MY spin on Joseph Andrew Stack...

[wgadget]

He was a liberal-leaning hero, who, through his hatred for the IRS, brought Americans together when nothing else could.


R.I.P., Joe

YouTube - Erik Satie - Gnossienne No.4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJQGM3MfqmI&feature=related)

[sevin]

He was a liberal-leaning hero, who, through his hatred for the IRS, brought Americans together when nothing else could.


No one who takes the lives of innocent people is a hero.

[undergroundrr]

No one who takes the lives of innocent people is a hero.

+1

Those tempted to glorify this are missing the fact that acts like this and the OKC bombing are as reprehensible as anything Cheney, FDR and their ilk could come up with. This is a terrible setback to the public acceptability of tax criticism.

[cajuncocoa]

No one who takes the lives of innocent people is a hero.

+2

[RyanRSheets]

No one who takes the lives of innocent people is a hero.

+3

I do not buy into the concept of greater good.

[brandon]

I don't think anyone died, other than Stack. Not sure though, am I wrong?

I don't agree with his actions at all, but I can relate to his frustration.

[scoot87]

No one who takes the lives of innocent people is a hero.

well, we should never of had that Remember the 5th of November Money Bomb if you adamantly support that notion.

[ctiger2]

Chuck Baldwin wrote a great piece on this. I have to agree with Chuck, he shouldn't have killed himself, we need him in this fight.

[low preference guy]

..

[Vessol]

-3

no innocent lives were taken

He did not do anything to avoid taking innocent lives however.

It is just by chance that no one else was killed.

[cajuncocoa]

I don't think anyone died, other than Stack. Not sure though, am I wrong?

I don't agree with his actions at all, but I can relate to his frustration.

This kind of talk will discredit and set back Dr. Paul's movement more than anything any Liberal or neocon could do.

The ONLY response that this action deserves is condemnation. Period.

[low preference guy]

He did not do anything to avoid taking innocent lives however.

It is just by chance that no one else was killed.

You don't know that. When Francisco D'Anconia blew up his copper mines, no one died either.

[cajuncocoa]

You don't know that. When Francisco D'Anconia blew up his copper mines, no one died either.

Um.....fictional story?

[low preference guy]

..

[Vessol]

You don't know that. When Francisco D'Anconia blew up his copper mines, no one died either.

There was people in the building that he crashed into. There were injuries.

So unless he knew where everyone in that building was at the exact moment he was going to crash into it and aimed it just perfectly to cause only injuries, then well yeah.

This man deserves no praise.


It's possible to plan the destruction of property without hurting people. If someone says Joe didn't plan to avoid taking lives, that person is just guessing.

With other means perhaps, but not when you're flying a freaking plane into a building. Explain how he could plan the destruction of the property without hurting anyone.

[low preference guy]

//

[Vessol]

But they were IRS people, right? Joe shouldn't have done that, but I don't sympathize with the IRS people either, they are morally wrong.

They are still human beings however. Human beings with families and children. There is no excuse for what he did.

Explain to me however how he could have flown a plane into a building without potentially killing people?

[jake]

reckless!

[t0rnado]

He did not do anything to avoid taking innocent lives however.

It is just by chance that no one else was killed.

That's the same argument drug war fascists use. A coke addict isn't doing anything to avoid taking innocent lives, so let's lock him up. It's the same argument gun control activists use as well.

[low preference guy]

..

[cajuncocoa]

But they were IRS people, right? Joe shouldn't have done that, but I don't sympathize with the IRS people either, they are morally wrong.

IMO, you're a discredit to this forum, Dr. Ron Paul, and the conservative/small government/libertarian movement.

Shame on you. :mad:

[tmosley]

IRS employees are aggressors. Aggressors are always and at all times liable to violence. It's not nice, but anyone who voluntarily works for an organization responsible for enforcing massive theft and violence upon the people of this nation, well, that's blowback.

Kevin Smith made the point quite well: YouTube - Clerks Clip - Jedi Politics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6lzEhoXads)

[ResistTemptation]

I think the man could have better used his frustration such as joining the liberty movement, campaigning, or even preparing for a REAL revolution. With that said, however, the issue brings up an important question of what is an innocent life. What helps me make such a judgement is looking at the American Revolution. We can mostly all agree that what American revolutionaries did was one of the greatest acts for liberty against tyranny that has ever existed. What did the Founders do to secure victory? Tarring and feathering the enablers (e.g. tax collectors) of tyranny and oppression is just one of their acts. For the record I do not advocate a violent revolution, but the line between "innocence" and "guilt" is very grey. It is a pretty simple connection to make between "tax collectors" and "IRS" agents. That might be blunt and again I do not directly support what Stack did, but are we then going to denounce the other unfortunate revolutionary acts that eventually gave us the greatest victory of all time? I want people to at least be consistent.

[sevin]

That's the same argument drug war fascists use. A coke addict isn't doing anything to avoid taking innocent lives, so let's lock him up. It's the same argument gun control activists use as well.

are you seriously comparing doing drugs to flying a plane into a building where many people could have been killed? come on

[cajuncocoa]

I think the man could have better used his frustration such as joining the liberty movement, campaigning, or even preparing for a REAL revolution. With that said, however, the issue brings up an important question of what is an innocent life. What helps me make such a judgement is looking at the American Revolution. We can mostly all agree that what American revolutionaries did was one of the greatest acts for liberty against tyranny that has ever existed. What did the Founders do to secure victory? Tarring and feathering the enablers (e.g. tax collectors) of tyranny and oppression is just one of their acts. For the record I do not advocate a violent revolution, but the line between "innocence" and "guilt" is very grey. It is a pretty simple connection to make between "tax collectors" and "IRS" agents. That might be blunt and again I do not directly support what Stack did, but are we then going to denounce the other unfortunate revolutionary acts that eventually gave us the greatest victory of all time? I want people to at least be consistent.

How about the use of more civil disobedience?

The political Left made inroads by using this concept all the time in the 60s and 70s.

Have sit-ins in the IRS building, prevent them from getting in or out. Be prepared to go to jail for your actions, and have someone ready to take your place when they cart you off.

But killing is wrong.

Listen, I had my own run-in with the IRS about 15 years ago. They can be brutal. But I never wanted to take anyone's life over the situation.

If we are going to succeed in this movement, we have to win others over. We are not going to win them over by killing people, or excusing the behavior of people who kill.

I can't believe I actually have to explain this!

[Andrew-Austin]

IRS employees are aggressors. Aggressors are always and at all times liable to violence. It's not nice, but anyone who voluntarily works for an organization responsible for enforcing massive theft and violence upon the people of this nation, well, that's blowback.

Kevin Smith made the point quite well: YouTube - Clerks Clip - Jedi Politics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6lzEhoXads)

You have been waiting a long time for the opportunity to refer to Clerks in order to make a political point haven't you.

[RyanRSheets]

You have been waiting a long time for the opportunity to refer to Clerks in order to make a political point haven't you.

rofl

I have been waiting a long time for someone to use Clerks to make a political point.

[ResistTemptation]

IRS employees are aggressors. Aggressors are always and at all times liable to violence. It's not nice, but anyone who voluntarily works for an organization responsible for enforcing massive theft and violence upon the people of this nation, well, that's blowback.

This is the fundamental truth. Yes, it is incredibly hard to accept, but knowledge about the IRS's violation of NAP, theft, and violence against real innocents is publicly available to all IRS agents and other would-be tax collectors. Being too ignorant to think and look does not absolve one of guilt.

[ChooseLiberty]

Nobody even suspects this was staged?

[Vessol]

Nobody even suspects this was staged?

Nope. Considering how many people are fucked over by the IRS it surprises me this doesn't happen more often.

[DjLoTi]

Here's my spin:

Ron Paul wins in 2008 = No IRS today = No terrorist attack in Austin today.

[Vessol]

That's the same argument drug war fascists use. A coke addict isn't doing anything to avoid taking innocent lives, so let's lock him up. It's the same argument gun control activists use as well.

wut?

[jmdrake]

I don't think anyone died, other than Stack. Not sure though, am I wrong?

I don't agree with his actions at all, but I can relate to his frustration.

I just heard that another body may have been pulled out of the wreckage. :( And I agree with the sentiment that the actions were reprehensible but the frustration was understandable. He should have expressed it in a different way. Yeah he focused attention on the IRS but he merely strengthened the hand of the oppressor without making a dent in the oppression. At least that's how I see it.

[cajuncocoa]

I just heard that another body may have been pulled out of the wreckage. :( And I agree with the sentiment that the actions were reprehensible but the frustration was understandable. He should have expressed it in a different way. Yeah he focused attention on the IRS but he merely strengthened the hand of the oppressor without making a dent in the oppression. At least that's how I see it.

Well said. :(

[akforme]

This kind of talk will discredit and set back Dr. Paul's movement more than anything any Liberal or neocon could do.

The ONLY response that this action deserves is condemnation. Period.



Heil Hitler! No freedom of speech here, obey or leave. :eek:




I condemn the government for driving our citizens to this.

[DjLoTi]

Ron Paul wins in 2008 = No IRS today = No terrorist attack in Austin today.

This. lol=P Ron Paul 2008! w00t w00t! =P =PPP

[Vessol]

Heil Hitler! No freedom of speech here, obey or leave. :eek:

I condemn the government for driving our citizens to this.

That's fine, but this man deserves no praise for what he did.

And yes, it's confirmed he killed someone.

http://www.news8austin.com/content/top_stories/default.asp?ArID=267349

[jmdrake]

Nobody even suspects this was staged?

Sure that's possible. But then again the government is going out of it's way to claim it's not a terrorist event. :confused: Plus with a leftist in the Whitehouse you'd think they'd do more to tie it directly into the right wing without flipping into support for healthcare and communist references. If it was staged I'm not sure who benefits at this point.

[Son of Detroit]

Yep, I'm convinced. Our movement is going nowhere.

[klamath]

Deleted

[Anti Federalist]

Innocent?

Who the fuck is innocent working in the bowels of the beast?

[Brian4Liberty]

IRS employees are aggressors. Aggressors are always and at all times liable to violence. It's not nice, but anyone who voluntarily works for an organization responsible for enforcing massive theft and violence upon the people of this nation, well, that's blowback.


Are you issuing a fatwah there Mullah Mosley? Guilt by association? Collective guilt?

[Anti Federalist]

Are you issuing a fatwah there Mullah Mosley? Guilt by association? Collective guilt?

Yep.

They wouldn't think twice about killing you in a raid.

If you choose to serve the system...

[Brian4Liberty]

Yep.

They wouldn't think twice about killing you in a raid.

If you choose to serve the system...

"They"? Does that include the janitor?

[Son of Detroit]

"They"? Does that include the janitor?

Or the 5 year old boy who came to work with his father that morning?

[RyanRSheets]

That's fine, but this man deserves no praise for what he did.

No, absolutely not. He killed innocent people. His actions were contrary to everything we stand for, but I think everyone should read his letter and consider the things he said in it, because the things he said were mostly true, and I think much of America shares in his frustration. I do think that people like him are pretty rare still, but it will become more and more common if America chooses to ignore this.

Though what he did was undoubtedly wrong, I think it could be used to help awaken people to the problems facing this country. I think it also has very useful parallels to the war on terrorism, as it constitutes domestic blowback. Like I have said in other threads, though, I do not buy into the concept of a greater good, and I feel that we should never do what we know is wrong for what we believe is good, but once something is done, we should make the best of it. I think the victims would prefer for something good to come of this.

[klamath]

Deleted

[klamath]

Deleted

[Anti Federalist]

"They"? Does that include the janitor?

Yup.

You know who you're working for.

I thought that one of the cornerstones of individual liberty was taking responsibility for your actions?

Nobody's holding a gun to that man's head to sweep up the offices of the oppressors.

Sell your "they're not all bad" nonsense to a close personal couple that I know that is currently in prison for selling books that the IRS deemed "impolitic".

[Anti Federalist]

Or the 5 year old boy who came to work with his father that morning?

That fault lies with the father.

[Anti Federalist]

I think what may be good out of this is I am awakening to what this movement has really become.

I appreciate your John Adams honesty.

Sometime heads need to be thumped.

[Son of Detroit]

Yup.

You know who you're working for.

I thought that one of the cornerstones of individual liberty was taking responsibility for your actions?

Nobody's holding a gun to that man's head to sweep up the offices of the oppressors.

Sell your "they're not all bad" nonsense to a close personal couple that I know that is currently in prison for selling books that the IRS deemed "impolitic".

Can you fault someone for not being awake, and still being under the influence of those who have taught them what they currently believe?

I guess they would be better off dead then trying to teach them and convert those to our movement.

Even IF they were "one of us", I couldn't fault them for finding work wherever they can. Who am I to say "you cannot make a living and put bread on the table for your family".

But I guess you would rather they be homeless and not be able to give their children a college education. All in order to make you and your principles happy.

[Brian4Liberty]

Sometime heads need to be thumped.

I'll hand it to you...For an FBI agent, you really put in a lot of time and effort in building a cover story.

[Anti Federalist]

Can you fault someone for not being awake, and still being under the influence of those who have taught them what they currently believe?

I guess they would be better off dead then trying to teach them and convert those to our movement.

Even IF they were "one of us", I couldn't fault them for finding work wherever they can. Who am I to say "you cannot make a living and put bread on the table for your family".

But I guess you would rather they be homeless and not be able to give their children a college education. All in order to make you and your principles happy.

I turned down a six figure job working for the government, because of my principles, because I couldn't sleep at night knowing my pay was being extorted at gunpoint from you.

I'm nothing special.

If I can do it, anybody else can, and maybe we can topple the system without violence.

But as long as Boobus just wants to keep drawing a paycheck and excuse it by saying, "well it's just my job", then Boobus is going to increasingly find himself in harm's way as the system falls apart and becomes more tyrannical.

[Anti Federalist]

I'll hand it to you...For an FBI agent, you really put in a lot of time and effort in building a cover story.

Oh for fuck's sake...whatever.

Tell you what...flag my comments, get me banned.

I'm tired, and sick tonight, and don't really care anymore.

I got better things to do than hang around a bunch of hanky wringing pantywaists.

[Razmear]

Heres my two cents.
There are folks who hit financial ruin and go nuts then kill their whole families, or shoot up their old workplace or other misdirected homicidal acts. I see this as far less tragic than any of those other outcomes. Not a hero, but he made a better choice than most who flip out and attack family instead of the root of the issue. The IRS apparently royally screwed this guy, so this wasn't just some ideological attack, it was vengeance for being wronged (in his head anyways).

eb

ps: OKC was an inside job.

[ChooseLiberty]

What was the point of the crotch bomber which seems to have been poorly staged?

Instill fear and sell back scatter x-ray machines. Herd the sheeple in the desired direction.

AJ just did a special report on it btw -

YouTube - Alex Jones Tv 1/6: "World Exclusive" Source: FBI Knew Austin Attack Was Coming!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pStYTRvOT0M)


Sure that's possible. But then again the government is going out of it's way to claim it's not a terrorist event. :confused: Plus with a leftist in the Whitehouse you'd think they'd do more to tie it directly into the right wing without flipping into support for healthcare and communist references. If it was staged I'm not sure who benefits at this point.

[Brian4Liberty]

I got better things to do than hang around a bunch of hanky wringing pantywaists.

:D Ok, that is funny.

[Vessol]

Yep, I'm convinced. Our movement is going nowhere.

Heh, this has been said in every thread for almost a year I've been here.

Defeatist ideas get you nowhere.

[tmosley]

"They"? Does that include the janitor?

DON'T WORK FOR AGGRESSORS. You might get killed by someone they have wronged. Hopefully people will come to understand this and stop working for the government. Kevin Smith had the right idea, so long as you realize the governments are exactly equivalent to extremely powerful gangsters.

YouTube - Clerks Clip - Jedi Politics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6lzEhoXads)

I don't personally advocate killing IRS agents. What we have here is a situation much like wearing a CIA cap while walking down the streets of downtown Cairo, or Havana. You are likely to experience blowback. THIS IS YOUR OWN FAULT, for voluntarily associating yourself with an oppressive organization. I can feel for those who were in the building being audited, just like I might feel for those people who were prisoners (or press gangs) on British ships that were sunk during the Revolution, but their deaths are on the heads of the AGGRESSORS.

[Vessol]

But what do you define as the "aggressors"?

[Brian4Liberty]

DON'T WORK FOR AGGRESSORS. You might get killed by someone they have wronged. Hopefully people will come to understand this and stop working for the government.

We are the middle of a recession/depression. Unemployment and underemployment are out of control. Many of us don't want to work for taxpayers money. Many people who work for the IRS probably don't like the IRS.

So what do you do when you are unemployed, and the "government" offers you a job of some kind? What about a government contractor? Turn them down? For how long?

- Until you run out of money?
- Until you can't borrow any more money?
- Until you get kicked out of your house?
- Until you can't buy food?
- Until you are homeless?
- Until your wife and kids leave and move in with the mailman (a government employee)?

In the end, you will be taking taxpayer money (government assistance) anyway.

[constituent]

But what do you define as the "aggressors"?

fatties, fuglies, hood rats... u?

[tmosley]

But what do you define as the "aggressors"?

Anyone who takes what isn't theirs, including blood and lives. That is, those who violate natural rights.

Those who work for the IRS actively participate in mass theft. That is violation of natural law, and the consequences of violating natural law is inevitably violent death.

I am not saying that I support it. I am saying that that is the way the world works. Thieves eventually steal from the wrong person. Murderers eventually kill the wrong person. Rapists eventually rape the wrong person. Violent thugs eventually attack the wrong person. Then they die.

Those who have created this system and benefit by it will eventually find the masses turned against them, and screaming for blood. The only way to stop it is by adoption of a social contract that recognizes natural rights explicitly, and severely punishes those who violate them, or otherwise prevents those rights from being violated.

[libertarian4321]

I appreciate your John Adams honesty.

Sometime heads need to be thumped.

The head that needs to be thumped is yours.

Even if you rationalize killing a janitor or clerk or secretary because he works in a building that houses IRS offices (I find your cavalier attitude about killing to be abhorrent), you can't be so dim witted that you don't realize that innocent people can be killed when you fly a plane into a building.

There could be people making deliveries- does the UPS guy or the Coffee delivery guy "deserve to die"? What about TAXPAYERS who are in the office because of an audit or conducting business- do they deserve to die as part of your poorly thought out jihad?

Over the years, I've seen some pretty ignorant posts on these forums, but your posts on this thread are probably the worst.

You are an embarrassment to these forums and a vile human being. Ron Paul would never condone the senseless violence you advocate, and neither will the decent people on these forums. There is no place for people like you here.

You are an ignorant, violent thug and more of a threat to liberty than any IRS employee, but you probably aren't bright enough to see it.

We do not promote liberty by advocating the killing of innocent civilians!

Give it one more shot- explain to all of us how we promote liberty by indiscriminately slaughtering innocent civilians.

[tmosley]

Give it one more shot- explain to all of us how we promote liberty by indiscriminately slaughtering innocent civilians.

This was hardly indiscriminate. If you want indiscriminate killing, you'll have to look to the US military. Funded by funds stolen by the IRS.

Violate natural rights, and the citizenry will rise up against you. This is what is happening now. Whether it is good or bad is irrelevant. It is happening, and it is happening because the government is out of control, and no longer recognizes natural rights. There is no way to stop the Joseph Stacks of the world, save to recognize their natural rights, and those of everyone else. Do that, and this sort of thing will never happen again.

[tmosley]

I'm bumping this because it is important. Those who don't follow the non-aggression principle are setting themselves up for a similar attack. This means even something like working for the federal government (even legitimate positions such as border guards and judges are in danger due to the policies of the overall govt).

[Vessol]

Sorry, I don't agree with the whole "aggressors" thing. Sure you can not feel as sorry for them as they chose to work for the "aggressors", but you are saying is that they a valid targets.

Sounds overly Marxist/radical to me.

[Anti Federalist]

The head that needs to be thumped is yours.

Even if you rationalize killing a janitor or clerk or secretary because he works in a building that houses IRS offices (I find your cavalier attitude about killing to be abhorrent), you can't be so dim witted that you don't realize that innocent people can be killed when you fly a plane into a building.

There could be people making deliveries- does the UPS guy or the Coffee delivery guy "deserve to die"? What about TAXPAYERS who are in the office because of an audit or conducting business- do they deserve to die as part of your poorly thought out jihad?

Over the years, I've seen some pretty ignorant posts on these forums, but your posts on this thread are probably the worst.

You are an embarrassment to these forums and a vile human being. Ron Paul would never condone the senseless violence you advocate, and neither will the decent people on these forums. There is no place for people like you here.

You are an ignorant, violent thug and more of a threat to liberty than any IRS employee, but you probably aren't bright enough to see it.

We do not promote liberty by advocating the killing of innocent civilians!

Give it one more shot- explain to all of us how we promote liberty by indiscriminately slaughtering innocent civilians.

And I think you are weak and vacillating.

I think you are like many others around here, who like to throw around the word "revolution" because it's hip, trendy and cutting edge.

You have no idea what revolution really means, you haven't got the balls to pull one off, and when the time comes, you'd be first in line to turn in people like me as "enemies of the state".

Take your phony outrage and go sell it to the people I know, personally, who are rotting in jail because of the actions of the IRS.

[tmosley]

Sorry, I don't agree with the whole "aggressors" thing. Sure you can not feel as sorry for them as they chose to work for the "aggressors", but you are saying is that they a valid targets.

Sounds overly Marxist/radical to me.

You put a gun to your own head and pull the trigger, you don't blame the bullet for the resulting destruction. The government put a gun to it's own head by ignoring natural rights.

Violence begets violence, right? Well, government violence has beget Stack's violence. I'm not saying it is right or wrong, I am saying it is a natural reaction.

Poke a bear with a stick, and won't matter how many babies you have strapped to you for protection, you're going to get mauled. If you think you can poke the bear forever, then you are a fool.

When individuals are forced to defend their own natural rights, things get bloody, and messy, and innocents get hurt and killed. The only solution is to renew the social contract, such that that violence is no longer necessary. Until that time, those who participate in the violation of people's natural rights will be targets, and there is nothing you can do to stop it. Agreeing or disagreeing doesn't matter, as individuals will carry out such attacks on their own.

[Petar]

well, we should never of had that Remember the 5th of November Money Bomb if you adamantly support that notion.

The guy was a terrorist loser, and so was Guy Fawkes.

Still have to watch v for vendetta, so I can't comment on that yet myself...

[Brian4Liberty]

I'm bumping this because it is important. Those who don't follow the non-aggression principle are setting themselves up for a similar attack. This means even something like working for the federal government (even legitimate positions such as border guards and judges are in danger due to the policies of the overall govt).

You are using the "non-aggression" principle to justify killing innocent people? Maybe I am missing something, but that seems like a contradiction.

[Gideon]

OK,

I've finally gone through the entire thread, and yet with all of the complex and diverse opinions being bantered back and forth, I can only make one clear observation:

Joseph Stack planned and acted alone; the FBI is calling him a "lone wolf."

He methodically, efficiently and precisely performed his self-appointed mission.

His target was specifically chosen.

This was undeniably a pre-meditated act.


The only remaining question:

Why did he go to this extent of taking his own life in order to violently attack his intended target?

This is a rhetorical question of course, because The Founding Libertarian Thomas Jefferson answered this question for us when he penned the Declaration of Independence, and specifically, while referring to the tyrannical king:

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

Do any or all of the above offenses sound like a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States, by way of the IRS, Federal Tax Court System, all backed up by heavily armed enforcement tentacles?

Another rhetorical question of course...

Every one of you knows why he did it, and 99% of you are terrified to admit your absolute fear of the system which you claim you want to replace.

Tyranny thrives in America today.

Welcome to the Revolution!

[wgadget]

How about this, guys...

The United States government violates both of the Common Laws, the two main rules I use to train my children:

1. I will do all that I agree to do.
2. I will not encroach upon others or their property.

The case of Joseph Stack is not a chicken-egg scenario..since the government was the first offender, IMO.

[TheEvilDetector]

One way to disappear IRS is to convince people who work for it to resign and to convince people against applying for jobs there.

No IRS staff, no IRS.

If you're a regular law abiding citizen, then don't apply for IRS, it's like applying to be a thief, can't call yourself law abiding after getting hired without deluding yourself.

Besides, those with the most relevant documented experience for this job are currently locked up on a variety of armed robbery and related charges.

Armed robber is an IRS agent without a federal government certificate of recognition.

[constituent]

One way to disappear IRS is to convince people who work for it to resign and to convince people against applying for jobs there.

No IRS staff, no IRS.

meh, they'll just contract it out.

people been stringin' up the taxman since the beginning of time, but they just keep on-a comin'.

[constituent]

One of Joe Stack's bands: Last Straw (http://www.myspace.com/laststrawmusic)

You can listen to their album "Over the Edge" at that myspace page.

Someone might wanna grab it before it's gone...

[TheEvilDetector]

meh, they'll just contract it out.

people been stringin' up the taxman since the beginning of time, but they just keep on-a comin'.

You've crushed my dreams.

:P

[Vessol]

You put a gun to your own head and pull the trigger, you don't blame the bullet for the resulting destruction. The government put a gun to it's own head by ignoring natural rights.

Violence begets violence, right? Well, government violence has beget Stack's violence. I'm not saying it is right or wrong, I am saying it is a natural reaction.

Poke a bear with a stick, and won't matter how many babies you have strapped to you for protection, you're going to get mauled. If you think you can poke the bear forever, then you are a fool.

When individuals are forced to defend their own natural rights, things get bloody, and messy, and innocents get hurt and killed. The only solution is to renew the social contract, such that that violence is no longer necessary. Until that time, those who participate in the violation of people's natural rights will be targets, and there is nothing you can do to stop it. Agreeing or disagreeing doesn't matter, as individuals will carry out such attacks on their own.


I know, all I am just saying is that justifying the murder of people who work for the system stinks of Marxism.

What about the people who make the paper or the ink that the IRS uses? Without them, the IRS could not function, they are equally as guilty of working for the IRS, does that make them valid targets?

[libertarian4321]

And I think you are weak and vacillating.

I think you are like many others around here, who like to throw around the word "revolution" because it's hip, trendy and cutting edge.

You have no idea what revolution really means, you haven't got the balls to pull one off, and when the time comes, you'd be first in line to turn in people like me as "enemies of the state".

Take your phony outrage and go sell it to the people I know, personally, who are rotting in jail because of the actions of the IRS.

Spare me the internet tough guy routine.

First off, I defy you to find one of my 2,000+ posts where I was screaming "revolution"- you are the loud-mouthed yahoo, not me. Like Dr. Paul, I seek to fix problems through peaceful means, I'm not a knuckle dragger like you who thinks violence is the best answer to solving any problem. I should also add that "revolution" does not necessarily involve violence.

You are an ignorant, unthinking thug (or, more likely, a wanna-be thug) who's only solution to any problem is to call for violence. The fact that the IRS is a government agency that needs to be eliminated does not justify violence, and especially not violence against innocents.

The decent, hard working people that are working hard to make changes don't need people like you- you do more harm than good.

So go out tonight, get drunk with your friends, and tell 'em how tough you are- but don't bring that crap here.

BTW, the definition of "vacillating" is someone who moves indecisively from one course of action to another. I have never done so. I'm not sure if you are unfamiliar with my posts, or if you are just an idiot using big words you don't understand (I suspect the latter is true).

[tmosley]

You are using the "non-aggression" principle to justify killing innocent people? Maybe I am missing something, but that seems like a contradiction.

No, I am saying that people who don't follow the non-aggression principle are playing Russian Roulette. Jesus said it well when he said "He who lives by the sword dies by the sword." This is the same principle, and I don't think anyone could accuse Jesus of being a violent person of any description. In my case, I am not making a values judgment, I am predicting human behavior.

If you define the word "deserve" to mean that people should keep what they have made for themselves, then people deserve to keep their money, and those who steal from them deserve the violence they bring down upon their own heads.

The NAP is NOT the same as absolute pacifism. It means that you will not strike the first blow. However, if someone violates your rights, it is not contradictory to retaliate or to defend oneself from ongoing violence.

And for Vessol, a comparison to Marxism in this circumstance doesn't make any sense. Marxism is an economic philosophy, not a method of warfare. The concept of revolution does not imply the direction of any given conflict. It's like calling a pincer attack Marxist, or calling snipers Marxists. It just doesn't make any sense. Yes, Marxism tends to be violent, and violation of the NAP directs external violence onto the one violating that principle, but that does not mean that all violence is Marxist.

[QueenB4Liberty]

No, I am saying that people who don't follow the non-aggression principle are playing Russian Roulette. Jesus said it well when he said "He who lives by the sword dies by the sword." This is the same principle, and I don't think anyone could accuse Jesus of being a violent person of any description. In my case, I am not making a values judgment, I am predicting human behavior.

If you define the word "deserve" to mean that people should keep what they have made for themselves, then people deserve to keep their money, and those who steal from them deserve the violence they bring down upon their own heads.

The NAP is NOT the same as absolute pacifism. It means that you will not strike the first blow. However, if someone violates your rights, it is not contradictory to retaliate or to defend oneself from ongoing violence.

And for Vessol, a comparison to Marxism in this circumstance doesn't make any sense. Marxism is an economic philosophy, not a method of warfare. The concept of revolution does not imply the direction of any given conflict. It's like calling a pincer attack Marxist, or calling snipers Marxists. It just doesn't make any sense. Yes, Marxism tends to be violent, and violation of the NAP directs external violence onto the one violating that principle, but that does not mean that all violence is Marxist.

I pretty much agree with everything you've said.

And I'm sure no one wants to use violence, but it is effective, at least when the people at the top use it on the rest of us, or so it seems.

[Vessol]

I pretty much agree with everything you've said.

And I'm sure no one wants to use violence, but it is effective, at least when the people at the top use it on the rest of us, or so it seems.

If you think we can fight them with violence, be my guest. Have fun when a M41 Abrams is on your front lawn. Me, I'll be peacefully protesting till the end.

[Anti Federalist]

Spare me the internet tough guy routine.

First off, I defy you to find one of my 2,000+ posts where I was screaming "revolution"- you are the loud-mouthed yahoo, not me. Like Dr. Paul, I seek to fix problems through peaceful means, I'm not a knuckle dragger like you who thinks violence is the best answer to solving any problem. I should also add that "revolution" does not necessarily involve violence.

You are an ignorant, unthinking thug (or, more likely, a wanna-be thug) who's only solution to any problem is to call for violence. The fact that the IRS is a government agency that needs to be eliminated does not justify violence, and especially not violence against innocents.

The decent, hard working people that are working hard to make changes don't need people like you- you do more harm than good.

So go out tonight, get drunk with your friends, and tell 'em how tough you are- but don't bring that crap here.

BTW, the definition of "vacillating" is someone who moves indecisively from one course of action to another. I have never done so. I'm not sure if you are unfamiliar with my posts, or if you are just an idiot using big words you don't understand (I suspect the latter is true).

Yeah, you made that clear the first time, I'm a jerk.

Are you done venting yet?

If not, there is no reason to "soften your tone", unlike you, I don't take offense at people's opinions or criticisms, not to the point of editing or silencing them.

I know perfectly well what vacillating means.

It describes what will happen when your principles are confronted with the barrel of government gun, demanding compliance.

At that point, all talk of reform ends.

When that happens, you will crimp, waffle, fold, vacillate. That is, if you hold true to the total pacifism line you're taking here.

I did not "advocate" anything here. What I am suggesting is that there is coming a time, whether any of us like it or not, that these types of events are going to increase. At least, as long as government keeps pushing people to that point.

That will just make government retreat into it's bunker mentality and clamp down even more on the citizenry, making it even less legitimate.

For the record, I am not hoping for or "advocating" violent revolution either.

My solution always has been a peaceful separation, having become convinced the system is too bankrupt and corrupt to ever "reform".

So, no, I don't think violence solution to every problem.

I think it is needed at times to defend oneself against an aggressor.

Certainly Stack was the victim here, pushed by a ruthless aggressor to the breaking point.

[Anti Federalist]

blah blah blah

You know, I attempted a dialogue here, even though you wanted to chuck hand grenades from the get go.

But after reading the following callous (You do know what callous means don't you? Or do you have to look that up as well?) remarks you made about the bulldozing death of Rachael Corrie, I'm pretty sure I'm done here.


Don't get you panties in a bunch.

I was just giving good advice to all the future naive activists.

She put herself into a dangerous situation, then failed to react to the danger (whether because of naivete or clumsiness). She suffered the consequences.

She should have moved sooner, unless her goal was to become a martyr.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2391310&postcount=9

So, peaceful activism gets you bulldozed, and violence is wrong and you get to pick and choose who the "heroes" and idiot "martyrs" are?

Is that how it works?

Fuck off, hypocrite.

[furface]

I don't know of any taxing authority in the world that's as aggressive as the IRS. That's including places like Iran and Saudi Arabia. Sometimes people flip out, but what drives them to flip out is worth understanding.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[libertarian4321]

You know, I attempted a dialogue here, even though you wanted to chuck hand grenades from the get go.

But after reading the following callous (You do know what callous means don't you? Or do you have to look that up as well?) remarks you made about the bulldozing death of Rachael Corrie, I'm pretty sure I'm done here.

Fuck off, hypocrite.

I did not advocate killing anyone there. I said Corrie was foolish for not moving away from an oncoming bull dozer (because she was). I stand by my statement and advise all of you- if you see a bulldozer coming at you, MOVE.

There is a huge difference between saying that someone should move away from an oncoming bull dozer (as I did) and condoning the actions of a guy who flew a plane into a building full of innocent civilians.

I have never advocated killing innocent civilians, whereas you seemed to be advocating killing civilians as if it were noble- up until your last post where you said you do not advocate killing.

I certainly hope your last post more accurately reflects your real thoughts, because the last thing we need is to have people here advocating the killing of innocent civilians.

[QueenB4Liberty]

I did not advocate killing anyone there. I said Corrie was foolish for not moving away from an oncoming bull dozer (because she was). I stand by my statement and advise all of you- if you see a bulldozer coming at you, MOVE.

There is a huge difference between saying that someone should move away from an oncoming bull dozer (as I did) and condoning the actions of a guy who flew a plane into a building full of innocent civilians.

I have never advocated killing innocent civilians, whereas you seemed to be advocating killing civilians as if it were noble- up until your last post where you said you do not advocate killing.

I certainly hope your last post more accurately reflects your real thoughts, because the last thing we need is to have people here advocating the killing of innocent civilians.

And there is also a difference between condoning and understanding why something would happen.

[QueenB4Liberty]

If you think we can fight them with violence, be my guest. Have fun when a M41 Abrams is on your front lawn. Me, I'll be peacefully protesting till the end.

I didn't say I was going to use violence, but it's definitely more effective than peaceful protests. You go to a peaceful protest so you can feel good about yourself, not because it accomplishes anything. When we no longer have to have a permit to exercise our Constitutional rights, or if we could have the kind of protests France has where the place shuts down until things get done, then maybe I'll consider it effective.

[libertarian4321]

Certainly Stack was the victim here, pushed by a ruthless aggressor to the breaking point.

And no, Stack was not the victim. Stack was a criminal. Being pissed off about your taxes does not give you the right to slaughter people.

The victim here (the guy Stack murdered) was Vernon Hunter, a man who served 20 years in the military including 2 tours in Vietnam who left behind a wife, 2 children, and 6 grand children. A guy who is being described in the local news as friendly and outgoing and who did a lot of volunteer work with his church.

At least one of the hospitalized burn victims was NOT AN IRS EMPLOYEE (so even your bull shit about "they deserved it because they worked for the IRS" is wrong). This jackass (Stack) plowed his plane into an office building that contained non IRS offices.

Most of the victims have not yet been identified, but it's a safe bet that most of them were not "evil."