The shooting set off rumors among Khallid’s followers and provoked a ripple of speculation that history might be repeating itself. The gunman, a well-dressed black man, was kicked and beaten by onlookers who shouted that he must be working ““for the Jews.’’ Rescued and arrested by university police, he was identified by police as James Edward Bess, 49, a defrocked Nation of Islam leader from Seattle, Wash. Bess, also known as James X and Brother James X, had a history of violence and a reputation for vitriolic rant. Charged with attempted murder and five counts of assault, he pleaded not guilty. Police retrieved a 9-mm pistol; they also found two more pistols in a knapsack, and a rifle with a telescopic sight in the car Bess drove. Muslim sources said he had been seen outside a hall where Khallid spoke the night before, and it seemed Bess had stalked his victim. But investigators said there was no evidence of conspiracy – that Bess, while known for his loyalty to Farrakhan, seemed to have acted alone. ““We know whodunit,’’ university Police Chief Henry Rosenfeld said. ““What we’re dealing with is the why.''
Some wondered whether the shooting reflected tensions within the Nation of Islam, still a pillar of militant black separatism. Farrakhan, in this view, may be alienating the organization’s Young Turks by moving toward rapprochement with mainstream civil-rights groups. Khallid is less accommodationist. His strident speech at Kean College last fall, in which he attacked Jews as ““bloodsuckers of the black nation,’’ provoked an outpouring of indignation led by the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith. In February, Farrakhan suspended Khallid from his post as his national assistant and issued an ambiguous public apology for the speech.
The very brutality of Khallid’s diatribes, some experts say, is now making him a celebrity to younger blacks who blame whites for tolerating the appalling condition of the inner cities. But few who know both men think Farrakhan and Khallid are really feuding. Khallid, they say, remains loyal to his mentor, and Farrakhan has avoided the kind of open breach that made enemies of Elijah Muhammad and Malcolm X. Barring evidence of conspiracy, the best theory seemed to be that Khallid was a victim of his own demagoguery. ““When you engage in that kind of hate-filled rhetoric, you have to keep upping the ante,’’ said Selwyn R. Cudjoe of Wellesley College. ““You can only go from bad to worse.''
