John Stack: Tax Martyr or Tax Terrorist ?
'Pilot crashes into Texas building': I know it's oldish news - so last week right ? But when I saw this title on the news last week and this type of footage (source for photo on right) on TV with another American building on fire...I confess I was waiting for the word 'Arab' and 'Muslim' to spring up, not because this is what people who belong to this classification do best but because the world has become accustomed to hearing this connection from media whenever something happens :)
Imagine my 'joy' on hearing that it's only a 'white' guy who did this... and he is alleged to have stated on his website that "Violence not only is the answer, it is the only answer..." very balanced indeed. So John Stack went ballistic because of taxes !
I have yet to see hatred towards him or any reaction from the world, in fact he is not newsworthy anymore...but he did crash a plane into a building right ? so does this count as terrorism? Will his family members and neighbours be forever labeled with shame? I would like to know his religion- why is that not mentioned ? Or maybe soon we will hear that he was visiting a mosque, had traveled to Yemen and was donating money to a 'madrasa' in Pakistan.
I dread to think what would happen if he turned out to have had even bought a Shawarma or Falafel or eaten Couscous within the last 10 years :) * Can you imagine the scenario?
Sigh I guess it's just the double standards as usual .
* Or maybe not? because these are claimed to be favourite staples by Israelis , but this post is not about them :P so if you want to read more check Anglo Libyan's blog !
9 comments:
So John Stack went ballistic because of taxes !
...
I would like to know his religion- why is that not mentioned ? Or maybe soon we will hear that he was visiting a mosque, had traveled to Yemen and was donating money to a 'madrasa' in Pakistan.
You ask questions that you have already answered :)
It isn't mentioned because it isn't relevant. All the evidence points to him being embittered by the way he thought the Federal Government destroyed his life. Nothing to do with his religious beliefs, or lack of them. The only thing that makes him different than a disgruntled employee who went on a workplace shooting spree or any of the many previous examples of somebody in the US of people who became pathologically violent and suicidal because of a meltdown is that he used a plane for his attack and not a gun.
What do you think would have happened if he'd been Arab and Muslim, H? Do you think the media would have tried to portray him as an Islamist? And brushed all his rantings about the IRS and the Federal Government and his complaints about how capitalism destroyed his savings and buried him under insurmountable debt under the table? I don't believe that. Even with the Fort Hood shooter, it seemed to me that the media was trying very hard to give Hasan the benefit of the doubt. They were talking about post-traumatic stress syndrome and blah blah blah. It wasn't until they ran out of alternative theories and were confronted with all of his past public statements that they started labeling him a terrorist.
Although the hatred of the IRS is very much a part of Texan and American Mid-Western culture, the terrorists choice of weapon was obviously inspired by 911 so although the phrase 'crazy Moslem terrorist' may not have been used in the reporting of this event, the Islamic world can rest assured that they have a direct role in this episode of uniquely American insanity.
Salam Highlander,
I can certainly understand your distain at the lack of attention or more directly the attention that would have been directed had this individual been anything other than a "white" guy.
According to dictionary definition Craig, it would classify this guy as a terrorist.
Definition in part - "Noun - terrorist - radical - a person who has radical ideas or opinions".
Craig,
Actually you have answered my question :)
"All the evidence points to him being embittered by the way he thought the Federal Government destroyed his life."
That's the first excuse on which many people base their radical actions towards another entity perceived as enemy to justify violent action/behaviour.
Your sentence is a template to be used for a number of circumstances.
All the evidence points to Palestinians being embittered by the way they thought the Israelis destroyed their life. (and vice versa of course :P)
All the evidence points to Muslims being embittered by the way they thought the West destroyed their life.
and so on and so forth
Anon : thanks for proving my point as well :P
Ibeebarbie finally someone who understands exactly what I meant - thank you I was despairing ....
ibeebarbie:
Definition in part - "Noun - terrorist - radical - a person who has radical ideas or opinions".
I have radical ideas and opinions. Am I a terrorist? That definition is without value, and I'd like to know what dictionary it was taken from. Not that a concept as complex as terrorism can be explained with a dictionary entry, anyway, but that's a particularly poor attempt in my opinion.
H,
That's the first excuse on which many people base their radical actions towards another entity perceived as enemy to justify violent action/behaviour.
Which doesn't make them terrorists.
All the evidence points to Palestinians being embittered by the way they thought the Israelis destroyed their life. (and vice versa of course :P)
Which doesn't make them terrorists. What makes SOME Palestinians terrorists is when they deliberately choose to target the most innocent and most vulnerable from amongst the Israeli population to attack specifically because that causes the most horror and revulsion in their enemy. That's the exact opposite of what is considered rational and justifiable behavior when people feel they have no choice but to resort to violence. I'm sorry, but you will never convince me that if I had a grievance I felt had to be resolved with violence that I should not only attack the innocent but also the most defenseless as my first or even my last course of action. I'm going to be trying to take out the people who are a threat to me, and the people who have done me harm.
All the evidence points to Muslims being embittered by the way they thought the West destroyed their life.
I don't understand that at all. Can you explain how much better off Muslims were before the West "destroyed" their lives?
PS H, the "question" I was referring to was your comment that his religion wasn't brought up. It seems you realize his religion wasn't relevant. Are you claiming religion isn't relevant in the case of the Underwear bomber, the shoe bomber, the 9/11 attackers, the Fort Hood shooter, or HAMAS and Hezbollah terror attacks? That'd be a particularly hard sell in the case of of HAMAS and Hezbollah since not only are they Islamist in nature but their very names claim that they are Islamic representatives of God on Earth.
Highlander, may I be sincere?
I guess you'll say that I may, and I always are - well, may I raise the usual dose?
When I read a post like this one, I have the feeling that the author is underestimating the intelligence of his audience.. Perhaps the target readers of this post are people with IQ significantly lower than mine (and yours). If you are intentionally trying to use their IQ, then I do not find it quite right. It is like indoctrinating children.
You say, "I confess I was waiting for the word 'Arab' and 'Muslim' to spring up, not because this is what people who belong to this classification do best but because the world has become accustomed to hearing this connection from media whenever something happens :). Imagine my 'joy' on hearing that it's only a 'white' guy who did this..."
My opinion is that you were waiting for the words "Arab" and "Muslim" to spring up because, nowadays, it is most often Arabs and Muslims who do such things. And that you experienced joy without quotation marks to hear that at least this time, happily, the perpetrator was someone else.
"I have yet to see hatred towards him or any reaction from the world, in fact he is not newsworthy anymore..."
Because there aren't any groups of survivors continuing to promote his pet cause. Well, if you search the Web, you will perhaps find three or four of them. Still, nothing compared to the reactions after an Islamist terror act, when some people have parties in the streets, and others tell us that until we do everything as terrorists want, we can expect more of the same.
"So does this count as terrorism?"
Who cares? Names are not important, deeds are. Nobody denies that non-Muslims have produced, and are still producing, first-quality terrorism. E.g. the tactic to murder a person and then bomb his funeral ceremony, often used in Iraq, was first used in Bulgaria in 1925. But now we have most problems with Islamist terror, and pay most attention to it. If a patient has peritonitis, he and the doctors will address the peritonitis, not the tooth that happens to be decaying, and not the flu he had back in 1988.
For once I have to agree totally with Craig. It was far too obvious that this was the sad result of a mentally disturbed person. No need, not even for Fox AFAIK, to seek a terrorist spin. Very similar, I'd say, to the post 9/11 Tampa crash. Anyone else remember that sad piece of news of that confused 15-year-old kid?
/Adam
LOL Adam it's fun to see you and Craig agree on something !
Post a Comment