Man intentionally crashes light plane into IRS offices

[SteamWake]

In texas...

Look out private pilots your life is about to become more complicated.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,586581,00.html

White house states "Its not terrorisim"!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/18/white-house-texas-plane-crash-does-appear-terrorism/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+foxnews%252Fpolitics+%2528T ext+-+Politics%2529

Just some angry guy in a plane I guess.

[FIREWALL]

How much you wanna bet other IRS workers in buildings near airports are a bit nervous now.

I like the White House response. :roll:

[Oberon]

Define Terrorism. I'd say that the people at the IRS office were hardly calm and collected... :hmmm:

[lorka42]

pardon me, but I was under the impression that a terrorist ws someone who does violence against people for their beliefs, or because of the peoples beliefs that the violence is directed against. Am I mistaken?

[Oberon]

It would seem that there is no proper international definition of Terrorism, however Dictionary.com has it defined as:

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

Unlawful use of violence by a person - Crashing a plane is pretty violent
Against people or property - IRS office
Intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments - Well, he didn't do it for lols, that's for certain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_terrorism

[UnderseaLcpl]

Anyone remember that report on domestic terrorism that came out a while ago? I remember it, because Libertarians and Ron Paul supporters were thoroughly pissed off about it, since they were mentioned as candidates for acts of "domestic terror". I was pissed off about that, too, as I couldn't concieve the idea of Libertarian (or similar) radical actually comitting an act of terror; it is completely against our principles. It would be using force or coercion against people who had not attacked us.

However, I think I may have been very wrong. What makes me think that is this statement from the pilot's suicide note:
"If you’re reading this, you’re no doubt asking yourself, “Why did this have to happen?'" the note read. "The simple truth is that it is complicated and has been coming for a long time...
"Violence not only is the answer, it is the only answer...

I pretty sure there isn't one person in this country who really likes the IRS. Even some of the IRS employees I have talked to don't like the IRS, but Libertarians hate the IRS with a passion. Well, some of them do, anyway. The reason for that hatred is belief in the theory that taxation is theft. It more or less goes that since governments derive their authority from force and the use of force against someone who did not violate your rights first is immoral, taxation is immoral. After all, if you don't pay your taxes you go to jail and if you won't go to jail, they will force you to go to jail and maybe kill you - not much different from a street thug who robs you at gunpoint. I feel wierd saying this given what I quoted above, but, its actually a lot more complicated than that.. but this thread isn't about ethics and political theory.

Anyhow, the last words in the text quoted make me think that this guy was a Libertarian (or some variation thereof) radical. If I'm right about him, he is a person who strongly believes in individualism, and that is why his last words are so seemingly cryptic; he wants people to question them and search them for meaning, because he is certain that they will ultimately arrive at the same conclusion he has. People of all beliefs do that from time to time, but it is particularly prevalent amongst believers in individualism. Assuming I'm correct about all this, the only thing I don't really understand is why he would fly a plane into a building full of people who had never hurt him. Even if he had problems with the IRS, the use of force against unarmed people who don't know they are hurting you is unethical. Employees of the IRS are not the IRS. Perhaps his perception was skewed, or perhaps he was just a wacko to begin with.

There are a lot of people in the US, and especially in Texas, who are ready and willing to revolt against the government and establish what they see as a free state. I'm one of them. If there was a Libertarian revolution tommorrow I'd be on the front lines by the next day. But I'm not about to fly a plane into a freaking building or try to kill scores of innocent people by any other means because I'm not a freaking madman.

I really hope I'm wrong about this guy, because if I am right about him it means that we who are economic conservatives and social liberals are being undermined by our own. J.A. Stack, and anyone who follows him, are doing to us what radical Muslims have done to Islam. We will triumph because we are right, and our vision will be adopted or rejected by others of their own free will, not by coercion or terror.

[Castout]

Poor guy why would he waste his life . . .

[Bubblehead1980]

Undersealcpl...



The fact is this guy went nutty and offed himself by crashing into an IRS building.There is a peaceful revolt going on in America now.A great number of us are tired of Liberals and their "Progressive(hate that term because their policies are actually REGRESSIVE).The real Conservatives who believe in the Constitution are fired up and can wait for November 2010 and November 2012, think Americans have learned a lesson from 06 and 08 elections.We will take America back via the correct methods not crashing a plane into a building like an idiot.Don't let the acts of one crazy fool question your beliefs.Always a few crazys in every bunch.

What he did is no different than some far left winger shooting up a police station etc like what went on back in the 60's and 70's Takes crazy people to actually go through with it.Again crazys on all sides.

[CaptainHaplo]

Local "liberal" media (880 AM) had a field day with this - trying to tie this guys 7 page manifesto to the Tea Party movement.

The fact is the hardcore left SEES the fact that the average American is against the (insert label here - progressive, socialist, whatever) direction that the hard left has tried to take the country, and they are trying to find ANY way they can to marginalize any group that disagrees with them, no matter how much they need to reach.

[FIREWALL]

Here in California and I think all over US.

You threaten someone and you can be charged with makeing A Terriost Threat.

[GoldenRivet]

Read the "manifesto"

agree with virtually every word.

However, I can't say any single sentence of the whole document is worth putting a plane through a seven story window... but then again... im more or less "normal" depending on your definition.:doh:

[Highbury]

It is sadly ironic that the lead-in advertisment for this video report was H&R Block when I first watched it...

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4024344/behind-the-crash-manifesto

[Castout]

Saw the damage on tv it was quite bad. The smoke is pretty thick.

What the man did was obviously wrong and cannot be justified but not forget that he's a victim too. He must have been pushed to commit the action. Desperate people do drastic measures even sacrificing his own life.

[bookworm_020]

It seems going postal is now out of date. I know that people get frustrated with the tax man, but killing people who are trying to do their job isn't the way to vent your frustrations

[TarJak]

My first thought when I heard this on the radio was I hope it wasn't GR doing his nana! Shocking way to protest against your government and clearly the guy was unstable but WTF drove him so nuts as to go this far? I understand he set his house on fire before leaving for the airfield.:o

[Castout]

It seems going postal is now out of date. I know that people get frustrated with the tax man, but killing people who are trying to do their job isn't the way to vent your frustrations

Of course what he did was wrong it can never be justified.

[SteamWake]

Read the "manifesto"

agree with virtually every word.

However, I can't say any single sentence of the whole document is worth putting a plane through a seven story window... but then again... im more or less "normal" depending on your definition.:doh:

I'm quite supprised at this perhaps you should read it again. ;)

Oh yea and the media trying to paint this nut as a right wing activist is amusing.

[Platapus]

One would think that if he wanted his suicide note/ "manifesto" to be taken seriously, he would have at least passed it through a spell checker. :nope:

If they feel that is the appropriate action, I wish guys like this would just quietly kill themselves; but not involve innocent people or destroy public property. :nope:

Depending on the culture, there may be honour in suicide, but never for the murder of innocent people. :nope:

What a terrible thing this guy choose to do. Honestly, I have a hard time mustering up any sympathy for him.

My sympathies are for the innocent people he decided deserved to die for HIS reasons. Tragic

[GoldenRivet]

I'm quite supprised at this perhaps you should read it again. ;)

Oh yea and the media trying to paint this nut as a right wing activist is amusing.

"virtually every word" being the key operative phrase.

the particular part i agree with is the part about the Tax codes and laws being so convoluted that even the heads of the IRS cannot fully understand them. we have actually seen this in the press. I cant seem to find the article on short notice but one of the heads of the IRS i think it was says that he uses turbotax because he doesnt understand all the tax laws.:doh::doh::doh:

also the part about there being two interpretations to these laws, those for the wealthy and those for the rest of us... it is true.:cry:

dont get me wrong... the man was a nut job, and to say he obviously had no idea how to rationally deal with his problems would be an understatement.

but you cant label him a right wing nut job or a left wing nut job, or any nut job with any political motivations.

who hasn't been upset with the IRS... even if just a little?

his motivations were not "politics" - his motivation was frustration and anger at the IRS.

to really clarify my previous post, i think the IRS codes and laws need a massive overhaul of not a TOTAL RE-WRITE altogether... i personally find them to be frustrating, and overly demanding of the average citizen financially speaking.

I also think that we roll over and take it as a people (a theme also present in his "manafesto")

I further agree that there are a number of taxes that we pay that could be reasonably argued as unconstitutional.

i further agree with his statement that "The law “requires” a signature on the bottom of a tax filing; yet no one can say truthfully that they fully understand what they are signing; if that’s not “duress” than what is? If this is not the measure of a totalitarian regime, nothing is."

i honestly cant say for fact that my tax filing is 100% perfect to the interpretation of the law... especially considering that the law might have multiple interpretations.:doh:

Yet... if i am to "play the game" and do so "legal and proper" i MUST sign the form, yes?

though i agree with perhaps one quarter of this man's entire angry little rant... AND i am completely distrustful of virtually every single branch and individual associated with the Government on some level... i cant say that ANY of his ramblings could ever in a million years justify his actions.

i also cannot tolerate any condemnation of general aviation as a whole over this "isolated incident".

If the man didnt have access to a plane, he probably would have just loaded a van with fertilizer... no van? no fertilizer? he probably would have just walked right into the front door with a hunting rifle or a pistol or a knife or a sharp stick or a rock or his bare hands and a deranged look on his face. - and in the process probably would have caused less physical damage to the building... and MORE loss of life.

the fact alone that he seemed to opt not to gun everyone down and instead targeted the building suggests to me even further that he was not after any one person or individual... but instead was targeting the "agency"... if that statement makes sense. (like a u-boat sinking a ship... the ship represents the enemy... you are not necessarily targeting the sailors inside)

nobody can prevent or predict this sort of thing... i dont care what security measures you put in place, what your budget for psychic network is etc. it cannot be prevented or predicted.

to say the man makes a few valid points in his cute little manifesto is one thing.

but please understand... I, in no way think his foolish, selfish criminal act was justified in the least little bit.

I also know it is not the first time... and it wont be the last time... that someone gets pissed off at the IRS and goes ape sh*t over it and attempts to kill someone.

hope that clears up my feelings on the matter.

[Platapus]

who hasn't been upset with the IRS... even if just a little?



Honestly? Me. I too have disagreements and opinions on the tax laws. However that is under the purview of congress which I often DO get upset about. :yep:

But I don't get upset at the IRS. It is simply a government office doing what it is told to do; staffed by imperfect humans in which a goodly percentage are trying to do a good job. They do their job "pretty" well but not perfect (have not met anyone, government or commercial that does their job perfectly).

Are mistakes made? Yup
Sometimes are the mistakes in the favour of the citizen? yup
Sometimes are the mistakes in the favour of the government? yup

It is an imperfect system, staffed with imperfect humans enforcing imperfect laws made by the

LYING CHEATING SCUMBAGS THAT HAVE INFESTED CONGRESS LIKE THE WORTHLESS VERMIN THEY ARE FOR THE PAST 100 YEARS OR MORE!

Oops, that got away from me for a bit. Sorry.

But no, I don't get upset with the IRS. I have been audited twice and both times I have been treated with respect and consideration. I am batting .500. One time it was a mistake on the part of the IRS and the other was a mistake (an honest mistake, but still a mistake) on my part. No threats, no intimidation, just an emotionless explanation of the facts.

I don't have a problem with the IRS.

Did I happen to mention how I feel about congress? :stare:

[krashkart]

I really don't have an opinion on this one, just hope that everyone that has been affected by that one mans' actions will again find a measure of peace. Plenty of nightmares to come, and those will perhaps fade over time. The wounds will heal over enough as well. Got a prayer for tonight. :cry:

[Morts]

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/528055 :rotfl2::rotfl2:

[Tribesman]

also the part about there being two interpretations to these laws, those for the wealthy and those for the rest of us... it is true
What is true is that there are those whose accountants can get a grip on the details and those whose accountants can't.
There is no shortage of people who thought being wealthy was sufficieint reason to put their own interpretation of tax laws into play, they end up paying the price just like anyone else who illegaly dodges tax.

There are a lot of people in the US, and especially in Texas, who are ready and willing to revolt against the government and establish what they see as a free state. I'm one of them. If there was a Libertarian revolution tommorrow I'd be on the front lines by the next day.
And like any revolution and establishment of a "free state", you would be swapping one bunch of crooks and liars for another bunch of crooks and liars who in the end will be come indistinguishable in any meaningful way.


Local "liberal" media (880 AM) had a field day with this - trying to tie this guys 7 page manifesto to the Tea Party movement.

The fact is the hardcore left SEES the fact that the average American is against the (insert label here - progressive, socialist, whatever) direction that the hard left has tried to take the country, and they are trying to find ANY way they can to marginalize any group that disagrees with them, no matter how much they need to reach.
You can flip that round and it works just as well, in fact it fits very well with the practices of many parts of the tea party movement and its mainstream media sponsors.

[Aramike]

"...violence ... is the only answer."I'm curious as to what this man thought his violence would answer.

[OneToughHerring]

But he wasn't a terrorist. I mean, he was white, wasn't he? And possibly even a christian of some kind, so nope, not a terrorist. A violent protester, or possibly an unruly demonstrator, but a terrorist? No.

[Aramike]

But he wasn't a terrorist. I mean, he was white, wasn't he? And possibly even a christian of some kind, so nope, not a terrorist. A violent protester, or possibly an unruly demonstrator, but a terrorist? No.Umm, do you know what "terrorism" is?

A person's ethnicity, religion, etc. has little to do with it. Rather, if the act is measured to cause terror beyond the scope of said act, that's when it is terrorism.

Yes, this idiot slammed a small plane into a building. If it were the same situation and it was an Arab perpetuating the act, it would still not be terror.

[OneToughHerring]

Umm, do you know what "terrorism" is?

A person's ethnicity, religion, etc. has little to do with it. Rather, if the act is measured to cause terror beyond the scope of said act, that's when it is terrorism.

Yes, this idiot slammed a small plane into a building. If it were the same situation and it was an Arab perpetuating the act, it would still not be terror.

Seems you have your very own definition of terrorism. But hey, that's pretty common in the States.

[Aramike]

Seems you have your very own definition of terrorism. But hey, that's pretty common in the States.Yeah, nice try at avoiding the issue.

Why don't you kick off your part of the INTELLECTUAL discourse (meaning, not the continuance of emotional, knee-jerk comments) by sharing YOUR definition of terrorism?

And please note that you're talking to the individual that called for restraint in labelling the Fort Hood shootings terrorism immediately in its aftermath.

[Wolfehunter]

This guy wasn't insane. He knew what he was doing. Was his method effective? I don't know. Time will tell. But in his letter.. He's right 100%.

Everybody has to wake up.. He was fed up with the elitist bull****.

At least he has the balls to do something about it...

[CaptainHaplo]

By the legal definition, his act of violence with the INTENT to create or ignite unrest in the people toward a legally elected government does meet the stringent definition of terrorism. His race or religion have nothing to do with it.

Terrorism is designed to disrupt the order of society, while forcing the people of society to react in a specific way. His "manifesto" - while it does have some extremely accurate points - does put forth the premise that the people must "stand against" the government - resulting in the subsequent "body count" he refers to.

There are political reasons why the government is not calling this terrorism. But politics have no bearing on the truth. It was a terrorist act - and was committed by a terrorist.

[Aramike]

Edit: Indeed, that makes sense, Haplo. However, using the more common perception of terror, it is certainly quite a different circumstance.

[CaptainHaplo]

Oh I agree Aramike. The "perception" of terrorism is that the person must have some Islamic ties, or must be Arabic or have a anti-Israeli/anti-Western political motivation. At the least, one or more of these is usually associated with the term. However, we have "eco-terrorists" that the government recognizes due to the reasons listed above - their acts of violence intended to motivate or intimidate people into standing against the government.

Now I am no tree hugger, but if the government can call the destruction of a in construction subdivision eco- "terrorism" - its pretty bad it can't call a wacko flying his plane into a government building "terrorism" when the INTENT is the same.

As OTH points out, though sarcastically, is that there is a definite double standard in how this matter is being dealt with. All because the current Administration doesn't want to have to admit there was a "terrorist act" on home soil during their watch.

[OneToughHerring]

And then there's also the "pro-life movement" that engages in "anti-abortion violence". The're not terrorists either. Tree-huggers? Yep, they are terrorists. And all unruly muslims and folks with any kind of dark hue skin.

[Bubblehead1980]

There are terrorists of all types.Terrorism as far as Muslims are concerned are usually referred to as Islamic Terrorists.So don't try to throw the boohoo poor muslims are automatically considered terrorists card.Sure there are some who do that but guess what, there are ignorants on all side. There are terrorists everywhere motivated by their ridiculous religious beliefs, just seems to be more prevalent in the muslim world because well, it is.Sure that is not PC, but think about it, it is the truth.There are no religiously motivated bombings/shootings happening every day in this country.

As far as FT Hood is concerned, that was an act of terrorism by an Islamic Terrorist.Nadal Hassan was a follower of Islam who put his ridiculous religion above his country.The country that allowed him to join the military, paid for his education and even when he showed obvious signs that should have had him kicked out and possibly even put in prison(for communicating with the enemy) they overlooked it, gave him the benefit of the doubt.Well he paid the US back, murdered REAL Americans in a foolish act on behalf of whatever imaginary being he believes in.

[OneToughHerring]

I mean just take a look at this news story about a anti-abortionist, yes I will use the word, terrorist. It's almost like a cry for sympathy for the guy, I mean, is he running for the highest office or something?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/01/28/abortion.roeder.testifies/index.html?iref=storysearch

[CaptainHaplo]

OTH - while you are entitled to your opinion - I have to point out the difference between the the case you linked and the legal definition of terrorism.

The anti-abortion murderer did NOT commit his act in an attempt to convince others to do so. He did not commit the murder as an attack on government itself. Thus, while still a heinous crime, it is not terrorism. It is simply murder. His own defense states he acted in an attempt to save the life of unborn children - not "roll up a body count".

Now I know your a smart person OTH, though you do tend to react emotionally at some things. If you take the emotion out of the equation, you will see the stark difference. The link you provided is a simple crime, albeit one with a religious tone. However, that religious tone itself does not call for the destruction or overt citizenry challenge of a legal government, the mass slaughter of civilians or a violently manipulated societal change. The guy who flew his plane into the IRS building, as well as the Ft Hood shooter - both had one of the above components as a part of their act, and thus they do qualify as acts of terrorism. This is why "eco terrorists" are called such - because their acts of violence are intended to force societal change against the will of that society. The abortion doctor murder lacks that component. Had this guy before his crime put out a call to "every Xtian" to go out and target innocent civilians - or government officials who refuse to change the abortion laws - then he would also have to be considered a terrorist. He didn't - and there is the difference.

I know you feel passionate about a number of things - but terrorism isn't defined by race or religion alone. If it were, then you would see a movement to intern any "arab" or muslim - in a manner similiar to what was done to Japanese and Americans with Asian ancestry during WW2. Thankfully, that isn't the case, and throwing "fuel on the fire" by trying to claim that everything is about racism can, when used to often and the claim is demonstratably false - it loses its mileage.

[Arclight]

Don't know what to think of it, but: IRS Plane Crash Flash Game is Quick and Tasteless (http://kotaku.com/5477733/irs-plane-crash-flash-game-is-quick-and-tasteless)

[Foxtrot]

Change his appearance to Middle Eastern, and violá you got a terrorist

[Subnuts]

You know, this fanatical atheist small-business owning communist anarchist who could afford a single-engine aircraft but couldn't pay his taxes who tried to kill 200 people but isn't a terrorists and wasn't crazy in the slightest sort of had a point. ;)

[OneToughHerring]

CaptainHaplo,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Roeder#Anti-government_activism

Still NOT a terrorist. :roll:

Edit. Also make a note of the fact that Roeder got into the anti-abortion - thing through the anti-tax - thing. So the guy who flew the plane into the building and Roeder are kind of like from the same source.