Yesterday, a man in Austin sets his home on fire, reportedly while his wife and step-daughter were still inside. He then proceeds to his local airport, where he steals a private plane, and sets out to fly that plane into the office building where the local IRS office is located. As of press time, in addition to the pilot, Joseph Stack, one person inside the building was killed, and one is missing. 11 persons were injured, some in serious condition. Luckily, his neighbors rescued the wife and girl from the burning home before firefighters arrived. Also fortunate is the fact that more weren’t killed in the government building.
In a multi-page screed, Stack wrote about how, over the years, he just couldn’t win any battles with the IRS. Claiming pianos as business expenses when you are not actually a musician didn’t work for him at tax time. He also didn’t understand that his wife’s income was reportable, something else the IRS pointed out to him. Over the years, he had vested in and spent several different retirement accounts, and found the accountants that he had been paying small fortunes to to keep all of this straightened out were idiots when they told him how unsustainable all of this was.
So he writes a suicide note to explain his deadly choices, steals a plane, and flies it into a building shortly after 9 in the morning because he had nothing but pure hatred for those inside. Americans. Over 200 Americans, who just happened to work for the government that Joseph Stack held responsible for his own failures.
It was an act of terrorism, and don’t let anyone try and spin it any other way. Those were innocents, and they were us. They had no choice when that plane bore down on them, and Joe Stack didn’t care. He wanted to send a message, and innocent Americans had to die for him to make it. Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, and Sean Hannity, among others, are responsible. They are promoting this type of fringe behavior, as some of their listeners are actually calling Stack an American hero. They have been very critical of President Obama for not using the word “terrorism” (another con lie: Obama has, on several occasions, used the term), but they are not about to label this domestic terrorist in the same way.
Already, the right-wingnuts are quick to parrot the words of Austin’s Police Chief, who said this was the act of a lone individual, and therefore not a terrorist act, even though Stack planned it, and had focused intent to do great harm and violence upon unsuspecting persons who could not in any way defend themselves from him, all to make an anti-government point laid out in his suicide note.
Maybe he should have wore a turban, or a fez. Perhaps his skin wasn’t the right shade of olive or brown, or he wasn’t named Ahmed. For the above mentioned spewers of hatred on con radio and tv, that’s the first thing we should be looking for.
Whoopeedo just did a great post on the relaxation of concealed weapons regulations, and with all of the anti-government hypocritical rhetoric being thrown down by these folks, this type of violence is being promoted, not discouraged. Michelle Bachmann says we should all refuse to cooperate with the Census Bureau, because the information they gather is used against us- LIE. Palin tells us that any health care reform will result in “death panels” that will meet in committee to decide who lives or dies- LIE (yes, we’d hate to take that exclusive right away from the insurance companies, not while they’re making record profits while doing it). Beck advocated the murder of Michael Moore on his show on a couple of occasions, and Jim Demint says that all republicans should vote against every democratic measure, initiative, and nomination, because it will result in the failure of our President. And teabaggers in a rally yesterday were calling for the public hanging of our Patty Murray. This is not patriotism, but a call to violent anarchism by the extreme right, and has no good end for America or our democracy.
Ann Coulter likes to label liberals as treasonous for, as she puts it, we continually speak out against America, but she is silent, along with Hannity, Beck, and Limbaugh, when Sarah Palin goes to China and tells businessmen there to not trust our President or our government.
No one has come out and actually said it yet (that I have heard of so far), so I will: the comparison to this and 9/11 is obvious. Planned and calculated multiple homicide, with a written political manifesto, and a long history of hatred for our government. He wasn’t a Muslim extremist from a central Asian country, who watched al Queda videos in his spare time. But he did plan to kill a lot of government employees because he hated the IRS. Let’s see how Palin and Beck and all of the other worthless shills want to spin that.
Blogroll
Archives
- February 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
It’s been over 24 hours and no crack down of general aviation. Flashback to Christmas Day and additional rules going into place. It’s possible the FBI had some foreknowledge of his web postings as they were in the area and the IRS office was next door. Beck should apply for his pilots license as he is scattered and delusional as well.
streeter, the reason for no “crackdown” on general aviation is an obviously good call by this administration. This was one man doing a nutty thing by flying a small plane into a building. No sign of ongoing conspiracy, no sign of foreign influence, no sign it will be repeated. No reason for additional regulations, and if so, what would they be? A pilot that wishes to fly a small plane into a building can’t be stopped by any laws.
Now, as for Drew’s spew: Definition is clear? To whom?
Your problem is you’re trying to fit a definition to a political party leaning. You could choose to throw off those Dimmocrat chains and think for yourself someday, but….NAHHHHH
This particular issue should cease being a political football by both parties. If you believe there is NO circumstance where a foreign or foreign influenced person committing an act of terror on American soil should be tried as an enemy combatant, no need to read further.
I would put forward the following criteria for choosing between trying a person as a criminal or trying them in a military tribunal as an enemy combatant.
1. The act must be classified as part of a systematic attack on Americans (not a single act)
2. The person must be a foreign agent or be an American under the direct influence of a foreign power, i.e. a foreign government or a known foreign terrorist organization.
3. The act should be classified as ideologically motivated to cause disruption in the lives of American citizens (as opposed to a single act of targeted assassination)
I think my ideas have merit. I think SOME criteria can be set so it’s fairly black and white which was to prosecute these matters.
And Drew…the ONLY substantive thing this one act had in common with 9-11 was an airplane and a building.
Actually they could, he filed no flight plan. If that was a requirement, his movements would of been tracked a lot closer.
To be a terrorist act the purpose of committing the deed needs to be media attention. Innocent lives are lost or innocent hostages are held in such great numbers that the media must convey whatever message the terrorist wishes. It is pretty clear that the Austin suicide pilot had a message to convey, one that he felt had been ignored, and so he left it in a way that he knew could not be ignored. He failed to take as many lives as he hoped. So, by my definition, he meant to commit a terrorist act. Domestic terrorism is a threat that should not be minimized.
A flight plan for a flight as short as his would have had NO impact. Only way to stop this would have had to occur before he took off.
Eleanor, media coverage occurs in this country on just about anything that causes violent death. And domestic terrorism (like Oklahoma City) certainly can’t be minimized. But, as these both were isolated incidents perpetrated by one or two people as a single act, they don’t fit my criteria as “enemy combatants”. Nor do the two boys at Columbine. They should be tried (when they survive, which isn’t always) as criminals.
Neal, your definition and mine may overlap, however some terrorists are not enemy combatants and some enemy combatants are not terrorists and no amount of punching the definitions will make a perfect fit. The pilot was not an enemy combatant, that’s a fact.
At Columbine the assailants knew the victims and intended to see them die. Not terrorism. At Oklahoma City death and destruction were wrecked on innocents for the purpose of sending a message to the country. Terrorism.
We agree a lot there, Eleanor..In fact…just about completely.
Do you feel enemy combatants should be treated differently than non-enemy combatants? And, if so, do you agree it would be good to make usable definitions so this issue could be taken out of politics to the greatest extent possible?
whats going to happen if they find out the wack job pilot is a dimocrat.
BTW streeter how many plane thief’s file a flight plan. I’m willing to none of them do.
In 2008 the term “enemy combatant” was defined by a US District Court Justice to mean someone who is part of the forces of Taliban or Al Queda and is engaged in hostilities or has directly supported hostilities. Those detainees are the ones who may be tried in military tribunal. It is the US justice system that forced us to revert to international law. It started before the last presidential election. It is not a partisan issue.
I misspelled Al Qaeda.
I am doing no research on that, Eleanor, so I’ll take you at your word.
I’m puzzled even further at this point, as KSM surely seems to fit the definition of “enemy combatant” to be tried in a military setting. Why has this been such a difficult decision for this administration if that definition has been around since 2008?
Some day The Military Commissions Act of 2006 will be repealed. That’s the law that says the US President can hold any foreign national living anywhere in the world as an enemy combatant without having to show cause. I’m not a lawyer, but I guess it will avoid complications if we stick to the criminal justice system.
It’s pretty obvious that Cheney, Bush and Co. wanted the Act protected, because it relieved them of any accountability for holding people indefinitely without charges or justification of any kind. Even the lapdog media went along with the assumptions that,
if we captured them, they must be terrorists, so there’s no need for an investigation or a trial.