TexasCHLforum.com

Rex B wrote:The Founding Fathers were criminals in their time, as was Ghandi

Never say never

Neither of them dropped planes into an IRS building full of civilians either.
Nonviolent illegalities are one thing (I am opposed to those)
Violent activities are completely different.

frazzled wrote:2. I don't believe in committing illegal acts. Do it through the legal process. I am not saying committing illegal acts equates to terrorism, but I do not support illegal acts as a method of positive change.

If it hadn't been for a bunch of people committing illegal acts, this nation and its freedoms would not exist.

TLynnHughes wrote:According to news reports a copy of the suicide note can be found here:

http://embeddedart.com/

It's very long!

T.

I caught his suicide note here.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... artco.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've been trying to figure out whether this is a right wing rant or a left wing rant, and I have decided it is either neutral or both of the above. I must say I have a lot of sympathy for his situation, but none for the way he chose to publicize it.

Jim

57Coastie wrote:

TLynnHughes wrote:According to news reports a copy of the suicide note can be found here:

http://embeddedart.com/

It's very long!

T.

I caught his suicide note here.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... artco.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've been trying to figure out whether this is a right wing rant or a left wing rant, and I have decided it is either neutral or both of the above. I must say I have a lot of sympathy for his situation, but none for the way he chose to publicize it.

Jim

Agreed. I don't know his whole story, only what he wrote. He described several run-ins over the course of the life with the IRS that deprived him of the livelihood he'd built for himself. I can sympathize the utter hopelessness and futility he felt. The choice he made today, however, was completely wrong and despicable.

This is very sad.

Andrew Stack was a depressed and angry broken man who felt that he had nothing left to live for. I can understand how his anger and feelings of hopelessness led him to kill himself. However, by crashing an airplane into an occupied building I can not see any redeeming social, political, religious or morale beliefs that could justify his actions.

Drewthetexan wrote:Generally, I'd agree. Breaking the law is wrong. And without a doubt, killing people and blowing things up is bankrupt. No issues there.

I suppose you disagree with Ghandi and Dr. King too? They were all about breaking the law.

I know this wasn't intended for me, Drew, but I never hesitate to speak, as I am sure many of you know, and of course I recognize that your very good question is rhetorical.

Gandhi and Dr King took no lives; they willingly gave their lives, they were martyrs for their cause, while engaging in nonviolent actions furthering the cause of freedom. Were their actions sometimes illegal in the eyes of discriminatory lawmakers and law enforcers? Of course, but very few of their actions are illegal now -- which, of course, was the point.

You have my greatest respect for drawing such a valid distinction.

Jim

Bennies wrote:

budroux2w wrote:

Bennies wrote:The news in Houston is confirming the name of the pilot and confirming that it was no accident. They even had a note he wrote to the IRS. I would not be suprised if he had explosive or something to that nature in the plane. I have quite a bit of time in that type aircraft and cannot believe the damage. It's not impossible but wow.

How much fuel does that type hold when full? That could be a big factor plus angle of attack. I'm not fimilar with the plane or how big the building actually is, but form the pics it does look like a massive amount of damage.

Good question it has been a few years since i have flown one so i had to look it up. If it is a normal Piper Cherokee and not something bigger like a Dakota it will hold a maximum of 50 gallons. Typical aviation fuel would be 100 low lead. some planes are converted to take 87 octane like a normal car. there is no way it had jet fuel which is what my local news channel was saying for a while. 100 LL is more volatile. to give you a size comparison a Cherokee has a gross take off weight of about 2,100 to 2,200 pounds fully loaded. that's why i find it hard to believe that it put that much hurting on that building. even hitting it going 160 to 180 knots. but like i said i guess its not impossible.

This airplane holds 25 gallons in each wing for a total of 50 gallons and has a speed of around 115 knots.
If the news was correct in reporting it as a Piper Cherokee 140 which has a 140 horse power motor.

austinrealtor wrote:and of course right on cue, CNN's resident king idiot Rick Sanchez is already asking "what can we do to prevent this?" so far he's come up with requiring all pilots to file flight plans because a maniac will of course stick to a flight plan

I'd like to point out to him that the 9/11 flights had all filed flight plans.

The Cherokee registered to Mr Stack was a PA28-236

84 gallons usable fuel

frazzled wrote:

Rex B wrote:The Founding Fathers were criminals in their time, as was Ghandi

Never say never

Neither of them dropped planes into an IRS building full of civilians either.
Nonviolent illegalities are one thing (I am opposed to those)
Violent activities are completely different.

The Founding Fathers certainly thought that there was a point where violence was justified to oppose tyranny. As Thomas Jefferson said, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

I'm don't think the US is anywhere near that point, or is likely to be in my lifetime, but with the history of our nation it is very difficult to say that violent resistance is never justifiable.

ETA: I'd agree that terroristic acts against non-combatant are never justifiable.

I have as much contempt for the IRS as the next guy, especially considering the Socialist regime it is presently supporting, but to resort to violence of this nature is just flat out unacceptable. Maybe I am reading some of the posts wrong here but if your posting up that this is somehow justified and this forum is allowing this opinion to be posted, I don't want to hear any crud from the mods around here when I talk of walking past a 30:06 sign.

My beliefs on these subjects are fairly straightforward and clear cut (something rare for me )

1. What happened today was terrorism. It was not "almost" terrorism or nearly terrorism. It was as much terrorism as an Arab/Muslim extremist strapping a bomb to themself and blowing up a pizza parlor in Israel. Joseph Andrew Stack will reside for the rest of eternity in the same growing corner of Purgatory occupied by the 9/11 hijackers, Timothy McVeigh, the Unabomber, the Virginia Tech killer, the Fort Hood shooter, and countless others. Regardless of how you feel about the IRS or anything else, what this man did was pure evil.

2. Non-violent breaking of laws like Gandhi and Dr. King espoused is one way of bringing difficult social change outside the "system". It's not the only way. And it's not the way our Founding Fathers finally brought about change. But you better have a following if you plan to break the law. Otherwise, you're just a common criminal.

3. Violent illegal acts to bring about change are sometimes acceptable. This is how our country was a founded. But a violent uprising against an oppressive ruling class must be directed at that ruling class directly or at its military arm to be socially acceptable in my book. Attacking some rank-n-file tax collectors at a local office does not qualify. And again doing so alone is also unacceptable. If you are the only member of your "revolution" then you're not a revolutionary, you're a nut job. If you can't convince others you're right, then shut up and go back to your worthless existence or just end yourself without bothering the rest of us with the job of cleaning up your messy ending. Our Founding Fathers resorted to violence against the standing Army of an occupying overlord ONLY after thorough, painstaking debate, soul-searching, and voting amongst a large group of like-minded individuals who all agreed to abide by the group's collective decision.

Oh, and I gather news from CNN, MSNBC, Fox, PBS, NPR, local newspapers, the NYT and countless other sources. If you boycott a certain news organization because you don't agree with them politically, then you're just as bad as they are. I watch/listen/read as much as I can and form my own opinions. I don't do well with "groupthink".

austinrealtor wrote: 1. What happened today was terrorism. It was not "almost" terrorism or nearly terrorism. It was as much terrorism as an Arab/Muslim extremist strapping a bomb to themself and blowing up a pizza parlor in Israel. Joseph Andrew Stack will reside for the rest of eternity in the same growing corner of Purgatory occupied by the 9/11 hijackers, Timothy McVeigh, the Unabomber, the Virginia Tech killer, the Fort Hood shooter, and countless others. Regardless of how you feel about the IRS or anything else, what this man did was pure evil.

AMAN TO THAT!!!

SmoothFox wrote:So does this mean my refund will be delayed?

LOL.... ... I don't plan to pay them what I owe until after I have exhausted all my legal delays in October, so you weren't going to get it back for a while anyway.