Direct hit

Cosmo

CJMST3K wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

Report the money you make and pay the taxes that are due. We all have to pay...

Except for Obama's treasury secretary.


http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/alexs ... _evasion_/

Tim Geithner's tax evasion

THE US senate finance committee has voted for a tax evader to become Treasury secretary. He is likely to be confirmed by a vote on the senate floor soon.

Be in no doubt that is what Tim Geithner is. I’m not sure what is more amazing about this case: the virtually free pass he has been given by the media, the toothless opposition of the Republicans or the magnitude of Obama’s first betrayal of his ideals.

In 2006 the Internal Revenue Service discovered that Geithner had not paid he had failed to pay taxes in 2003 and 2004 because he had incorrectly believed they were deducted at source by the IMF, where he had moved after serving the treasury in the Clinton administration. He duly paid about $17,230 in back taxes and interest.

After he was selected to lead the treasury in November, it was discovered as part of his vetting that he owed a further $25,970 for 2001 and 2002 as well. That was the point Obama should have dropped Geithner, instead he has championed him as the only man fit for this major job in dire times.

...
Wait... didn't he end up paying the back taxes?
I'm saying, pay what is due.. don't lie... don't cheat... and the IRS won't come knocking. Stack (and Geithner) should have know that eventually, the system will catch up with them. They shouldn't be angry because they tried to cheat the system... and got caught.

gimmesometruth27

Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
--FBI Definition

http://www.angelfire.com/ca7/Security/Terrordef.html

did this guy meet any of the above criteria? of course he did...he even had a "manifesto"...the guy was a fucking right wing, anti establishment, anti government, extremist, and with his actions he became a terrorist today.

Cosmo

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
--FBI Definition

http://www.angelfire.com/ca7/Security/Terrordef.html

did this guy meet any of the above criteria? of course he did...he even had a "manifesto"...the guy was a fucking right wing, anti establishment, anti government, extremist, and with his actions he became a terrorist today.

...
Damn straight, he was. Fuckin' Aye. Terrorist fucking asshole.

NoK

_outlaw wrote:

new? welcome to 1990. they were even reluctant to label mcveigh's bombing in 1995 as terrorism - although of course that was after they initially blamed Muslims for it when they actually had no proof.

Definitely not new but worth pointing out the hypocrisy.

mb262200 wrote:

Actually, terorist acts have happened by muslims and they still have a hard time calling them terorists. After all, we can't even call AlQaida terorists anymore, they are enemy combatants. If we label them or give them a profile we might hurt there feelings and that would be politicaly incorrect.

Not sure what its like where you live but terror act/terrorist seems to be every second word in mainstream media articles about Iraq or Afghanistan.

NoK

aerial wrote:

Incase you did not know there is a group of radical Muslims that hate Americans and want us all dead....there is even a war going on against them....I am sure that is the terrorist the media is referring to.......common sense is not being racist.

Actually, common sense disappeared with your post.

_

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
--FBI Definition

http://www.angelfire.com/ca7/Security/Terrordef.html

did this guy meet any of the above criteria? of course he did...he even had a "manifesto"...the guy was a fucking right wing, anti establishment, anti government, extremist, and with his actions he became a terrorist today.

Not to be nit-picky and I generally agree with you, but I don't think this guy fits your definition above. I don't think his act of violence - though horrible and uncalled for and obviously meant for a specific governement target - was meant to (or has the power to) "intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives". I think his objective was revenge, which is not the same as coercion. Now that he's dead and we know he's no longer a threat, we're not intimidated and cannot be coerced, ya know? Just sayin'.

gimmesometruth27

scb wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
--FBI Definition

http://www.angelfire.com/ca7/Security/Terrordef.html

did this guy meet any of the above criteria? of course he did...he even had a "manifesto"...the guy was a fucking right wing, anti establishment, anti government, extremist, and with his actions he became a terrorist today.

Not to be nit-picky and I generally agree with you, but I don't think this guy fits your definition above. I don't think his act of violence - though horrible and uncalled for and obviously meant for a specific governement target - was meant to (or has the power to) "intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives". I think his objective was revenge, which is not the same as coercion. Now that he's dead and we know he's no longer a threat, we're not intimidated and cannot be coerced, ya know? Just sayin'.

that is like saying oklahoma city was not terrorism, and its like saying bombing abortion clinics is not terrorism...any time any douchebag has an agenda, religious, political, whatever and he attempts to make his feelings known by taking out a public building it is an act of terror.

_

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

that is like saying oklahoma city was not terrorism, and its like saying bombing abortion clinics is not terrorism...any time any douchebag has an agenda, religious, political, whatever and he attempts to make his feelings known by taking out a public building it is an act of terror.

Well I think the differnce with abortion clinics is that because the individual acts are part of a larger movement, they do have the power to coerce and intimidate. I don't think acts that have no chance of being repeated have that power.

Edit to add: Acts that are commited by individuals who aren't part of a larger movement but also who don't die in the act also have the chance of being repeated, and could therefore create intimidation or coercion and fit your definition.

michelleelise

Domestic terrorism refers to activities that involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any state; appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. [18 U.S.C. § 2331(5)]


He was trying to "influence the policy of a government by mass destruction". In his note he says "Nothing changes unless there is a body count " and says he's "dying for the freedom of his country". To me this shows it wasn't simple revenge but that he hoped to draw attention to the issue with the intent of putting the spotlight and pressure on them in order to influence their future actions. I think it's definitely terrorism. If I were an IRS agent, I'd be nervous!

_

michelle822 wrote:

Domestic terrorism refers to activities that involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any state; appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. [18 U.S.C. § 2331(5)]


He was trying to "influence the policy of a government by mass destruction". In his note he says "Nothing changes unless there is a body count " and says he's "dying for the freedom of his country". To me this shows it wasn't simple revenge but that he hoped to draw attention to the issue with the intent of putting the spotlight and pressure on them in order to influence their future actions. I think it's definitely terrorism. If I were an IRS agent, I'd be nervous!

I didn't read his note and I see your point. But I still think that just because a crazy man thought he had the power to affect change doesn't mean he actually has that power. I'd be nervous if I were an IRS agent too. Of course, someone was stabbed at my school this week and that made me nervous - but it wasn't an act of terrorism. It's a fine line, I guess.

gimmesometruth27

michelle822 wrote:

Domestic terrorism refers to activities that involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any state; appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. [18 U.S.C. § 2331(5)]


He was trying to "influence the policy of a government by mass destruction". In his note he says "Nothing changes unless there is a body count " and says he's "dying for the freedom of his country". To me this shows it wasn't simple revenge but that he hoped to draw attention to the issue with the intent of putting the spotlight and pressure on them in order to influence their future actions. I think it's definitely terrorism. If I were an IRS agent, I'd be nervous!

that is the point i was trying to make, thank you!

yeah this guy was quite delusional..why did he not just blow his head off in a hotel room somewhere? because he had to take some people with him to draw attention to his way of thinking...classic example of making a statement. he would not be on world news right now if he had shot himself in the hotel room, but by trying to take out others, he seems much more important and that his death was for a cause...

_

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

michelle822 wrote:

Domestic terrorism refers to activities that involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any state; appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. [18 U.S.C. § 2331(5)]


He was trying to "influence the policy of a government by mass destruction". In his note he says "Nothing changes unless there is a body count " and says he's "dying for the freedom of his country". To me this shows it wasn't simple revenge but that he hoped to draw attention to the issue with the intent of putting the spotlight and pressure on them in order to influence their future actions. I think it's definitely terrorism. If I were an IRS agent, I'd be nervous!

that is the point i was trying to make, thank you!

yeah this guy was quite delusional..why did he not just blow his head off in a hotel room somewhere? because he had to take some people with him to draw attention to his way of thinking...classic example of making a statement. he would not be on world news right now if he had shot himself in the hotel room, but by trying to take out others, he seems much more important and that his death was for a cause...

Would you classify the professor who shot up the faculty meeting because she didn't get tenure a terrorist? Just wondering.

gimmesometruth27

scb wrote:

Would you classify the professor who shot up the faculty meeting because she didn't get tenure a terrorist? Just wondering.

yes i would. she attacked government workers on government property to voice her displeasure with not getting tenure. action against the state funded institution qualifies as terrorism in my way of thinking...she took out innocent people in making her statement, the same way suicide bombers take out innocents to make their statement...

michelleelise

scb wrote:

Would you classify the professor who shot up the faculty meeting because she didn't get tenure a terrorist? Just wondering.

Hmmmm...I personally don't think I would. That seemed like direct revenge on the people who had harmed her. I doubt she had any expectation that she her actions would influence them to give her the job when it was all over and while I'm not really familiar with what happened, I haven't seen anything about her making an overall statement of the tenure process at universities.

BUT..she may have had that affect whether she intended to or not. I bet it'll be on people's minds as they're voting on tenure for other borderline-personality types.

So, there's the issue of outcome vs. intent. If this guy today is not successful in affecting change, does it mean he's not a terrorist? IMHO, no.. I think the intent of the actions is more important than their success.

I mean, the US has a policy of not negotiating with terrorists. If they adhere to it, all terrorism fails and therefore terrorism would not even exist - by that definition. So, yeah, even if he was totally unsuccessful, he's a terrorist just by the fact that influencing the government was his intent.

And she wasn't, because even though professors across the US may be going to bed this week terrorized, that wasn't her intent.

kenny olav

I deal with IRAs every day at work and what this asshole says here is bullshit:

To survive, I was forced to cannibalize my savings and retirement, the last of which was a small IRA. This came in a year with mammoth expenses and not a single dollar of income. I filed no return that year thinking that because I didn't have any income there was no need. The sleazy government decided that they disagreed.

IRAs are tax-deferred. The government is doing you a favor by allowing you to collect interest or market value on a larger sum of money. That's why people get them. That's why this asshole got one. So when you take money out of your IRA, you then have to pay the taxes on that income. There's nothing fucking sleazy about it.

How many Tea Party psychos will want to follow in his footsteps now? It sucks that he was shit out of luck and apparently had nowhere viable to turn to... I feel at least that amount of empathy for him. What scares me is how many more are directly feeling his pain, and sympathizing with his actions.

Direct hit???????? :x

keeponrockin

aerial wrote:

NoK wrote:

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/1014295/man-crashes-plane-into-us-building

A Texas man may have deliberately crashed a small plane into a building containing a US federal tax office after setting his own house on fire.

Two fighter jets were scrambled out of a nearby airport in response to the incident, which an official said does not appear to be linked to terrorism.

----

So let me get this straight.. it does not appear to be linked to terrorism because a white American committed it. I guess the new definition of terrorism is "an act of terror committed by a muslim".

Incase you did not know there is a group of radical Muslims that hate Americans and want us all dead....there is even a war going on against them....I am sure that is the terrorist the media is referring to.......common sense is not being racist.

This man is also a terrorist.

WaveCameCrashin

Cosmo wrote:

mb262200 wrote:

Actually, terorist acts have happened by muslims and they still have a hard time calling them terorists. After all, we can't even call AlQaida terorists anymore, they are enemy combatants. If we label them or give them a profile we might hurt there feelings and that would be politicaly incorrect.

...
According to who? There is no fucking law that tell you what to call them.
I call Al Qaeda, 'Fucking assholes that need to die' all the time... I can't help it if you are a follower of political fucking correctness.

Whoa dude !!!! :shock: You sound like a door flying off the hinges of a double wide from being kicked in by a DEA agent during a Meth bust.

But I like it... :thumbup:

_

Okay, I just read the letter and it kind of reinforces my idea that this wasn't meant to be a terrorist act. I don't think he meant to "intimidate or coerce". I think he meant to get people's attention and open their eyes to the injustices he felt are going on in this country. Obviously, this was the wrong way to do it though. :(

mr.pink

I haven't read the whole letter yet. And this is a very sad act for the victims and the man's family. But this is the kind of thing many people are going to .... understand. At least understand his points. And I'm sure the media will try to turn this man into a coo coo monster, and he may partly be that. But the whole anger about a corporate controled government selling out this county and the politicians working for big businesses.... thats all obviously true and many people will understand that anger. The only hope our government has of really preventing more and more revolutionary acts is to find a way to really keep the people content. Most people are nowhere close to this radical behavior... yet.

arthurdent

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

that is like saying oklahoma city was not terrorism, and its like saying bombing abortion clinics is not terrorism...any time any douchebag has an agenda, religious, political, whatever and he attempts to make his feelings known by taking out a public building it is an act of terror.

PETA is a terrorist organization.