A letter from Larken Rose on the events transpiring yesterday in Austin.
-
ragnaroknrol wrote:
Guess being white means you aren't a terrorist.
Welcome to the 21st century. Say you blow up a building... If you're muslim, you're a terrorist If you're white, you're a disenfranchised employee If you're black, you're a gangster If you're rich, you're accident-prone If you're a politician-- Wait, you didn't do it. That muslim guy over there did it Disclaimer: This post is intended merely as humorous satire... And I take no responsibility if parts of it happen to coincide with reality.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel)If you are hispanic, you are are a damn illegal terrorist that took jobs away from honest hard working Americans that didn't want to do those jobs anyway, but dammit, they took them.
-
While you're going around chastising others for not reading the mans suicide note, perhaps you could be bothered to read it yourself. The man was clearly hoping to inspire others to violence. That is what changes this from a random act of violence (a la Amy Bishop) to a terrorist act.
No he wasn't inciting people to violence. He wanted people to wake up and take their lives back. He was extreme with his measure, however he was just trying to make a statement. He wanted people to become aware of the system, not to incite to violence.
-
So they used a redundant statement? Or they were just stupid? Or they meant that if you collected $5 from Bill for making $100 that year you also had to collect $5 from Jack for making the same amount? Which is how it is supposed to happen unless you have a crap ton of money, so you can shelter everything. (Blame Reagan)
-
No he wasn't inciting people to violence. He wanted people to wake up and take their lives back. He was extreme with his measure, however he was just trying to make a statement. He wanted people to become aware of the system, not to incite to violence.
You make people aware of the system with protests, demonstrations, or advertsising of some sort. Heck, you have a show. YOU KNOW THIS. You don't make people aware of the system by KILLING PEOPLE RANDOMLY
-
And you still didn't concede the point. If flying a plane into a building of people you don't like is a terrorist act, he fit the bill. Considering 9/11 fit the bill, so does he. Terrorism does not need to be an organization. For all we know 1 person sent envelopes filled with white powder to people all over the US. Tell me that wasn't a terrorist act. We know the unibomber was 1 guy, was he a terrorist? They put a classified a US citizen as a terrorist for trying to light his shoe on fire with explosives inside. He was obviously not part of an organization since anyone with a clue would have told him it would not work. The US is ignoring the number of abortion doctors currently living in fear because of nutjob right wingers that think they are allowed by God to kill abortion doctors. They get fires, and a few have been killed. Are these folks terrorists? Mad at a group that stormed a religious fanatics compound so you load a truck full of fertilizer and take out a govenment building in a completely different state? Terrorist? A guy flies a plane into a building hoping to kill a bunch of government employees. Terrorist? So exactly what does a person have to do to qualify for the term? Not do it for a reason you agree with?
No, I do not concede the point. Maybe I am wrong, but I still believe that it is not terrorism. Because yes, it does instill fear into those involved, however, it will not last, and it was just ONE person, ONE time. In order for it to be terrorism, he has to instill fear. 9/11 lasted a while, and arguably goes on to this day. But that's it! Just once! The guy is gone! If a guy bombs a bank, is that terrorism? Does it instill fear? Yes. But it's over with in a matter of hours, though the damage lasts a while. The game's over! It's a crime, and it's one incident, it's over!
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Ok, so I missed option three, "Revolt." But that option applies to groups, not individuals.
I'm glad you see what I've been trying to say. Terrorism has more to do with groups, not individuals. You must have a lot of small attacks about one specific point to really have a revolution or any terrorism at all. One guy doing one attack is not terrorism, it's an incident.
No, terrorism can apply to an individual. When it happens once, it's a "terrorist act." I said a revolt only applies to groups, because let's face it... One person can't overthrow the government. One person can TRY to revolt, but it's pointless and ineffective. One person can commit a terrorist act, though. An act such as, let's say... Sending a politician a mail bomb, gunning down a bunch of people, blowing up a building, setting fire to an abortion clinic... These are all terrorist acts if they fit the criteria of having political, ideological, or religious motivation. This guy flew a plane into a building because of his political and ideological opposition to the IRS. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. I understand what you're trying to do here, avoiding the "terrorist" label for fear of it becoming too common and misused... But in this specific situation, it DOES apply.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel) -
You make people aware of the system with protests, demonstrations, or advertsising of some sort. Heck, you have a show. YOU KNOW THIS. You don't make people aware of the system by KILLING PEOPLE RANDOMLY
-
If you are hispanic, you are are a damn illegal terrorist that took jobs away from honest hard working Americans that didn't want to do those jobs anyway, but dammit, they took them.
Dey tuk ir jerrrrrrbs! :)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel) -
No, I do not concede the point. Maybe I am wrong, but I still believe that it is not terrorism. Because yes, it does instill fear into those involved, however, it will not last, and it was just ONE person, ONE time. In order for it to be terrorism, he has to instill fear. 9/11 lasted a while, and arguably goes on to this day. But that's it! Just once! The guy is gone! If a guy bombs a bank, is that terrorism? Does it instill fear? Yes. But it's over with in a matter of hours, though the damage lasts a while. The game's over! It's a crime, and it's one incident, it's over!
Let me point out something... Happened just 1 time[^] AT THE TIME they defined it as a terrorist act. Immediately. From 1995 to 2005, over 60 domestic terrorism plots were foiled due to preventive measures taken in response to the bombing. Note, domestic terrorist plots. Here is the accompanying article[^] So we have organized hate groups out there. A lot of them looking for justification to do something very bad. So, how many do you think this guy will inspire? You don't need to deliver the bomb if you can hop into a cesna filled with fuel and take care of business that way. The fact that you agree with his agenda and so are willing to not call a spade a spade is disturbing Joshua. I thought you were better than that.
-
No he wasn't inciting people to violence. He wanted people to wake up and take their lives back. He was extreme with his measure, however he was just trying to make a statement. He wanted people to become aware of the system, not to incite to violence.
He wasn't inciting people to violence, he just wanted them to "wake up and take their lives back". He was "trying to make a statement". Do you even listen to yourself? Edit: Oh and funnily enough, even if you're right and his intention really was to inspire non-violent change, that would still make him a terrorist.
-
Like I said, I do not condone what he did! I just fuckin understand it! What is it that you don't understand? I don't like what he did, and yes he should have protested instead! Absolutely! But I'm saying it's a CRIME! Not terrorism!
Because it is terrorism. It fits the bill. Read the response above about Oklahoma City. It can be 17 people, 2, or just 1. Doesn't matter. Killing people for a cause to become a martyr is asking for copycats. It's setting up and justifying it for others.
-
Let me point out something... Happened just 1 time[^] AT THE TIME they defined it as a terrorist act. Immediately. From 1995 to 2005, over 60 domestic terrorism plots were foiled due to preventive measures taken in response to the bombing. Note, domestic terrorist plots. Here is the accompanying article[^] So we have organized hate groups out there. A lot of them looking for justification to do something very bad. So, how many do you think this guy will inspire? You don't need to deliver the bomb if you can hop into a cesna filled with fuel and take care of business that way. The fact that you agree with his agenda and so are willing to not call a spade a spade is disturbing Joshua. I thought you were better than that.
This does seem to clear it up. Sure. I just fear very much the thought that we are going to call, QUICKLY, a guy a terrorist. It took them four hours to call him a terrorist, and they didn't have all the information. I'm nervous for the country sir. I'll concede. Just know my fear.
-
He wasn't inciting people to violence, he just wanted them to "wake up and take their lives back". He was "trying to make a statement". Do you even listen to yourself? Edit: Oh and funnily enough, even if you're right and his intention really was to inspire non-violent change, that would still make him a terrorist.
-
Dey tuk ir jerrrrrrbs! :)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel)I have Team America stuck in my head. Thanks. Now I gotta find that DVD...
-
wolfbinary wrote:
Your interpretation. I've never heard the supreme court hear any case involving income tax and it's constitutionality.
Look it up then. Treasury Decision 2313 Eisner v. Macomber Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co.
wolfbinary wrote:
How is an income tax immoral? Please explain.
Gladly. It's a redistribution of wealth through coercion. If you don't pay, you go to jail. Yes, that's the way with many things in government. However, if you were to pay sales taxes, you'd have to do it on the spot. With income tax, it is usually deferred and you have to do it within a certain period of time. So, if you don't pay it, you have cars, houses, land, etc seized or other extreme things such as jail time. I'd call that immoral, how about you? Violence is wrong, and the founders knew it, so they decided to implement an indirect taxation system through the states, as opposed to directly to the People.
josda1000 wrote:
Treasury Decision 2313 Eisner v. Macomber Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co.
From what I can tell the supreme court upheld income tax on money earned, not other financial instruments, as income that was taxable. Then based on that income tax is constitutional. So what's all the fuss about, people don't like paying for things the government does and so they b$tch about it.
-
This does seem to clear it up. Sure. I just fear very much the thought that we are going to call, QUICKLY, a guy a terrorist. It took them four hours to call him a terrorist, and they didn't have all the information. I'm nervous for the country sir. I'll concede. Just know my fear.
Ow, I know your fear. We apply terrorist to anything that pisses us off and consists of foreigners. We don't to local threats that are actually making people live in fear. Using it for a boogeyman is a horrible thing. But not seeing it when it is real is bad too. Thank you, I knew you'd see it for what it was.
-
No link, so I'm posting the whole thing... ----- Original Message ----- From: tmds-list-owner@mail-list.com Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 4:47 PM Subject: Mr. Stack, Rest in Peace Rest in Peace, Mr. Stack Earlier today, a victim of the largest extortion racket in the world struck back, giving up his life in the process. The control freaks, and their propagandists who pretend to be "reporters," will no doubt spend the next few weeks demonizing the man, or painting him as crazy. You can decide for yourself if this was the case. As best I can tell, today Joseph Stack burned down his house, and then crashed his plane into the Austin, Texas offices of the IRS. We don't need to ponder the reason, because he told us why, in a suicide note, which can be read here: http://www.informationclearinghouse.infoarticle24783.htm I found reading the note very disturbing, mainly because Mr. Stack was obviously far more intelligent, and more in touch with reality, than the vast majority of Americans. In other words, compared to the deluded masses of conformists, Mr. Stack was the sane one. Several statements in his suicide note show that he had overcome the authoritarian statist indoctrination far more than most people ever will. Does the following sentiment sound familiar? "We are all taught as children that without laws there would be no society, only anarchy. Sadly, starting at early ages we in this country have been brainwashed to believe that, in return for our dedication and service, our government stands for justice for all. We are further brainwashed to believe that there is freedom in this place ... I have spent the total years of my adulthood unlearning that crap from only a few years of my childhood." [Joseph Stack, 2/18/2010] A lot of you will find aspects of Mr. Stack's personal story disturbingly familiar. I see no need to parse every sentence of it, though I would urge everyone to read it all, carefully. What would drive a rational, intelligent man to do such a thing? Of course, the control freaks and their propagandists will paint Mr. Stack as a nutcase, and will claim that his actions, by themselves, prove that he was insane. But they don't. They prove he was desperate, and frustrated, and that he was willing to GIVE UP HIS LIFE to try to resist injustice. And THAT is the part the parasite class does NOT want people to think about. They will paint him as a "mentally unstable" "tax cheat," or apply to him whatever other labels they think might make people not want to THINK about what Mr.
josda1000 wrote:
Most do it without thinking, and I doubt any of them accept any personal responsibility for their actions. "Hey, I'm just doing my job." Yeah, you and the Nazi SS. But this is the problem that the "authority" myth creates: a bunch of brain-dead authoritarian jackasses, day after day, terrorize, extort and rob millions and millions of people. The people are then left with a choice: go after the unthinking bureaucrats whose main sin is being blindly obedient, or allow injustice to continue.
Most do it without thinking. I doubt any of them accept any personal responsibility for their actions. Wow! Such omniscience! I can't speak for the USA, of course, but having worked with bureaucrats in both the public and private sectors for 50 years, to me brain-dead, authoritarian, unthinking, blindly obedient personality traits were evenly distributed throughout both. Were any of them in any way like the Nazi SS - of course not. But Mr Rose has a Nazi mind set, instead of Jews, Homosexuals, Gypsies, et al, his Concentration Camps would be bulging with State Mercenaries (Police), Terrorists (IRS), Tyrants (Elected Legislators), et al. Mr Rose is a bitter little man, and I feel sorry for him. It is so hard for the self employed to dodge their taxes[^].
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
-
Excuse me, but he did make a statement. See the other thread on Joe Stack's letter. And within the letter, he says he wanted people to wake up and see what's going on around them. So, yes. I think I'm in the right here.
josda1000 wrote:
And within the letter, he says he wanted people to wake up and see what's going on around them. So, yes. I think I'm in the right here.
He committed a violent act for that purpose. How exactly does that make him anything other than the textbook, the common, and every other conceivable definition of a terrorist?
-
I have Team America stuck in my head. Thanks. Now I gotta find that DVD...
Hey, that's from South Park, not Team America.... Same writers, yeah, but still :)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel) -
josda1000 wrote:
Most do it without thinking, and I doubt any of them accept any personal responsibility for their actions. "Hey, I'm just doing my job." Yeah, you and the Nazi SS. But this is the problem that the "authority" myth creates: a bunch of brain-dead authoritarian jackasses, day after day, terrorize, extort and rob millions and millions of people. The people are then left with a choice: go after the unthinking bureaucrats whose main sin is being blindly obedient, or allow injustice to continue.
Most do it without thinking. I doubt any of them accept any personal responsibility for their actions. Wow! Such omniscience! I can't speak for the USA, of course, but having worked with bureaucrats in both the public and private sectors for 50 years, to me brain-dead, authoritarian, unthinking, blindly obedient personality traits were evenly distributed throughout both. Were any of them in any way like the Nazi SS - of course not. But Mr Rose has a Nazi mind set, instead of Jews, Homosexuals, Gypsies, et al, his Concentration Camps would be bulging with State Mercenaries (Police), Terrorists (IRS), Tyrants (Elected Legislators), et al. Mr Rose is a bitter little man, and I feel sorry for him. It is so hard for the self employed to dodge their taxes[^].
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos