The Tale of a Gun

Edward Archer and his attack on Officer Jesse Hartnett

The gun was a semiautomatic nine millimeter pistol, with at least a 10-round magazine, most likely a Glock 17. It had been issued to an unnamed Philadelphia police officer.

Then, in  October, 2013, the gun was stolen from the police officer’s home.

There followed a shadowy interlude of just over two years during which the gun changed hands who knows how many times, participating in who knows how much mischief. Eventually, it ended up in the possession of one Edward Archer, 30, a self-professed Islamic radical.

Archer had already shown himself to be susceptible to the siren call of a gun. In 2012, he was arrested following a domestic dispute in which Archer “pulled a small black and silver semiautomatic handgun from his waist and pointed it towards the complainant's stomach while grabbing the complainant's shirt." Arrested and charged with assault and carrying a gun without a license, the courts sentenced him to nine to 23 months, but immediately paroled him, releasing him to the streets.

In the current event, on January 7^th, Archer, dressed in a traditional white Muslim robe, attempted to assassinate Philadelphia police officer Jesse Hartnett. Charging Harnett’s cruiser at point blank range, Archer fired his stolen Glock from 11 to 13 times (as various sources report). Hartnett took three shots to his left arm, was critically wounded, but heroically exited his car and gave chase, shooting and wounding Archer in the buttocks before radioing for assistance. Archer's attack was captured on video by a security camera and has been widely viewed.

Backup units sped to the scene and Archer was quickly apprehended, his smoking gun still in hand. But the question of motivation remained.

According to CNN, the suspect told investigators: "I follow Allah. I pledge my allegiance to the Islamic State and that's why I did what I did."

Philadelphia police commissioner, Richard Ross, expounded. "According to him, he believed that the police defend laws that are contrary to the teachings of the Quran."

Archer had traveled to Saudi Arabia in 2011 and Egypt in 2012. His mother, Valerie Holliday, stated that her son was a devout Muslim. Asim Abdur Rashid, the imam of Masjid Mujahideen mosque, said that Archer “was a frequent member of the masjid.”

The draw of Islamic radicalism is one theory. But Jim Kenney, the mayor of Philadelphia, assured us that this was all a ruse. “In no way shape or form does anyone in this room believe that Islam or the teaching of Islam has anything to do with what you’ve seen on the screen,” said Mayor Kenney.

“That is abhorrent. It’s just terrible and it does not represent this religion [Islam] in any way shape or form or any of its teachings,” he added. “This is a criminal with a stolen gun who tried to kill one of our officers. It has nothing to do with being a Muslim or following the Islamic faith.”

Doubling down, Kenney blamed the stolen police weapon. "There are too many guns on our streets, and I think our national government needs to do something about that."

Then the White House weighed in. Josh Earnest, the President’s press secretary, said ”Certainly one thing we can do is to keep guns out of the hands of people like him. Whether it’s somebody who planned to carry out a terrorist act or somebody who has significant mental problems shouldn’t be so easily able to get their hands on a gun.”

(Earnest, lobbying for greater background checks, apparently forgot that the weapon had originally been stolen from a police officer).

There is also the theory that Archer was mentally unstable. According the Archer’s mother, he had been hearing voices in his head. While Archer’s brother, Shane, denied that Edward was “mental,” the possibility certainly remains.

From this confusing diaspora of events and statements, we are left with three theories to explain Archer’s actions:

1. That Archer was radicalized and performed the shooting in the name of Islam
2. That Archer was mentally unstable and committed the act out of insanity.
3. That the gun somehow animated Archer’s action and was the root cause of “gun violence.”

It seems that the White House and media are going with door number three. By focusing on “gun violence,” they are positing that removing guns will eliminate violence. And that “expanded background checks” will reduce the carnage.

While anything is possible, it seems that violent people will always find a way. The Murrah building, destroyed by explosives, 168 killed. A knife attack in a Chinese train station, 29 dead. For evil people, it seems that their goal is more important than their means. By focusing on “gun violence” alone, we are shortsightedly ignoring the broader evil in the human heart.

Violence is violence. Let’s concentrate on that, and the means to control it.

Speak the truth

U2 performs in Paris, Dec. 6 2015

On Sunday, December 6, the Irish band U2 rocked a capacity crowd in the AccorHotels Arena in Paris. Bono’s vocals soared and the Edge’s distinctive guitar rang out. Over 20,000 people waved and cheered and clapped, offering a big poke in the eye to ISIS. And then Bono sang U2’s anthem, “In the Name of Love,” and brought down the house. This was powerful stuff and showed human love and compassion in sharp contrast to the evil of terrorism.

This celebration of Liberté, Equalité, Fraternité occurred just four days after the vicious ISIS-inspired attack in San Bernardino. Radical Islamic terrorism had, once again, visited our shores. Our President sprang into action. Jumping right to the central point, he profoundly observed that “we have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country,” and called for more and stricter gun laws.

While millions of ordinary Americans scratched their heads over this, the President went on to scold us. “We cannot turn against one another by letting this fight be defined as a war between America and Islam.”

This is a habit Mr. Obama has long possessed. A Google search for the phrase “Obama scolds” returns over 150,000 hits.

Here is a telegram Mr. President. The American people are a good people. We are reasonably smart. We are kind, generous, and welcoming. We have Muslim friends, neighbors, and colleagues. It is very clear to us that they are good people and not radical jihadists. It is condescending of you to point this out as if you were privy to some great insight. We get it.

And to claim that this terrorism is completely divorced from Islam is an insult to our intelligence as well. Maajid Nawaz, a former jihadist who has deradicalized himself and written about it, defines it succinctly. Writing in the Wall Street Journal on December 12, Nawaz says:

“Islam is a religion, and like any other faith, it is internally diverse. Islamism, by contrast, is the desire to impose a single version of Islam on an entire society. Islamism is not Islam, but it is an offshoot of Islam. It is Muslim theocracy.”

“In much the same way, jihad is a traditional Muslim idea connoting struggle—sometimes a personal spiritual struggle, sometimes a struggle against an external enemy. Jihadism, however, is something else entirely: It is the doctrine of using force to spread Islamism.”

That the President and his supporters can’t mouth these terms is demeaning. We really do get the distinction.

And it goes on. In a major policy speech on December 6, the President demanded that “Congress should act to make sure no one on a no-fly list is able to buy a gun. What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semiautomatic weapon?”

Here is what possibly could be the argument. It’s surprising that a constitutional scholar needs to have it pointed out.

In 2005, Rahinah Ibrahim, a doctoral candidate at Stanford University, tried to board a flight to Hawaii from San Francisco International Airport. While trying to check in, her name flashed up on the no-fly list and she ended up being taken away in handcuffs. A long, ultimately unsuccessful attempt to get herself off the list followed. So she sued in Federal court.

The issue was the opaque nature of the process. According to the Stanford Alumni Magazine, “The U.S. government has given her no opportunity to hear the evidence against her, let alone challenge it, say her lawyers.”  Rahinah ultimately prevailed, and in 2014 (yes, nine years later), won her case. But only Rahinah was removed from the list – nothing else changed. The system is still broken.

Many others have found themselves improperly on this list. Ted Kennedy, United States Senator. Daniel Brown, United States Marine returning from Iraq. John Lewis, U.S. Representative from Georgia. And many, many more.

In proposing that everyone on the no-fly list should lose their Second Amendment rights, the president is compounding an already constitutionally challenged program. Let’s fix that first by providing transparency, notification, and due process for anyone placed on the list. Then, and only then, add the no-gun provision.

Here’s the bottom line. We are in a war not of our asking. We must prosecute it, but to truly change this jihadist meme will require generations. It will require solidarity with our Muslim brethren. We will have further attacks, further losses. Perfect safety is not possible. But emotional demands to reduce the strength of the American people will make us even less safe. Calm, cold-eyed reason must prevail. And truth. Quit the scolding, trust us, and speak the truth.

Oceans offer no solace in the digital age

There is a theory that our universe consists of nothing but energy and information.

This is rather startling, for our own eyes tell us that a plethora of things exist, from trees and puppy dogs to the Milky Way and Taylor Swift. But upon closer inspection, we see patterns everywhere. Taylor Swift is composed of human cells which are organized in a predictable fashion to form bones and muscle and nerves. Her brain is wired into patterns of neurons which enable her to create patterns of sounds with which to entertain us.

Patterns are created by information which imposes regularity, repeatability, predictability. Waves on the ocean, the facets of a diamond, and Taylor’s DNA are all examples of patterns, hinting at the hierarchical structures underneath. Energy, coalesced into matter, organized by patterns on top of patterns. An entire universe could conceivably be computed if one’s computer were only powerful enough.

Consider “Minions,” “Despicable Me,” and Warcraft – movies and video games representing entire worlds, entertaining and engrossing, but in fact existing only as strings of ones and zeroes arranged in clever patterns within a computer.

 Here are some other examples of information. The Constitution of the United States. The Ten Commandments. The Koran. Not just the paper and words, but the thoughts and beliefs represented by these documents – all information.

 We humans are respectable computers – information processors – in our own right. This has always been true, but what is new is the digital age. The ease with which ideas can flow, be shared, discussed, embraced or rejected is enormous. The digital age has really just begun, but it has already profoundly affected the ways in which we interact. Social memes ebb and flow across the internet, tweeted and posted and shared with the click of a button or a swipe of your phone.

This virtual world is becoming more and more real, and as more of us participate, with increasing facility and ease, physical borders and impediments dwindle to insignificance. Mountain ranges have long since ceased to be barriers. Rivers are instantly crossed by crackling electrons carrying our tweets through the ether. Oceans shrink, deserts are conquered. Information binds us, aligns us, encouraging alliances, creating schisms, and flows with the speed of light, imposing patterns upon mankind.

Such as the recent successes of ISIS. Nothing but a credo, a belief system, ISIS is reaching out to disaffected millions with their message of empowerment. Join us, and be strong. Support us, and be someone. Come to Western Asia and Africa and help us to build the caliphate. Stay at home and attack from within. Professional YouTube videos present targets and means and tactics. The draw is magnetic, the FBI is concerned.

The recent attack on our military in Chattanooga is an example. The perpetrator, a young male, was stirred to action, exactly how we will never know. But his actions are consistent with ISIS directives. We can expect more such attacks.

Attempts to minimize, to label this a “lone wolf” or “lone gunman,” to deny the link to terrorism, are blatantly political.

There is nothing at all “lone” about it. Mohammod Abdulazeez was one of an army of recruits, potentially millions strong, who are formed and trained and inspired every day by a sophisticated social media program. This threat must be recognized and confronted.

While the Administration and  Department of Defense dawdle, several states are moving rapidly. Florida, Indiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Texas and Wisconsin have all taken various steps to arm their National Guard members on base and in recruitment centers. More states are reviewing security measures and, one can hope, we will see additional measures adopted.

During the first battle for Fallujah, in the halcyon days when all the fighting was “over there,” a captioned photo of combat Marines was circulating around the internet bearing this legend: "America is not at war, the Marine Corps is at war. America is at the mall."

Those days are gone. ISIS is bringing it. We must recognize the threat and prepare to defend ourselves.

Like it or not, America is at war, and broad oceans offer little solace.