Man intentionally crashes light plane into IRS offices

[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It seems going postal is now out of date.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.

[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.

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.

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

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

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.

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

Originally Posted by Aramike

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]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

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.

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.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by 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

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