Plane hits building in Austin

[03Lightningrocks]

While I agree Jim that this is obviously a criminal act, I disagree with who it is that is muddling things up. During the Bush administration there was absolutely no question about what a terrorist was. Your man Odumbell started the confusion to gain political power. It cracks me up that you would try to blame this on Bush too. It is actually getting real old. Give it up already.

[Keith B]

OK, stop this or the thread will be locked. You have been warned before.

[PUCKER]

Not to be at all callous with this tragedy, but that's something I was wondering about too, mine is supposed to go through electronically tonight or next Friday.

So does this mean my refund will be delayed?

[A-R]

The IRS guy was simply seeking payback. He does not represent any group or cause, other than his own selfish motivations.

We don't yet know this for a fact. Perhaps he was a member of "KillTheIRS" or something. But I get your point. And it's a valid argument. My point is simply that this event is much closer to terrorism than it is to just common crime. The Austin police chief yesterday compared it to everyday crimes his department deals with everyday, and THAT is what set me off and made me take a side that this was terrorism. If the scale is between 9/11 and some punk robbing a convenience store at gunpoint, the plane crasher is much closer to the 9/11 terrorists than he is to the armed robbery criminal. All three will end up "terrorizing" someone - the entire Western World (9/11), all IRS field offices (plane crasher), convenience store clerks (armed robbery). But the plane crasher adds spectacle, a written "belief" or manifesto or whatever, and motivations beyond merely money (though some have labeled the plane crasher as just somone who didn't want to pay his taxes - thus merely money - his issues in his manifesto seem much deeper than that, going to the whole of the American way of life).

Let me put it another way. If Bullet Trap takes away my membership and kicks me out because I rapid fire at the range, so I fly an airplane into the place, am I a terrorist or am just a guy who flipped out because I felt like they did me wrong? That is how I perceive what this guy did with the IRS. It was an individual act carried out over selfish motivations. I don't think we want to define terrorism in a way that includes any attempt at mass murder. That would trivialize true terrorist groups to the point of not taking them seriously enough. Which I believe is the true goal of the pacifist regime our country is presently under. That is why this debate is happening. We knew darn good and well what a terrorist was and wasn't 1 and 1/2 years ago. The obamamaniacs are trying to persuade us all to hug a terrorist and understand them. But first they have to change our definition of terrorist. By blurring the lines, they create acceptance.

I also see your point here, but please understand that I am in no way trying to dimish the evilness of 9/11 terrorists. I'm trying to elevate (reduce?) what plane crasher guy did closer to their level and further from a common street criminal. And I don't think all mass murderers fit the bill as "terrorists" either. Some of them do just snap a wire in the ol noggin and go kill people for no apparent reason. It is plane crasher's manifesto and his "reasons" that push this closer to terrorism, IMHO.

Another interesting argument related to all this is whether inner city street gangs and the KKK, Aryan Nation, Mexicano Narco gangs and other such gangs can be labeled "terrorists", which in many ways I think they can. But again I am in no way trying to blur the definition of anything or reduce the severity of the depravity of 9/11-style terrorists. I don't believe al Qaeda types should be treated as "criminals", nor do I believe gangs, mass murderers, and guys such as plane crasher, Unabomber, Tim McVeigh etc should be treated merely as common "criminals". I can't speak for any political leadership or organization as none of the current major choices represents my beliefs.

Anyway, interesting discussion. I greatly appreciate your point of view and willingness to express it.

[A-R]

Not to be at all callous with this tragedy, but that's something I was wondering about too, mine is supposed to go through electronically tonight or next Friday.

So does this mean my refund will be delayed?

Austin Statesman today mentioned that this office houses a lot of auditors and people who work in that type of capacity and that no tax returns were processed there in any way.

[03Lightningrocks]

Not to be at all callous with this tragedy, but that's something I was wondering about too, mine is supposed to go through electronically tonight or next Friday.

So does this mean my refund will be delayed?

Austin Statesman today mentioned that this office houses a lot of auditors and people who work in that type of capacity and that no tax returns were processed there in any way.

I was hoping maybe some of my files got roasted in the fire.

[03Lightningrocks]

I would think that the random act of violence as a reprisal or to gain temporary riches would not qualify as true terrorism. I went ahead and used my best Google-Foo and came up with the standard definition of terrorism.

terrorism (usually uncountable; plural terrorisms)

1. The deliberate commission of an act of violence to create an emotional response through the suffering of the victims in the furtherance of a political or social agenda.
2. Violence against civilians to achieve military or political objectives.
3. A psychological strategy of war for gaining political or religious ends by deliberately creating a climate of fear among the population of a state.


One thing I found in common with all definitions was the political agenda part. This would indicate that random acts of violence for revenge or personal gain don't qualify.

[PUCKER]

Thank you for the info!

Not to be at all callous with this tragedy, but that's something I was wondering about too, mine is supposed to go through electronically tonight or next Friday.

So does this mean my refund will be delayed?

Austin Statesman today mentioned that this office houses a lot of auditors and people who work in that type of capacity and that no tax returns were processed there in any way.

[A-R]

I would think that the random act of violence as a reprisal or to gain temporary riches would not qualify as true terrorism. I went ahead and used my best Google-Foo and came up with the standard definition of terrorism.

terrorism (usually uncountable; plural terrorisms)

1. The deliberate commission of an act of violence to create an emotional response through the suffering of the victims in the furtherance of a political or social agenda.
2. Violence against civilians to achieve military or political objectives.
3. A psychological strategy of war for gaining political or religious ends by deliberately creating a climate of fear among the population of a state.


One thing I found in common with all definitions was the political agenda part. This would indicate that random acts of violence for revenge or personal gain don't qualify.

Nice Google-foo. My Google-foo (dictionary.com) keeps crashing my computer lately for some weird reason so I've been resorting to the 20-year-old hardcopy of Webster's on my bookshelf (can you believe it? in this day and age, having to turn actual pages? made of paper? from trees? )

Anyway, this is all hand-typed by me (typos probably included) from that book:

1 the act of terrorizing; use of force or threats to demoralize, intimidate, and subjugate, esp. such as a political weapno or policy
2 the demoralization and intimidation produced in this way

Back on point, my quibble with your above post is that you assume this guy's motive was revenge and/or personal gain alone. I read his manifesto as having a lot of political agenda. Just so happens it's not a political agenda that can easily be pigeon-holed into our two-party system. But questioning how your government collects taxes and how it uses that tax money is inherently political. And I still say his motive includes both revenge AND spectacle AND terror. He wanted revenge for how he felt mistreated, and he wanted to scare the IRS and "wake up" his fellow citizens with a spectacular display of violence.

Seems he didn't really accomplish those goals as the national news stations today are already downplaying this story in favor of Tiger Woods' mea culpa *puke*

[03Lightningrocks]

LOL...yeah...Tiger took the headlines today. My guess is the story isn't as enticing because the only dead person was the pilot. But Tiger Woods apologizing is some real serious business.

[Keith B]

LOL...yeah...Tiger took the headlines today. My guess is the story isn't as enticing because the only dead person was the pilot. But Tiger Woods apologizing is some real serious business.

There were two killed; the pilot and one person in the building. Two additional were injured.

[tacticool]

It all depends how you define terrorist. By some of the implied definitions here, Eric Holder is a terrorist.

My definition is different. For me, a required element of terrorism is deliberately targeting uninvolved parties, especially noncombatants. In addition, a terrorist act is intended to advance a political, religious, social, or cultural cause.

According to my definition:
A USAF pilot who unintentionally kills noncombatants living next to an enemy missile site is not a terrorist.
An Army Ranger who intentionally kills trainees and staff at an al Qaeda camp while they're asleep is not a terrorist.
The people who killed Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai last month were not terrorists.
A bank robber who intentionally kills a teller is not a terrorist. The bank robber is a criminal.
A robbery victim who fights back but negligently hits a bystander is not a terrorist.
A local guerrilla who attacks a government convoy is not a terrorist.
Charles Bronson's character in Death Wish was not a terrorist.
Joe Stack doesn't seem to be a terrorist.

[03Lightningrocks]

LOL...yeah...Tiger took the headlines today. My guess is the story isn't as enticing because the only dead person was the pilot. But Tiger Woods apologizing is some real serious business.

There were two killed; the pilot and one person in the building. Two additional were injured.

Oh my...I am real sorry to hear that. I knew there were 2 injured but had not picked up on the second one killed. I have not been watching the news much today and yesterday. Thanks for letting me know. Was that the person who they were referring to as missing yesterday?

[Keith B]

LOL...yeah...Tiger took the headlines today. My guess is the story isn't as enticing because the only dead person was the pilot. But Tiger Woods apologizing is some real serious business.

There were two killed; the pilot and one person in the building. Two additional were injured.

Oh my...I am real sorry to hear that. I knew there were 2 injured but had not picked up on the second one killed. I have not been watching the news much today and yesterday. Thanks for letting me know. Was that the person who they were referring to as missing yesterday?

They haven't released a name that I aware of, but all indications are they found two bodies, one being the pilot, so I am assuming it is the one that was missing. I think I heard yesterday that the person missing was a male IRS auditor, but not sure.

[marksiwel]

So I heard about the plane crash from a co-worker, called wife, asked her what was going on downtown (she by the capital) asked her if it was time to "bug out" she said, wait and see.
If it was Bug out time, I'm going to 'The Gun Store" and getting a Shotgun or a AR ASAP and a bunch of mags and ammo.
Then I'm stopping by the gas station and filling up all my Gas cans. then we are going to Possum Kingdom area where wife's family has cabin hid away.

I was worried it might be a Crop Duster.

So does this count as a terrorist act? Will the IRS agent get Terrorism money or just Job Accident money.