Joe Stack: Victim or Terrorist?

Damn you are being a paranoid! The chances of some nutjob finding you are slim to none at best. If I thought this could happen I'd not comment like I do on the Moslem problem.I'll admit that some tax protesters are more then a tad dangerous,but many aren't and I've known a few.also our government will not hesitate to use violence to nail them,so people in that position feel they need the same weapons the feds have.some are skinheads,some are white supremacists,sure but many get that way from perceived injustices done to them by the government.If you think loan sharks will go to any means to collect,the IRS is even worse! As a result people lose it and go off! don't be paranoid rather enjoy the freedom to express your views here!

Disinformation is king in the world of governments. People are paid to be on this site and to contradict the regular posters. Its so obvious like the nose on your face.

I won't back down from them.

that depends on your definition of fun and it is not mine! I may be an idealistic dreamer but I love the concepts upon which this nation was founded,I do not love how that concept has been perverted by those only interested in power and profit,which is why they have slowly removed the freedoms all Americans were supposed to enjoy,to insure no oversight, by the people, into the activities of the rich elite! The people let this happen buying into the crap fed to them! I would rather live,and die, on my feet then do so on my knees, I hope there are more of like mind or we are truly doomed and our children will live in a country that has become a prison!

Yes E-6 we are on the same side and probably in more ways then one. Productive? been down that road most people in this country are brainwashed and refuse to learn! read a lot of the posts on current will prove that fact,and the apathy in this country is so thick it is like quicksand it sucks them in and down until any chance of free will is gone! I prefer action of one type or another to trying to convince the blind to see,and while I do enjoy arguing on current with people here it solves nothing,and the clock is ticking! What it will take is small groups of like minded people to make the first steps while trying to win heats and minds!{doesn't that strategy sound familar?] that is what it will take and when the government reacts harshly people will wake up hopefully.There is no time to teach my friend there is little time left in my view! although am willing to listen!

You're not running one of those "you can get paid to post" scams, are you? You mean to tell me the gov't is behind those? Dang!!

Cuz after years of posting, I'm still waiting for the check "they" PROMISED! And if the firm that promised doesn't pay up soon, they can expect me to come-a-visitin' in a rented Piper Cherokee, LOL!

Dude, paranoia is destroying ya'.

Trust and believe: NO ONE is so important that anyone else gives a crap what THEY or any other nut-job BELIEVES. As long as you keep your self-delusional megalomania contained and in YOUR MIND (and don't become a suicide bomber), me or any other citizen truly couldn't give a crap about you. You're just another dick in a world full of dicks, in my book.

HOWEVER, once YOU cross the line and think YOU'RE the arbiteur of right and wrong, and once you intrude your business into mine by trying to kill me too, THEN I've got a HUGE problem with you.

See, that whole "right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" thing isn't exclusively YOURS: it belongs to everyone, so we've got to SHARE it.

Don't tread on the rights of others, since YOU think someone's out to "get" you. Get a grip, all of you, before you get 'schooled' in how picking random conflicts can back-fire on you as the aggressor.

If you hate your lot in life, grow a pair and check out for the hereafter by sucking on the hand-gun you place in your mouth. If you don't have the balls for DIY, you could do the whole 'death by cop' thing, realizing that it's the chicken-shit way out, too (think of the cop you force to take your life: THAT leaves scars).

There is NO "going out with a blaze of glory": not that it should matter, since at least YOU'LL get your wish, since you're only focused on what's in it for YOU.

Dude, you need help. You're clearly intelligent, but it's not an issue of smartness: it's an issue of possessing a dying/dead soul.

When you start referring to the U.S. as "the enemy", you're either a clever and warped troll, or truly in psychological trouble.

There is help out there, but like all problems, you're going to first have to make the first step and admit there's a problem...

What's the different between Joe Stack and a Marine who kills innocent Muslim civilians indiscriminately?

Please be specific and include examples in your response.

Wow. I thought you would actually answer that question with a logical answer. But now I think there probably is no such thing. The one with the impulsive ALL CAPS response has the anger issues. Not me.

I'm asking a serious question. I'd really like a civil answer. What is the difference between randomly killing innocent Muslims and randomly killing an IRS worker war veteran (also by happenstance responsible for the deaths of innocent war victims). It seems like poetic justice. Joe Stack was in a fight for America's freedom as well. There is always collateral damage. Ask any military person.

But I'm willing to listen to a sane argument to the contrary.

Who are you trying to convince, beside yourself? You're working real hard at a futile effort. Give it up. No one is listening.

Difference is, Stack on some level REALIZED what he was doing was wrong, and despite the damage he inflicted on taxpayers, he saved taxpayers the expense of a lengthy trial and costs of execution by doing it himself. So in that ONE regard, killing himself was appreciated. An absolute a-hole sociopath parasite would do this without killing himself, thus forcing the rest of us to fret over what to do with the guy (death penalty vs life imprisonment, etc)

For all we know, some of the marines beset by personal demons who've committed suicide are in their own way attempting to atone for sins they've committed when no one was watching. No one knows, as it is unknowable (unless you're God, if you believe in the idea of all-being, all-knowing entities, that is).

For even the most incorrigible sociopathic mass-murderer (someone who is completely unable to fathom that other people may have feelings and drives, too) sometimes has a temporary break-thru, and comprehends that what they did was WRONG. Hopefully they temporarily remember the old saying, "two wrongs don't make a right", even though the time to remember was YEARS AGO before they killed another.

"This is my country - I paid one hell of a price for it, a price you couldn't begin to understand."

See, if you truly are a retired O-6 (which I find incredibly hard to accept: it wouldn't be the first time some loser lied over the internet, LOL!), then you'd know that you're absolutely dishonoring those who have made the ULTIMATE sacrifice on the battlefield, giving their LIVES for the sake of the greater good of their citizens.

You'd also know that your service entitles you to no special treatment over your fellow citizens: apparently you thought otherwise?

Bottom line: I don't care WHAT you think your government has done to you; only a traitor would spit on the graves of his fellow soldiers by telling their families and orphans they died for NOTHING. Absolutely disgraceful to say, EVEN IF you truly DO think it's God's truth. Talk about behavior unbecoming of an officer (which may have been stripped from you, if true? Tax dodging is not exactly condoned on any public servant, aside from the likes of Geithner, LOL!! Yeah, it's a double-standard, but MOST military members are PROUD and WILLING to maintain higher standards than others in public service).

I suppose it's possible someone could attain the rank of O-6 without truly believing or absorbing the CORE values required for honorable military service as an officer: if so, then you're no doubt finally realizing what a sniveling two-faced coward you are, a brown stain on the honorable profession of military service.

anyone who served and risked their lives,or was wounded,has a lot more right to bitch about the state of this country then you do! you aren't a traitor for speaking out against the injustices in this country either,and in my view you are a traitor if you don't! tax dodging? listen the poor and middle class pay it all, the rich pay next to nothing,and since both struggle to survive, it is an issue of economics rather then not paying! in todays New York Times is a story that the amount of income tax the rich pay has dropped 400% in the last few years alone! I say tax these greedy scumbags at 50% and give the rest of us a break! They can afford it! Also if you think that being in the military means you go along blindly goose stepping all the way you'd be wrong! The tax code needs to be changed so the rich pay their share!

You don't read carefully, do you? I'm ALSO a vet (prior-service enlisted, 10 years TAFMS if you have a clue what that means...) who did the taxpayers a favor by NOT staying in to go for the cushy retirement package (I started back in 1983, so was eligible for the old "top 3" retirement deal). Kiss my ass, just for being one....

BTW, anyone who actually SERVED knows that the military fights to protect the rights of freedom of speech for EVERY citizen, even those who don't appreciate it. Ironically the only ones who don't enjoy the right are military members themselves, while in the military.

Only a pompous blowhole who's probably never served a DAY in his life would think he's BETTER than his country, and not pay taxes based on who knows what.... See ya' in Federal Jail (I bet Irwin Schiff can use a bunkie mate).

Live free or die (and take out the IRS with you), I always say.

Eh, I think you're referring to munitions commonly referred to as "bunker busters" (not "blockbusters"? That's the video store in the mall)? Google "bunker buster," and learn how/why these expensive munitions are designed for a specific goal (and hint: it's not about killing anything above the ground, but penetrating to subterranean targets hiding underground).

Please get your BASIC facts straight before trying to edumacate (sic); some of us DO know better, and see such basic errors as only undermining your credibility.

Freedom in death.

Yeah, getting the language right makes all the difference, in your fairy tale world. 1,000,000 innocent dead Iraqi civilians, just because a racist military said so. We are no better than Nazis.

For one, I never suggested "bunker-busters" were used in Iraq; you assumed I said it. If you're the supposed expert you claim, you'd know they were famously reported as having been used in Afghanistan as a means to penetrate Al Qaeda bunkers hidden inside Tora-Bora.

Don't pay taxes? FIne. Evade taxes for whatever BS you can dream up: it doesn't matter. I hear Irwin Schiff needs a bunkie in the Pen.

You forgot one thing that is important and that is the Patriot Act which legally allows our government to terrorize it's citizens! All the points Joe Stack made in his manifesto ring true and if you are making the point that government are the real terrorists then you are correct in that assumption! It is also important to add that we the people let this happen,let our rights be taken away on a false promise of safety! Lets talk about the FEMA concentration camps Bush built, with ovens,to dispose of anyone the power elite doesn't like,or who speaks out in opposition to government policy! The time when one can fight the rich power elite in this country is gone forever,and it is only a matter of time before a dictatorship of corporatism has the firm hold on power and using the so called law and the force of arms they seize power totally,and kill of those of us who'd dare object! The outrages you list are only the tip of the iceberg the worst,not seen since the days of the nazi's,is yet to come!

http://lavin.st

If you are unaware of these camps FEMA built under orders from Bush then you have not done your research my friend and I'd urge you to do so! The subject has even been on Current as I recall! They exist and their purpose is clear! I have been speaking out against the Patriot Act since congress passed it WITHOUT even reading it! May I assume that besides both of us being in our fifties,am 58,that you have been involved in the social justice movement since the late 60's or so as I have been? From reading your posts I'd bet on it! Do the research! You will find they do exist! Also are you aware that Obama has ordered the North American army command to be prepared to be used against the American people in the event of mass protest or Civil War?They and canadian troops will be used to staff these camps as well! Do your research then if you want to chat email me: lavin.stephen@yahoo.com. You need to do this research and see for yourself my saying so won't change,or open your mind! While you are at it google ECHELON you will have much reading to do! I never speak on any subject that I know Isn't true!

+^d

Right ON Walks.

Go to UTube they showed pictures of the camps! I believe current also had a story awhile back.I saw it on Utube first! you could also google FEMA camps and see what comes up. It is there! it's good you won I did too once when they set me up back in 1971 but they never go away and sooner or later they'll come at you again the bastards! Am at my office so I can't do it now but if you want later today I'll do the search and send you the site or sites to find out about these camps.gave you my email so feel free to use it!

Calm yourself try FEMA camps then give me a break I research everything I hear and as I said I remember a while back a story on this here. Look you hate research fine I'll do it for you after work [tonight] had it all saved on my home computer until 2 weeks ago when the hard drive crashed! couldn't retrive the data! lost files but had those backed up! so am done around 7pm can probably do it after 8. Ok Happy now? stop growling! Christ!

Your nickname wouldn't happen to be Epic Bearded Man, by any chance? :)

So you showed up unannounced at the door of Charles Grassley and got him out of the shower to extract a promise from him? You must have some powerful presence in person to do THAT! And you say Federal snipers were trying to take you out (3x, no less)?

So what was the name of the decision where the U.S. District Court ruled against you? (I have access to findlaw and lexisONE, and want to look up the case to verify your claim).

ever heard of a CPA?

He is a terrorist, and the American people do need to be woken up... it's just sad to see it done in this uncivilized manner.

Its easy to say that people need to be woken up, but im not sure as to whether you and are on the same page. As much as I dont agree with killing others, I am not sure that people will listen to the desperate cries to put an end to America's corruption, unless they are in violent manners. Politicians run on a platform of representing the voices their constituents, yet I haven't heard too many demanding the U.S. to stop supporting Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territories, those that do are deemed anti-semitic. Most Americans have not even thought about why the terrorists chose the World Trade Centers to hit on 9-11. With out understanding that, you might as well think that the Muslims started the feud, and its all in the name of religion.... Oh wait, people do think that!

When I say people need to wake up, I mean Americans need to get their heads out of their asses and realize the institutions they help support, whether it be voluntarily or not, are the very reasons why there is hatred directed towards the U.S.. But understand this, the extremist may take the lives of innocent people, but their aim is the institutions. They are not trying to kill every American for the sake of a difference in beliefs. They did not just up and decide they were going to attempt the most difficult genocide of all time. These violent attacks spurred out of the rich history between the U.S. military, the intelligence agencies, like the C.I.A., the corrupt corporations, and the manner in which they handled the people in the Middle East, since the Cold War days.

Not terrorist, freedom fighter.

The system needs radical change, people dont listen to rational voices they are too deeply sedated by those in control. It is going to take a full on bloody violent revolution to change things.

We are in too deep for non violence. We can either let them keep killing us as people wake up to the truth or we can fight back as people wake up, either way people will die.

I disagree completely but I know my hopes are idealistic. I think everyone should drop their guns, and other weapons. Every person that finds themselves going up against the U.S. Corporatocracy should find one location to hold a demonstration in which they can drop off their weapons. When you think in terms of fighting against one of the strongest military complexes that has ever existed, it is almost impossible to defeat them. That is why I believe everyone should just give up that route.

Think about it in this scenario; The Palestinians gather all they're weapons, bring them to the borders of Israel and profess "Okay, we won't fight you anymore." What is Israel to do? How can they justify killing innocent people and occupying territories that do not belong to them if there aren't any "terrorists" to fight? The same goes for every other Arab nation. If all Arabs gave up they're weapons to U.S. military forces, then say, "Okay, you win. Now get out of this region and keep your hands away from our oil." It's so crazy it might just work.

I do believe most americans are some what brainwashed on the issue of israel. I currently live in Munich and see the protests of both pro and anti israel occupation very often and is brought up in discussions A LOT more than in the US. I am just ashamed that my country (of origin) went so far down the wrong path that it resulted in terrorist acts (again). What have we become?

Yup

Most of the Islamic terrorists are pawns, used from inside a large, vast system with political aims.
To think the purpose of Islamic terrorism is generated from some deep, inner good is a mistake.

Their oil is being sold to the US - by them. Except the Muslims in control are not sharing the wealth. The people at the top have golden thrones in their private jumbo jets.
The oil is sold to one place.
The people are miserable because they've been left in a backward, uneducated state - by their leaders. Not by the US.

If you think violence is going to change things you are deluded. Too deluded my romanticized revolutionary fantasies.

I dunno. I like the strategy they used in Avatar better.

Yeah, what you say is true.

It's the height of hypocrisy to claim that when one person of one nationality carries out the same action it is terrorism, while when another ("one of our own") does the same thing he is a "hero", a freedom fighter. Most Americans are so moronic they can't see that the likes of Stack/McVeigh were working towards the same goal of Al Qaeda: the economic and political destruction of America.

When a military member takes an oath of office, they swear to "uphold and defend the Constitution, from enemies both foreign and domestic". Most who've taken the oath understand the need to protect from foreign enemies (e.g. Germany during WW II), but few have had to deal with the "domestic" enemies. Many don't even know what it really MEANS.

A 'domestic enemy' is any outfit that attempts to OVERTHROW the gov't of the U.S. by violent means. This Stack guy was simply a domestic enemy of one (assuming he didn't have any aid).

As much as people try to make out the revolutionaries as freedom fighters, the thing they conveniently forget to mention is the Founding Fathers ALSO realized they needed to PROTECT the newly-crafted Nation from those who'd seek to destroy it. Hence the phrase in the 2nd Amendment about a "well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms";

At the time, the U.S. military (Regular Army) was weak enough that the citizenry needed to assist at times as citizen-soldiers, serving as the reservists (citizen-soldiers) of their day (we still have this in the form of the National and State National Guards).

Point being, the point of a militia is NOT to overthrow the gov't (as some paramilitary groups would attempt), but to protect against enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC. If anyone cannot define who the 'enemy' is, then they're truly adrift without a sail or rudder.

They might not be able to justify it but do you really think the Palestinians laying down their arms would stop israel from finally taking control of their long time enemy? More like it would give them the opportunity to take control once and for all.

Non-violent revolution would be ideal but it isn't realistic when all things are considered. Laying down your weapons and professing you will no longer fight isnt going to change the world the way you hope it will, because those corrupt few who are in control will still be in control, expect they will finally have complete control with no resistance.

Its definitely a crazy idea and it would never work in a million years.

23 years? my god! You say you thought about an action like Joe Stack took,what convinced you not too take that step? Did you win your battle with the IRS and if you did how? I'd like to look your case up could you send the cite so I can? not many win against the IRS!

and violent revolution would, against the most technologically advanced and well trained/funded military in the world?

Ugh, revolutionary romanticism gives us a bad name.

You really don't understand the issues of the Middle East, or the concepts of Islam. It seems you have gathered an idea out a few miscellaneous stories, but you have not taken the time to look into the history of influential figures and events. Do you really believe that all the oil is sold to one place? As if the U.S. was the only place that needs oil, ha!

You need to check out the C.I.A. world fact-book online to get a general understanding of the economics of these countries. I'm not claiming that is the best source for valid information, simply because we can agree the CIA might be an intelligence agency, but the corrupt information is packaged neatly.

This notion that Muslim countries rich in oil are all very under-developed and the general populace is uneducated, I don't know how you came up with that but it is simply wrong. I think you are mistaking stories of Afghanistan and other Muslim nations for Arab nations in the Middle East. Afghanistan is not located in the Middle East. It is not an Arab nation. Afghanistan is a Muslim nation, but not Arab. In general the countries in the Middle East have a mixed demographic that is split between those that are pushing for more modern reform and those that feel going modern is equivalent to becoming more Western, which implies being more liberal and accepting of other life-styles, even those depraved of values, clearly going against the beliefs of Muslims.

These countries have found ways to develop in ways the U.S. could only dream of, yet remain relatively true to their religious values. It is well known that many of out-dated traditions and practices still remain, some being seen as barbaric, yet Western countries have developed plenty of new ways to be inhumane and monstrous. Everyone has work to do. As for the current development, these countries have some of the most advanced infrastructure, top-of-the-line shopping centers, and education-systems that are pressing ahead of pretty much the entire U.S..

If you want to talk about a country that is being exploited by its leaders, and a population of uneducated religious fundamentalists, then look no further then your own back-yard. The taxes of the U.S. is what supports Israel's apartheid of Palestinians, which upsets the entire world, but the Islamic extremists are the only ones that are willing to loose their own lives for the sake of attacking those responsible for the slaughtering of innocent. The U.S. military complex is how the Arab nations, and most others, even have weapons to pursue war agendas. The U.S. armed everyone, and now its time for "peace-keeping operations".

I am honestly getting very tired of having to teach you some of the most basic information on these issues. Please, read some books, learn the real history, and stop living off the day-to-day events you come across. There are actually a ton of great documentaries online that you could watch. You have options, take advantage of them.

Well, what you are saying is that there will not be an end to the fighting until one side has either killed the others, died themselves, or one has simply gained complete control. Basically that means, it will never end. If you reconsider what I suggested, about people putting down their weapons to stop the fighting, that is simply what has to happen, not what we can fantasize about. The fighting must end, so someone must give up the battling with weapons approach. Now, laying down their weapons does not mean letting go of their differences. We will always have disputes and grievances, but as long as people try to solve their problems by destroying their opponents, then they will only add fuel to the fire.

About Palestine, do you really believe the rest of the world would allow Israel to take complete control of the Palestinians if it was known that the Palestinians were unarmed? Israel has indeed been carrying out in some cruel behavior, while many in the U.S. remain clueless. As long as Palestinians try to fight back with what little weapons they can gather and make, the Western media has the ability to paint the picture as Israel protecting its people from "terrorists". Now if Palestinians held a demonstration that expressed how weak they have become from all the fighting, that they are unable to fight Israel, so they turn over all their weapons, but demand their rights protected--- then Israel is the one left weakened. It is only then that Israel would have no other choice but begin real discussions with Palestinians to come to some sort of compromise. Then the world will witness what agendas are being pursued and judge the integrity of both sides.

Apply this to every feud currently handled by means of weapons and military might, then you will understand there are no real winners. People must have the ability to discuss their grievances and agendas to sort out a compromise. This is what the United Nations should be about. Also, when I suggested Arab nations giving up their arms, the same goes for all nations; which produces the problem of regions having a standing army to prevent any corrupt group from overtaking any populace. That again is what the United Nations organizations try to be, but fail.

What's so wrong with anarchy? Obviously democracy has failed. Capitalism has failed. We now live in a corporate socialist welfare oligarchy. Anarchy just might be the first step to a better society.

To welcome anarchy is to invite a complete lapse into barbarism. The laws of man are far from those found of nature. If you wish to live in a world of absolutes a world where nearly every transgression of the law is punishable by death, and the will of arms or the designs of the insidious reign I can assure you a most warmth welcome and appreciation in a world void of civilization. I will however rest in a country wherein free association and consensus prevails and in defense only is the final ground sought.

It might well be the start of something big!

Anarchy leads to barbarism huh. Just like the public option leads to single payer which leads to socialism. Just like smoking pot leads to heroine. Yeah right.

Then you talk about an absolute world where every transgression is punishable by death. Where the hell did that come from? What fantasy land do you live in?

None of that is anarchy. Perhaps you should look up the word. Webster says "a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority." There's nothing absolute about that.

Did you ever come to a broken stop light where everyone had to take turns? There is no order there. No law. Yet everyone has the common courtesy to take turns, and if someone doesn't it's no big deal. That's anarchy. It doesn't have to absolute.

Furthermore in anarchy who can punish anyone by death for every transgression of the law if there is no law?

The wild west was anarchy. It survived. It can work.

Sometimes you have to tear things down before you can build them up.

Anarchy is not an inevitable event but its path is far from clear hence the word "invite" and not something more affirmative.

Then I will congratulate you for your realization that people live and act in a reasonable fashion but reasonable is a wholly subjective term. After all you naturally moved to the Wild West while I would think Dark Ages at the thought of lawlessness whose snapshot is more within a reasoned discussion. The Wild West being tamed and settled by a single country or 700 years marked by virtually no urban life, constant warfare, and the loss of texts and knowledge not to be rediscovered for a millennium.

Further when I speak of absolutes it is the profound if subtle difference between the laws of nature and man. A fundamental tenant of the law of nature is punishment a means that holds no limit other than the ability to dominate the transgressor.

Evolution is a two way street the last two thousand years are bookmarked by two republics that fell not from foreign aggression but the thunderous applause that accompanies victory at the ballot.

+^d

Haha...you're a brain washed Ameican hahahahaha

ha ok... I want to start off first saying I don't even live in America currently.

I am simply saying there are alternative non-violent people you can side with that won't make you look like a supporter of a home-grown phsyco. Is that so wrong?

I also want to state (since I know now you believe Americans are under educated monkeys) that I have been educated in Europe since I was 15. Do you believe Europeans are in the same boat? You are ignorant by stating that people with different view points are under educated.

You are entitled to your opinion but you have no power over the millions who in some way believe in what Joe Stack did. For many he is an American hero and all the ALL CAPS in the world will never change that.

I do think many of the things Stack said were true but violence over this is insanity. We need to take an example from greece and take to the streets. Americans are either too agressive or too quite. What we need is a strong voice to put our beliefs behind. I choose to put mine behind Ron Paul. I do not believe in everything he says of course an example being healthcare. We can win things through strong words and voices. Look through history and see what peaceful agressive protests can do. America is a nation divided nearly 50/50 on most issues. Violence will be met only with violence. Is that really what you want? To spiral into agressive violence around the country?

May I remind you that when Mandela was put into power many people feared that the country would fall into civil war and the country would turn into a blood bath. I think a strong message can be sent with a peacful leader if there are enough supporters... Voilence can be a strong sign of weakeness of a movement.

I want to make it clear that my views of the situation in the US are probably close to the same as the people that actually consider him a hero. I just value the human life (especially those of my own people) to say I agree with his actions.

Difference being, LeMay was someone who volunteered to serve his country in a time of war, was commissioned as an officer, who trained in rules of engagement, worked his way up the chain of command, and was disciplined in the effective use of force. Like many of his generation, he truly HATED Japanese; however, such hatred is not a disadvantage during a War (he didn't need to control such emotions; maybe another matter if he were in Japan FOLLOWING the War, when diplomacy is a more-valued skill than hatred). Not aware of him delivering hate-filled rhetoric afterwards?

This Stack guy was a self-styled vigilante, SELF-ORDAINED, and self-empowered to unilaterally declare war against his country, and who decided to take other lives.

How are these similar, again?

FWIW, I also object to the SCOTUS decision on corporate speech, but don't agree that it "proves" anything that you say it does.

Any analysis must also include the 9-11 attackers. If they sincerely felt that the US government was a corrupting force on their world and that US hegemony was destined to wipe them out of existence, then were they a David to America's Goliath? Or were they just a bunch of scumsucking Muslims who should be locked up and tortured? Yes, the motivation of many Muslim terrorists is their interpretation of Islam. But that excuse is conflated and used by our government as well as other middle eastern governments to fire everyone's emotions on both sides and to keep the conflicts growing. (and would these analyses of the IRS attack be any different if the guy had espoused a more christian theme in his manifesto? Would there still be so many excusing his behavior?)

I believe that many people's problems with the US are the same problems that many Americans have with their own gov. It's so easy to define the "other guy" as a demon who uses the deaths of innocent people to make their point. Well here we have a homegrown American who has used the deaths of innocents to make his point. So, Mark, I agree that this incident gives us cause to re examine how we define our terms. But that analysis should be done across the board and focus on current events as well and not just in terms of our own national history.

You confirmed what I said. Lemay was sanctioned (and trained) by the state, so everything he did was ok. If Stack was a Muslim who the CIA had trained to crash his plane into an Iraqi market for the purpose of destabilizing Saddam Husseins goverment, would that have been acceptable? From the point of view of the US government, yes, because they would have perceived they were doing their patriotic duty and protecting US interests.

Stacks point was the US government/corporations are destroying our system of government and I agree with him 100%. So he took it upon himself to attack that government. Does that make him a vigilante? Good question. Did Britain consider our founding fathers vigilantes and rebels? Did those vigilantes and rebels fight against an abusive government ? Did innocent people die during that rebellion? Like I said, winning means you get to write history. You are allowed to justify your actions and build and entire culture around that justification. Losing means history remembers you as a vigilante and crazy person. Although methinks the jury is still out on this.

Don't get me wrong, violence is not my style. But that doesn't mean I don't understand the motivation for actions or see them as different from similar, larger scale actions undertaken by the US government.

My only reason to bring religion into the discussion at all is to continue to point out the hypocrisy of so many. So many commenters here have tried their damnedest to differentiate this guy's attack from any of the other terrorist attacks that have happened to justify their support for him and their utter contempt and condemnation of the others. These stances simply confirm to me, many in the US and many around the world that mainstream America are nothing but hypocrites with one set of standards for the rest of the world and a different set of rules for Americans, at least white Americans.

So you are saying then that the U.S. military has a grand tradition of racism as a means of dehumanizing entire cultures, which I agree is quite true. Even innocent civilians are fair game because they are Japanese. The same applies to Muslims. Our military has a racist dehumanization policy towards them and there's no doubt that many in the military hate all Muslims. We have a racist military.

Then you put LeMay on a pedestal because he rose up through the racist military ranks as if that somehow vindicates his racist mass murdering. The only way that works is if you can agree racism is OKI. Do you? Say it. Stand up and be proud. Repeat after me, "I am a racist and I hate all [insert your unfavorite culture here]."

You have no credibility or respect as far as I'm concerned and neither do your racist arguments.

You are talking about two different U.S. governments. The present one not only dehumanizes other nations and their cultures, but it dehumanizes its own U.S. citizens with corporate socialist welfare at the expense of everyone else in the country.

So Joe Stack was attacking a quite different government, and what he did is exactly what our forefathers did to England and is exactly what they intended a free U.S. population should do to their own government should tyranny prevail. It's called the Bill of Rights and it empowers the people to act against the U.S. government if and when that should become necessary. The right to bear arms is in place so that the people of our country can bear arms against a tyrannic government. You could say Joe Stack used an airplane as arms against a tyrannic government and so he is a true American patriot.

We all live once. And most people throw their time away, just throw it away.

Interesting questions. Thanks for the civil reply. I'll reply, as I think you're sincere.

"You confirmed what I said. Lemay was sanctioned (and trained) by the state, so everything he did was ok."

Simply put, that's way too simplistic.

Dunno how familiar you are with principles by which the military operates, but NO ONE in the military is given freedom to do as they wish ("everything he did was ok"). Contrary to what you think, laws governing military members' actions are not improvised on the fly; no one "wings it". There actually is something known as the "Law of War".

For one, the Geneva Convention identifies what lawful targets are (you can Google what targets are considered "fair game"). If you've seen any of the battle footage posted by the Army vet here (sorry, forgot his name), you'd notice how careful the operators of drones are to avoid collateral damage. Engaging the enemy requires careful analysis to prevent accidental death to civilians (non-combatants): there is little tolerance for stuff like carpet-bombing nowadays (if only because indiscriminate killing garners public opinion against the mission).

And "flying a plane into a bazaar"? Are you kidding? Too messy, indiscriminate. Modern military missions require more surgical precision than that. You don't see the U.S. utilizing suicide bombers, or trucks loaded with explosives, do you? Of course NOT.

Military members are ALWAYS held to comply with basic laws governing military members of EVERY Nation (per Geneva Convention). In addition to the principles codified there, military members are subject to UCMJ. It's been that way for decades.

In fact, US military members are PROHIBITED from following orders that are in violation of international law (Geneva Convention), EVEN IF they are directed to do so by their superiors.

This concept of respecting international law was demonstrated in the Nuremberg Trials which showed the pointlessness of a defense claiming, "but I was only following orders". ALL military members are supposed to exercise capacity for free thinking, and are REQUIRED to question whatever appears to be an unlawful order. If they follow an unlawful order, they do so at their own peril; same goes with failing to follow a lawful order.

Those who haven't served in the military apparently learned everything they know about how the military operates based on watching war movies; sorry, it's not so simple as that (popular opinion seems to be that they give you a weapon and set you loose: not so). Serving in the military requires an ability to think on your feet under pressure, and military members train constantly so they don't hesitate when confronted with an issue.

Yeah, seems valid to me. It's almost as if Americans seemingly think they can "have their cake and eat it, too" and no one should DARE point out their seeming hypocrisy.

My point is that one person's justification for committing murder/suicide for religious ideology can parallel another's as patriotism, as exemplified by warrior heroes who "make the ultimate sacrifice". This guy was neither.

For one, this guy was not affiliated with some separatist extremist group (just a "lone gunman"), and didn't claim any religious justification. More damning, he was sloppy in the execution of his plot (and trying to kill the wifey and step-daughter, but leaving them homeless, is NOT a good move if you're trying to claim you only want to take down the IRS).

Seems pretty obvious: he was pissed about the argument with his wife the night before (who spent the night in a hotel in fear, with her teen daughter), and decided to teach her a lesson by attempting to murder them by setting the house on fire after they came home.

After attempting murder of his family, he knew there was no going back now, so he loaded up the Piper Cherokee with a gas tank and set out to finish himself off, blaming it all on the IRS.

Fail....

"So you are saying then that the U.S. military has a grand tradition of racism as a means of dehumanizing entire cultures, which I agree is quite true."

Put words in other people's mouths often? ;)

NO. I'm NOT saying that. Nice try, though.

In fact, go ahead, I dare you to find ANYWHERE where I said anything REMOTELY close to that. (I'll wait....)

"Like many of his generation, he truly HATED Japanese; however, such hatred is not a disadvantage during a War..."

Hatred of the Japanese is racism. To say it is "not a disadvantage during war" is equivalent to saying it is a military policy. But that is just pure fact, regardless of what you are saying. The military is indeed racist. Your statement attests to this fact.

I may have elaborated on what you said but it is in fact the premise of your argument. If not, then how is the military not racist, then or now?

"Hatred of the Japanese is racism. To say it is "not a disadvantage during war" is equivalent to saying it is a military policy."

Say what? Basic logic should make you realize that something being advantageous doesn't mean it's automatically accepted as policy. (For example, a cleaner environment is clearly advantageous for life, but people don't accept anti-pollution laws because there's that nasty angle of reducing corporate profits). If you're trying to prove a point, you've failed.

"But that is just pure fact, regardless of what you are saying. The military is indeed racist. Your statement attests to this fact."

Keep repeating it's "fact", hoping it'll be. ;)

Look, do I have to do ALL of your debating for you? Let me help you:

Look at the example of Japanese Internment Camps during WW II: it's as close to institutional racism as I can think of (remembering that 70 years ago was a long time ago, and few current-day organizations like the military still have the same race-relations policies that they had in 1940's).

If you look at internment, realize the practice started under FDR Presidential decree, and was carried out by not only the military, but the ENTIRE Federal gov't (DOJ, INS, Border Patrol, all participated, until such camps were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1945). Even there, the U.S. formally apologized under Reagan, and reparations were made.

Realize Japanese soldiers served in Europe (as seen above), and you have to applaud THEIR service to their country by risking THEIR lives to defend a system that didn't share the respect for THEIR families. Really amazing sense of duty on display: all of these soldiers deserve a medal for THAT, IMO.

Having served in the military, I can only speak to the training I received where racism was not tolerated (as if the Civil Rights Act of 1964 didn't make that point for ALL Federal agencies). The military is NOT being magnanimous here: if even only for one reason, racism is problematic as it creates discord and rancor within the troops.

When you're deployed fighting a common enemy, the last thing you need are some racist lug-nuts who think THEIR biases and hatred are important than the needs of the Country, the Military, the Mission. Being that the military requires efforts of those from MANY racial backgrounds, it should be a no-brainer that you can't alienate entire elements of your forces for stoopid (sic) reasons like racism.

Instead, a core value of military service is 'service before self', which means placing YOUR wants and needs on the back-burner and the Nation's first. So even if someone as racist as David Duke ended up in the ranks, he'd just have to keep his pie-hole shut the entire time, because once he starts spouting his racist crap it suddenly becomes a risk to 'team integrity' and jeopardizes the ENTIRE team, from his Commander on down. Yes, I've seen racist types who didn't "get" the idea they need to STFU who eventually were discharged after many opportunites to turn their thinking around; racist ideology is clearly more DANGEROUS as a source of internal conflict.

Yes, I'm sure you can find examples of violations of this policy that weren't prosecuted, but I find it extremely hard to fathom that it wasn't due to a break-down in the Chain of Command, etc. As Abu Grahib showed, heads DO role when military members violate policy.

It's not enough to say that it's policy if you can't produce PROOF. Where's your PROOF of some massive conspiracy?

Would you consider the convictions under UCMJ for various war crimes committed over the last few years as a good example of the EXACT opposite? Does the 17 soldiers punished for Abu Grahib ring any bells?

Maybe you haven't heard Michael Savage's rants against the prosecution of some military members (1st Lt Brenna, etc) as evidence that they don't encourage violation of military law? Savage even created legal defense funds to AID the defense of the accused (although Savage's own attempts to sell his book ("The Enemy Within") based on the surrounding controversy is immediately suspect, evidence of another infotainer profiting by selling books, ALA Palin with her "Going Rogue")

Look, I'm not disagreeing with the idea that our leaders use a blind rage for revenge to convince the sheeple to draw blood, ANY blood, as long as the victim is brown-skinned and wearing a turban (close enough, they'd say). As long as the victim can be scape-goated to take the blame with manipulated data (e.g. Hussein and Iraq), then it's good enough for Bush/Cheney.

I'm just saying that such duplicitous and abhorrent attempts to mislead are coming from the TOP, not just the military, and keeping such a big lie afloat is incredibly difficult to maintain (Bush fooled the populace for a few years, before it dawned on people that maybe it WAS all about "Blood for oil").

I know you hate the military, and that's your right: you can hate it with such passion that your hatred exceeds theirs! All I'm saying is, if you can't handle the facts and choose to remain uninformed and naive about it, being unable to prove your point, then do so. All you're doing though is undermining your own credibility. Present facts, and the conclusion SHOULD follow (can't put the cart ahead of the horse).