at Fort Lewis,
but law enforcement has yet to determine if the former occupant lived
in or near the Washington, D.C., metro area, the source said.

In a linked development in Montgomery, Ala., Mayor Bobby Bright said a
caller to the sniper investigation tip line apparently claimed
responsibility for the sniper shootings and a shooting in Montgomery
Sept. 21. where one woman was killed and another wounded. 

The Baltimore Sun reported that police found a piece of paper at the
scene of the Alabama shooting that bore Malvo's fingerprints. Police
subsequently traced Malvo to the Tacoma home, where he had been
living with Williams, the Sun reported. 

The back yard was divided into grids, and FBI agents and officials from
the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms swept metal detectors
over the ground, searching for shell casings. Crews also sawed off a
large tree trunk and carried it away for analysis. The stump was sent to
Washington, D.C., to see if bullets from target practice were lodged in
the wood. 

An FBI Seattle spokeswoman told reporters at the scene that the
search was done with the consent of the property owner. 

Authorities Wednesday connected the death of bus driver Conrad
Johnson, 35, to the string of shootings in which a sniper has killed 10
people and wounded three others in Maryland, Virginia and

The first shooting - about 5:20 p.m., Oct. 2 - linked to the sniper, went
through a crafts store window but didn't injure anyone. 

Johnson was shot as he stood on the top step of his Montgomery
County bus. He was at an area drivers often use to do routine
paperwork. He was pronounced dead at a hospital several hours after
the 5:50 a.m. shooting. 

The sniper has been blamed for five shootings - including four deaths -
within a mile of Tuesday's incident. Two other attacks have occurred a
few miles south of the site and another just inside the District of
Columbia border from Maryland. Another attack in Maryland resulted in
the wounding of a 13-year-old boy outside a school on Oct. 7. 

There have been five assaults in Virginia. In addition to the wounding of
the man in Ashland, a woman in Spotsylvania was also wounded but
survived while two men and a woman were killed.

Copyright 2002 by United Press International.

All rights reserved.

Back to Main News Page


> >

(Bookman is the deputy editorial page editor of The Atlanta
> Journal-Constitution)
The official story on Iraq has never made sense. The connection that the
> Bush administration has tried to draw between Iraq and al-Qaida has
> always seemed contrived and artificial. In fact, it was hard to
> that smart people in the Bush administration would start a major war
> based on such flimsy evidence.
> The pieces just didn't fit. Something else had to be going on;
> was missing.
> In recent days, those missing pieces have finally begun to fall into
> place. As it turns out, this is not really about Iraq. It is not 
> weapons of mass destruction, or terrorism, or Saddam, or U.N.
> resolutions.
> This war, should it come, is intended to mark the official
emergence of
> the United States as a full-fledged global empire, seizing sole
> responsibility and authority as planetary policeman. It would be the
> culmination of a plan 10 years or more in the making, carried out by
> those who believe the United States must seize the opportunity for
> global domination, even if it means becoming the "American
> that our enemies always claimed we were.
> Once that is understood, other mysteries solve themselves. For
> why does the administration seem unconcerned about an exit strategy
> Iraq once Saddam is toppled?
> Because we won't be leaving. Having conquered Iraq, the United States
> will create permanent military bases in that country from which to
> dominate the Middle East, including neighboring Iran.
> In an interview Friday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld brushed
> that suggestion, noting that the United States does not covet other
> nations' territory. That may be true, but 57 years after World War II
> ended, we still have major bases in Germany and Japan. We will do the
> same in Iraq.
> And why has the administration dismissed the option of containing and
> deterring Iraq, as we had the Soviet Union for 45 years? Because
even if
> it worked, containment and deterrence would not allow the expansion 
> American power. Besides, they are beneath us as an empire. Rome
did not
> stoop to containment; it conquered. And so should we.
> Among the architects of this would-be American Empire are a group of
> brilliant and powerful people who now hold key positions in the Bush
> administration: They envision the creation and enforcement of what
> call a worldwide "Pax Americana," or American peace. But so far, the
> American people have not appreciated the true extent of that 
> Part of it's laid out in the National Security Strategy, a document 
> which each administration outlines its approach to defending the
> country. The Bush administration plan, released Sept. 20, marks a
> significant departure from previous approaches, a change that it
> attributes largely to the attacks of Sept. 11.
> To address the terrorism threat, the president's report lays out a
> aggressive military and foreign policy, embracing pre-emptive attack
> against perceived enemies. It speaks in blunt terms of what it calls
> "American internationalism," of ignoring international opinion if 
> suits U.S. interests. "The best defense is a good offense," the
> asserts.
> It dismisses deterrence as a Cold War relic and instead talks of
> "convincing or compelling states to accept their sovereign
> responsibilities."
> In essence, it lays out a plan for permanent U.S. military and
> domination of every region on the globe, unfettered by international
> treaty or concern. And to make that plan a reality, it envisions a
> expansion of our global military presence.
> "The United States will require bases and stations within and beyond
> Western Europe and Northeast Asia," the document warns, "as well as
> temporary access arrangements for the long-distance deployment of 
> troops."
> The report's repeated references to terrorism are misleading, 
> because the approach of the new National Security Strategy was 
> not inspired by the events of Sept. 11. They can be found in much the
> same language in a report issued in September 2000 by the Project for
> the New American Century, a group of conservative interventionists
> outraged by the thought that the United States might be forfeiting 
> chance at a global empire.
> "At no time in history has the international security order been as
> conducive to American interests and ideals," the report said.
stated two
> years ago. "The challenge of this coming century is to preserve and
> enhance this 'American peace.' "
> Familiar themes
> Overall, that 2000 report reads like a blueprint for current Bush
> defense policy. Most of what it advocates, the Bush administration 
> tried to accomplish. For example, the project report urged the
> repudiation of the anti-ballistic missile treaty and a commitment to 
> global missile defense system. The administration has taken that
> It recommended that to project sufficient power worldwide to
enforce Pax
> Americana, the United States would have to increase defense spending
> from 3 percent of gross domestic product to as much as 3.8
percent. For
> next year, the Bush administration has requested a defense budget of
> $379 billion, almost exactly 3.8 percent of GDP.
> It advocates the "transformation" of the U.S. military to meet its
> expanded obligations, including the cancellation of such outmoded
> defense programs as the Crusader artillery system. That's exactly the
> message being preached by Rumsfeld and others.
> It urges the development of small nuclear warheads "required in
> targeting the very deep, underground hardened bunkers that are being
> built by many of our potential adversaries." This year the GOP-led
> House gave the Pentagon the green light to develop such a weapon,
> the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, while the Senate has so far
> That close tracking of recommendation with current policy is hardly
> surprising, given the current positions of the people who
contributed to
> the 2000 report.
> Paul Wolfowitz is now deputy defense secretary. John Bolton is
> undersecretary of state. Stephen Cambone is head of the Pentagon's
> Office of Program, Analysis and Evaluation. Eliot Cohen and Devon
> are members of the Defense Policy Board, which advises Rumsfeld. I.
> Lewis Libby is chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney. Dov
> is comptroller for the Defense Department.
> 'Constabulary duties'
> Because they were still just private citizens in 2000, the authors of
> the project report could be more frank and less diplomatic than they
> were in drafting the National Security Strategy. Back in 2000, they
> clearly identified Iran, Iraq and North Korea as primary short-term
> targets, well before President Bush tagged them as the Axis of
Evil. In
> their report, they criticize the fact that in war planning against
> Korea and Iraq, "past Pentagon wargames have given little or no
> consideration to the force requirements necessary not only to
defeat an
> attack but to remove these regimes from power."
> To preserve the Pax Americana, the report says U.S. forces will be
> required to perform "constabulary duties" -- the United States
acting as
> policeman of the world -- and says that such actions "demand American
> political leadership rather than that of the United Nations."
> To meet those responsibilities, and to ensure that no country dares 
> challenge the United States, the report advocates a much larger
> presence spread over more of the globe, in addition to the roughly 
> nations in which U.S. troops are already deployed.
> More specifically, they argue that we need permanent military bases 
> the Middle East, in Southeast Europe, in Latin America and in
> Asia, where no such bases now exist. That helps to explain another of
> the mysteries of our post-Sept. 11 reaction, in which the Bush
> administration rushed to install U.S. troops in Georgia and the
> Philippines, as well as our eagerness to send military advisers to
> assist in the civil war in Colombia.
> The 2000 report directly acknowledges its debt to a still earlier
> document, drafted in 1992 by the Defense Department. That document 
> also envisioned the United States as a colossus astride the world,
> imposing its will and keeping world peace through military and
> power. When leaked in final draft form, however, the proposal drew so
> much criticism that it was hastily withdrawn and repudiated by the
> President Bush.
> Effect on allies
> The defense secretary in 1992 was Richard Cheney; the document was
> drafted by Wolfowitz, who at the time was defense undersecretary for
> The potential implications of a Pax Americana are immense.
> One is the effect on our allies. Once we assert the unilateral
right to
> act as the world's policeman, our allies will quickly recede into the
> background. Eventually, we will be forced to spend American wealth 
> American blood protecting the peace while other nations redirect 
> wealth to such things as health care for their citizenry.
> Donald Kagan, a professor of classical Greek history at Yale and an
> influential advocate of a more aggressive foreign policy -- he
served as
> co-chairman of the 2000 New Century project -- acknowledges that
> "If [our allies] want a free ride, and they probably will, we can't
> that," he says. But he also argues that the United States, given its
> unique position, has no choice but to act anyway.
> "You saw the movie 'High Noon'? he asks. "We're Gary Cooper."
> Accepting the Cooper role would be an historic change in who we are
as a
> nation, and in how we operate in the international arena. Candidate
> certainly did not campaign on such a change. It is not something
that he
> or others have dared to discuss honestly with the American people. To
> the contrary, in his foreign policy debate with Al Gore, Bush
> advocated a more humble foreign policy, a position calculated to
> to voters leery of military intervention.
> For the same reason, Kagan and others shy away from terms such as
> empire, understanding its connotations. But they also argue that it
> would be naive and dangerous to reject the role that history has
> upon us. Kagan, for example, willingly embraces the idea that the
> States would establish permanent military bases in a post-war Iraq.
> "I think that's highly possible," he says. "We will probably need a
> major concentration of forces in the Middle East over a long period 
> time. That will come at a price, but think of the price of not having
> it. When we have economic problems, it's been caused by disruptions 
> our oil supply. If we have a force in Iraq, there will be no
> in oil supplies."
> Costly global commitment
> Rumsfeld and Kagan believe that a successful war against Iraq will
> produce other benefits, such as serving an object lesson for nations
> such as Iran and Syria. Rumsfeld, as befits his sensitive position,
> it rather gently. If a regime change were to take place in Iraq, 
> nations pursuing weapons of mass destruction "would get the message
> having them . . . is attracting attention that is not favorable and 
> not helpful," he says.
> Kagan is more blunt.
> "People worry a lot about how the Arab street is going to react," he
> notes. "Well, I see that the Arab street has gotten very, very quiet
> since we started blowing things up."
> The cost of such a global commitment would be enormous. In 2000, we
> spent $281 billion on our military, which was more than the next 11
> nations combined. By 2003, our expenditures will have risen to $378
> billion. In other words, the increase in our defense budget from
> 1999-2003 will be more than the total amount spent annually by China,
> our next largest competitor.
> The lure of empire is ancient and powerful, and over the millennia it
> has driven men to commit terrible crimes on its behalf. But with
the end
> of the Cold War and the disappearance of the Soviet Union, a global
> empire was essentially laid at the feet of the United States. To the
> chagrin of some, we did not seize it at the time, in large part
> the American people have never been comfortable with themselves as
a New
> Rome.
> Now, more than a decade later, the events of Sept. 11 have given 
> advocates of empire a new opportunity to press their case with a new
> president. So in debating whether to invade Iraq, we are really
> the role that the United States will play in the years and decades to
> Are peace and security best achieved by seeking strong alliances and
> international consensus, led by the United States? Or is it
necessary to
> take a more unilateral approach, accepting and enhancing the global
> dominance that, according to some, history has thrust upon us?
> If we do decide to seize empire, we should make that decision
> as a democracy. The price of maintaining an empire is always high.
> and others argue that the price of rejecting it would be higher 
> That's what this is about.

> The document the article refers to is available through:
> It's a 90 page PDF document:
> Defenses.pdf.http/

Back to Main News Page