Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Joe Stack: who will take right-wing terrorism seriously?
Global Comment ^ | February 27, 2010 | Erik Loomis

Posted on 02/28/2010 5:36:12 PM PST by presidio9

When most Americans think of terrorism, certain images come to mind: airplanes flying into the World Trade Center. Muslim men with long beards in Afghanistan. Dark-skinned people trying to set off bombs on airplanes.

But is Islamic-based terrorism a primary threat? Maybe the face of terrorism is more diverse than that. Perhaps it is also a middle-aged white man. Perhaps it looks like Joe Stack. On February 18, Stack, an Austin, Texas man with tax problems, flew his personal airplane into the Internal Revenue Office Building in Austin. He killed one IRS employee and himself. His manifesto explained that the IRS forced him to violence after a tax code switch in the 1980s ruined his life. Stack’s violent attack on a federal institution is only the latest example of right-wing terrorism to afflict the United States in recent years.

Some have questioned Stack’s right-wing credentials. They point out a reference to communism in his manifesto. This is possible. Parsing the political leanings of an unhinged and suicidal man can be tricky and counterproductive. However, his anti-government leanings and attack on the Internal Revenue Service comes straight from the right-wing playbook.

Regardless, conservatives have taken up Stack’s mantle. Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, a likely candidate for the 2012 Republican nomination, told the Conservative Political Action Conference last weekend that conservatives needed to “smash the windows out of big government.”

Iowa Republican Congressman Steve King went a step further, expressing sympathy for Stack’s actions. He told a CPAC crowd that they also needed to “implode” IRS offices. Stack’s own daughter has portrayed him as hero. Samantha Bell told Good Morning America that her father’s noble death should serve as a wake-up call to people to stand up against government agents she considers “pompous political thugs and their mindless minions.”

The man Stack killed, Vernon Hunter, served two tours of duty in the Vietnam War. Yet the hero is apparently his murderer.

Stack is the latest in a long string of violent right-wing attacks in recent years. On May 31, 2009, Dr. George Tiller, one of the nation’s few late-term abortion providers, was shot and killed in his church by the anti-abortion activist Scott Roeder. On June 27, 2008, an unemployed truck driver named Jim Adkisson walked into the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee and opened fire, killing two. He attacked the Unitarian church for its acceptance of gays and support of abortion rights, and claimed he wanted to kill every Democrat in the House and Senate.

The right-wing Tea Party movement has employed violent rhetoric as well, including a speaker at a Washington state rally claiming she wanted to hang Washington Democratic Senator Patty Murray. Some have called Stack the first Tea Party terrorist. While Stack doesn’t seem to have had explicit connections to organized right-wing activism, his actions come from the same conservative anger at the federal government and liberalism.

The most famous example of right-wing terrorism occurred in April 1995, when Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, two men with long-connections to right-wing militias, blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. 168 people died that day.

These rural-based militias preach anti-government extremism, often mixed with white supremacy, and constitute a real threat, as McVeigh and Nichols proved. Yet the United States has yet to have a serious public dialogue about increasingly frequent right-wing terrorism.

We have three major public spaces to remember victims of terrorism and to think about terrorism’s impact upon national identity. The first is the former World Trade Center site in New York. The second is where Flight 93 crashed in rural Pennsylvania. And the third is the Oklahoma City Memorial.

At the first two, visitors can visualize the bad guys, but the Oklahoma City Memorial does a remarkably poor job at contextualizing the attacks. The site is tremendously heartbreaking, but you get no sense that McVeigh and Nichols had right-wing connections. They read like isolated crazy people who just wanted to kill innocent women and children. You see the McVeigh and Nichols as two evil men, not as representatives of a larger terrorist movement.

Politics do enter the Oklahoma City Memorial. The exhibits have several references to so-called “eco-terrorism.” The museum paints eco-terrorism as a serious threat to American national security. Examples of this horror include groups like the Earth Liberation Front setting fire to SUVs in car lots and the 2008 arson of a luxury home development in a Seattle suburb.

While I’m not excusing such actions, they aren’t terrorism. They aren’t attacks upon government institutions, they are not designed to inspire terror in the American population. They are stupid acts of outrage over the destruction of the environment.

When environmentalists start killing CEO’s of chemical companies or blowing up Exxon-Mobil office buildings, then we can make legitimate comparisons between radical environmentalists and right-wing terrorists. Discussing this dubious threat at the Oklahoma City Memorial obscures McVeigh and Nichols’ political leanings.

Of course, conservatives don’t want you to make these connections. They worked hard to ensure an apolitical Oklahoma City Memorial. Say what they will, but events like Oklahoma City, Knoxville, and Austin serve conservative purposes.

Talk-radio and the internet spew an endless expectoration of hate. Republicans might publicly distance themselves from this, but Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, et al have created a powerful conservative movement with the potential for violence. Jim Adkisson explicitly cited right-wing radio as having influenced his actions.

The threat of right-wing domestic terrorism provides at least as great a threat to the nation as Islamic terrorism. And it’s far past time we started talking about this. How many Americans have to die before we take right-wing terrorism seriously?


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 1lessobamavoter; alinsky; democrats; domesticterrorism; josephstack; liberalfascism; liberalhate; liberalism; progressive; progressives; progressivism; stack; teaparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last

Erik Loomis is a visiting assistant professor of history at Southwestern University.

1 posted on 02/28/2010 5:36:12 PM PST by presidio9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: presidio9

someone didnt take their medicine today..


2 posted on 02/28/2010 5:40:32 PM PST by Armedanddangerous (Montani Semper Liberi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I don’t know who’s the bigger loon, Stack or this alleged professor.


3 posted on 02/28/2010 5:42:15 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Joe Stack (IRS plane crasher) ends his “manifesto” with this, a popular Karl Marx quote and a slap at Capitalism...

“The communist creed:
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

The capitalist creed:
From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed.”

-Joe Stack (1956-2010)
____________________________________

['See text of the note' (CNN PDF file)

4 posted on 02/28/2010 5:42:31 PM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

The ahole forgot about the leftist attacks on recruiting station over the years as well.


5 posted on 02/28/2010 5:43:03 PM PST by Trueblackman (F*@k Max Blumenthal the empty headed spin master with a degree in bulls%*t)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

"A family source said Bishop, a mother of four children - the youngest a third-grade boy - was a far-left political extremist who was "obsessed" with President Obama to the point of being off-putting."--Boston Herald, February 15, 2010

'Oddball' portrait of Amy Bishop emerges:
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/20100215oddball_protrait_emerges_suspects_family_pals_offer_clues/srvc=home&position=0

6 posted on 02/28/2010 5:43:20 PM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

He looks like he’s in a lineup.


7 posted on 02/28/2010 5:43:44 PM PST by CaptainK (...please make it stop. Shake a can of pennies at it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
BOTH OBAMA AND OSAMA HAVE
FRIENDS WHO BOMBED THE PENTAGON

_________________________________________________________

From HumanEvents.com, April 29, 2008:
"By all accounts, he [Obama friend and associate, Bill Ayers] was a ferocious, violent, revolutionary Marxist in his halcyon days as a Weatherman leader. He and his Weatherman bombers were enamored of Ho Chi Minh, Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Mao Tse-tung -- indeed, all the murderous heroes on the Left. Referring to the Weatherman members in August 1969, he said (according to the FBI): 'We’re revolutionary Communists.'

He got off on the group’s multiple explosions, too, and discusses them rather lovingly in his memoir.

Ideal Bombing Weather:
'Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon,' he writes (although he concedes it was really a group effort). 'The sky was blue. The birds were singing. And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them.' (p. 256 in the 2003 edition.)

Article: Obama and His Weatherman Friends
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26243
________________________________________________________

"It was at the Chicago home of [Bill] Ayers and [Bernardine] Dohrn that Obama, then an up-and-coming 'community organizer,' had his political coming out party in 1995. Not content with this rite of passage in Lefty World — where unrepentant terrorists are regarded as progressive luminaries, still working 'only to educate' — both Obamas tended to the relationship with the Ayers."
Article: The Company He Keeps:
Meet Obama’s circle: The same old America-hating Left
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YThjYTU1ZDBjNmQ2YzcwNzU1MmYwN2JiMWY0ZGI0NDA=&w=MA==
________________________________________________________

"This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who's a professor of English..."
--B.H. Obama

YouTube Video:
The O'Reilly Factor confronts Bill Ayers:
October 24, 2008:
(note the red communist star on his shirt)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP3uvK9gTIY

8 posted on 02/28/2010 5:46:05 PM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Best response - point and laugh.


9 posted on 02/28/2010 5:46:28 PM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

BOTH OBAMA AND OSAMA HAVE
FRIENDS WHO WANTED TO BOMB FORT DIX

From David Horowitz's FrontPageMag.com/DiscoverTheNetworks.org:
March 6, 1970: "three members of the Weather Underground accidentally killed themselves in a Manhattan townhouse while attempting to build a powerful bomb they had intended to plant at a social dance in Fort Dix, New Jersey -- an event that was to be attended by U.S. Army soldiers. Hundreds of lives could have been lost had the plot been successfully executed."
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6808

"The bomb was intended to be planted at a non-commissioned officer's dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey.
The bomb was packed with nails to inflict maximum casualties upon detonation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weatherman_(organization)#Chronology_of_events
__________________________________________________

2007 Fort Dix attack plot

A group of six radical Islamist[1] men, allegedly plotting to stage an attack on the Fort Dix military base in New Jersey, United States, were arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on May 7, 2007. They were subsequently charged with planning an attack against U.S. soldiers. The alleged aim of the six men was said to be to "kill as many soldiers as possible".[2] Their trial began on October 20, 2008. [3]

Opening arguments were presented on October 20, 2008.
Assistant U.S. Attorney William Fitzpatrick said the defendants were inspired by jihad saying "Their motive was to defend Islam. Their inspiration was Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Dix_plot

10 posted on 02/28/2010 5:46:32 PM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

That pictures says it all! Bet he got a lot of wedgies in grade school!


11 posted on 02/28/2010 5:47:07 PM PST by JaguarXKE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

That picture looks like he’s on a police pedophile lineup.


12 posted on 02/28/2010 5:49:10 PM PST by Lazamataz (Seriously. The only way Obama can possibly pull this out is to declare Martial Law before November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
I don't see what is so difficult to understand about an anti-government communist. Any true Marxist not only hates capitalists, but the system of government that supports and thrives off them. To a communist, the current government has to be destroyed too.
13 posted on 02/28/2010 5:49:32 PM PST by The_Victor (If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
He keeps watching out for right wingers from around his boyfriend's buttox.

LLS

14 posted on 02/28/2010 5:50:39 PM PST by LibLieSlayer (hussama will never be my president... NEVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
So, he's an Assistant Professor of History. And a left-wing loon.

No surprise.

15 posted on 02/28/2010 5:51:19 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I think Frank Rich’s NYTs column today is similar to this one. What a coincidence! /snort


16 posted on 02/28/2010 5:51:24 PM PST by tropical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Armedanddangerous

That’s what I thought too. Very schizophrenic.


17 posted on 02/28/2010 5:51:27 PM PST by darkangel82 (I don't have a superiority complex, I'm just better than you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

HEY, ya’ll been hiding thet thar rhat wing playbook from me for the lass 10 yeers?


18 posted on 02/28/2010 5:53:41 PM PST by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

There are none so blind as those who will not see.


19 posted on 02/28/2010 5:55:46 PM PST by SaveTheChief (Hey Democrats - Can you hear us now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Amazing a left-wing supporter of BO is now relabeled a right-winger. The old media is about as corrupt as a chicago politician.


20 posted on 02/28/2010 5:56:36 PM PST by Neoliberalnot ((Freedom's Precious Metals: Gold, Silver and Lead))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neoliberalnot

It takes some serious stupid to label someone who quotes Marx as a “right-winger.”


21 posted on 02/28/2010 5:58:41 PM PST by darkangel82 (I don't have a superiority complex, I'm just better than you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Trueblackman
http://www.pop-culture.us/Annual/images/unabomber.jpg

Whenever the left publishes these little lists of white guys who are terrorists they conveniently forget that this guy's motive was to destroy capitalism.

Also, I am an Irish Catholic who has worked for the past ten years with a charity that brings Protestant and Catholic children to the states to live together for a summer. I hate all terrorism, and I hate the IRA. But I get annoyed when the left equate's the IRA with al Qaeda. Virtually all the deaths that occured during the troubles where from gunfire, and occasionally grenades. When the IRA DID plant a bomb (in Belfast or the UK) they had a longstanding policy of calling it in, so the building could be evacuated, and no innocents were injured. I am certainly not excusing them, but does this sound like something an Islamic terrorist would do?

22 posted on 02/28/2010 6:05:11 PM PST by presidio9 (Islam is as Islam does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Loomis in a loon. Stack was one of his comrades. He was not a right winger. Stack railed against capitalism and the failure of Congress to pass ObamaCare. That would make Stack more like Loomis than any rightwinger I know.

Loomis might want to start doing a little more research before he opens his big mouth.

23 posted on 02/28/2010 6:08:46 PM PST by FlingWingFlyer ("Suitcase Jake" RIP 02-24-10. You were one of a kind good buddy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Liberalism has been terrorizing and killing people for at least fifty years. A great deal of the rise in violence and murders in the last fifty years can be placed squarely on liberals who were soft on crime. And every time some mother kills her kids because they’re a “burden”, you can thank a liberal.


24 posted on 02/28/2010 6:08:58 PM PST by driftless2 (for long term happiness, learn how to play the accordion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Bill Ayres.


25 posted on 02/28/2010 6:10:21 PM PST by Tzimisce (No thanks. We have enough government already. - The Tick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neoliberalnot
Amazing a left-wing supporter of BO is now relabeled a right-winger. The old media is about as corrupt as a chicago politician.

Progressives are active users of Orwell's New Speak.

26 posted on 02/28/2010 6:16:07 PM PST by highlander_UW (Obama has lost or not saved over 4 million jobs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I would not call him a right winger. Right wingers are not anti-capitalist.


27 posted on 02/28/2010 6:23:00 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Was Stack registered as a Republican or a Democrat?


28 posted on 02/28/2010 6:25:04 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
.
Right wing?

Stack was a Bush hating anarchist.

29 posted on 02/28/2010 6:26:13 PM PST by Touch Not the Cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Loomis apparently didn’t read Stack’s statement...stack was not a fan of capitalism, or America. Conservatives are fans of both things.


30 posted on 02/28/2010 6:30:55 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (We're right, we're free, we'll fight and you'll see!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9; All

Excuse me .. but the premise is: Joe Stack is right wing.

I reject that premise .. and call it what it is: A BIG FAT LIE.

The left is so paranoid they are trying to convince people that Joe Stack is right wing .. when I believe the general public already knows he was NOT!!


31 posted on 02/28/2010 6:39:33 PM PST by CyberAnt (HEALTHCARE IS NOT A "RIGHT"!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

I could not find a voting record, so either he was unregistered and hadn’t voted since moving to Texas or that someone scrubbed the record.


32 posted on 02/28/2010 6:51:47 PM PST by DrewsDad (Seize the false prophets of global warming before they tax us to death)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

If I had a nickle for every leftwing crazy, and subtracted a nickle for every rightwing crazy, I’d still be a rich man.


33 posted on 02/28/2010 7:06:18 PM PST by FastCoyote (I am intolerant of the intolerable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Armedanddangerous

someone didnt take their medicine today..

This is nothing to make light of as this is what the media puts out and the sheeple read. We have got to find a way to go on the attack ourselves, instead of joking about it. I wish there was a way to sue them(class action) or ridicule them.


34 posted on 02/28/2010 7:51:52 PM PST by gunner03
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Time to take these taxpayer stalking “writers” as supporting government and political party based terror cells seriously.


35 posted on 02/28/2010 8:16:04 PM PST by JudgemAll (control freaks, their world & their problem with my gun and my protecting my private party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

He looks like he would get along well with Elton John, or to put it another way, he probably needs diving weights in his loafers so he doesn’t float away.


36 posted on 02/28/2010 8:18:14 PM PST by Disambiguator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator


37 posted on 02/28/2010 8:37:20 PM PST by presidio9 (Islam is as Islam does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

You socialist professor and media types are doing this guy joe stack a real disservice.

Leftists want to be known for their activism. The absolute worst thing that could happen to any leftist is a post mortem false accusation robbing them of their rights to what they’ve always lived for—immortality in the media as a leftist activist.


38 posted on 02/28/2010 8:58:00 PM PST by reasonisfaith (Hey you noble leftists. You can't be honest about your agenda because you're not confident in it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Just sent this to Mr. Loomis:

First off, communists are anti-government when it comes to governments that don’t support their views. Just look at Castro, Ho Chi Minh, and Mao Zedong to name a few; all three led revolutions against goverments.

And what is your idea of “taking right-wing terrorism seriously”, Mr. Loomis? Should the government use force of law to silence “right-wing” radio programs that speak out against government action (isn’t there something called the First Amendment forbidding that)? Should they arrest anyone who protests against government actions (what were your feelings when the left wing was calling for Bush’es assassination?) or who suggest that we are approaching the point where armed revolt is our only option because our government ignores our votes and our protests and continues to grow in power and authority far beyond what the Constitution allows (doesn’t said Constitution state that when government becomes a threat to the people’s freedom, it is the people’s right to dissolve such a government?) Wouldn’t such government action in fact vindicate the very people you claim are the threat, as such actions are the very thing they are warning us about?

Ever ask yourself why some people are advocating these things? Can you honestly look me in the eye and say that our current government is following the Constitution that they all swore to uphold when they took office? The question that should be asked is “Who will take an overreaching government serioulsy?” because right now, I can promise you that that is a bigger threat than a few extremists.

As for the boogeyman “militia” term that your side is so fond of throwing at anyone who holds views of the government you don’t like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGYR7_PII7w


39 posted on 02/28/2010 9:00:33 PM PST by RWB Patriot ("Need has never produced anything. It has only been an excuse to steal from those with ablity.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ETL

I’m surprised somebody had sex with her at least four times


40 posted on 02/28/2010 9:24:36 PM PST by hattend (The era of John McCain is over, the era of Ronald Reagan is back! Go Sarah Go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: hattend
She and her husband were questioned in 1993 about some mail bombings. I think he is also under investigation for the recent Alabama shooting as well, something to do with the gun I think, but I'm not sure about that.

________________________________

"The woman accused of killing three colleagues at the University of Alabama in Huntsville was a suspect in a 1993 attempted mail bombing, according to a report by The Boston Globe.

The report broke the day after it was learned that Bishop fatally shot her brother in Braintree in 1986.

More than fifteen years ago, Bishop worked with Sylvia Fluckiger at Children's Hospital in Boston.

"I thought she was an odd-ball. Maybe socially a little awkward," Fluckiger said.  "I felt she was a little bit sloppy working in the lab. But we were not friends. She came to do her experiments in our lab. I had my stuff to be done. We didn't hang out."

In 1993, Bishop and her husband, James Anderson, were reportedly questioned about a mail bomb that was sent to the Newton home of Harvard Medical School professor Dr. Paul Rosenberg.

Colleagues at Children's Hospital were suspicious at the time, because Bishop was apparently angry at Dr. Rosenberg, although no one knew why.

http://www.necn.com/02/14/10/Amy-Bishop-at-time-of-1993-mail-bomb-inv/landing.html?blockID=180453&feedID=4215

41 posted on 02/28/2010 9:37:48 PM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

42 posted on 02/28/2010 10:24:48 PM PST by hattend (The era of John McCain is over, the era of Ronald Reagan is back! Go Sarah Go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
I'll perform the autopsy:

When most Americans think of terrorism, certain images come to mind: airplanes flying into the World Trade Center. Muslim men with long beards in Afghanistan. Dark-skinned people trying to set off bombs on airplanes.

Yes, Professor, this is called "induction" and is experience-based. "Most Americans" can do it but I suspect you meant to demean the commonality of it.

But is Islamic-based terrorism a primary threat?

Are you unwilling to accept that it IS, at least, a primary threat? Would you believe secondary? How about 'inconvenient on a Friday evening'?

Maybe the face of terrorism is more diverse than that. Perhaps it is also a middle-aged white man. Perhaps it looks like Joe Stack. On February 18, Stack, an Austin, Texas man with tax problems, flew his personal airplane into the Internal Revenue Office Building in Austin.

Maybe, perhaps, the Professor is attempting to pass off a proposition on the strength of UNCERTAINTY instead of the the solid CERTAINTY of a sound argument. He makes much use of "maybe" and "perhaps" for someone who is supposed be able to write at an academic level. This sort of language in usually not accepted in academic writing simply because it suggests that the writer is not burdened with the defense of otherwise defenseless claims.

He killed one IRS employee and himself. His manifesto explained that the IRS forced him to violence after a tax code switch in the 1980s ruined his life. Stack's violent attack on a federal institution is only the latest example of right-wing terrorism to afflict the United States in recent years.

Some have questioned Stack's right-wing credentials.

Oh, here it comes. This is one of those cowardly souls who is bound to use the indefinite "some" precisely because it allows him to posit a statement without having either to defend or define it. Here he uses here it to erect a straw man against which he will bravely tilt. He need not explain exactly to whom he refers because there is bound to be someone out there who possesses a more curious mind upon whom we can depend to question "Stack's right-wing credentials" - just as we can depend upon the writer to be the other, incurious, fellow who does not question.

They point out a reference to communism in his manifesto. This is possible.

From what institution did the Professor obtain his credentials? I ask because I am struck by his deficiency as a writer and I wonder how even graduated. "Perhaps" he was able to submit and defend his thesis by way of miming. The quotation above carries as much argumentative weight as saying "The temperature high today was 72 degrees. This is possible".

Parsing the political leanings of an unhinged and suicidal man can be tricky and counterproductive.

Here he uses the anti-intellectual strength of argumentative uncertainty again. See how that works? He turns up the uncertainty whenever he encounters evidence he wants us to ignore. Looking into Stack's writings for any evidence which does not jibe with the Professor's claim is "tricky and counterproductive". I have to wonder about the writer's purpose if evidence is "counterproductive".

However, his anti-government leanings and attack on the Internal Revenue Service comes straight from the right-wing playbook.

Any who attain the station of "Professor" should recognize a circular argument on sight. ETHICAL academic writers even avoid using them. The writer should know what is in the playbook because he has taken upon himself to compose it.

Regardless, conservatives have taken up Stack's mantle.

He also has taken upon himself to determine who is conservative with a slippery and circular definition of "conservative".

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, a likely candidate for the 2012 Republican nomination, told the Conservative Political Action Conference last weekend that conservatives needed to “smash the windows out of big government.”

Much like a good crisis, far be it for the practiced leftist to let missing context go to waste.

Iowa Republican Congressman Steve King went a step further, expressing sympathy for Stack's actions. He told a CPAC crowd that they also needed to “implode” IRS offices.

Yeah, sounds like he wants to go all "Cloward-Piven" on their asses.

Stack's own daughter has portrayed him as hero. Samantha Bell told Good Morning America that her father's noble death should serve as a wake-up call to people to stand up against government agents she considers “pompous political thugs and their mindless minions.”

I am reasonably sure that when the leftists most felt themselves to be out of power and under the thumb of "the man" during the Sixties and Seventies they used very similar rhetoric. In the writer's emotional worldview, the value of language is determined by personal investment. I have no doubt that if a scratchy 8mm reel surfaced in which an unwashed hippy could be heard to accuse "the pigs" of being the 'mindless minions of pompous political thugs' he would sigh with romantic reflection. It just a matter of how he feels about the subject.

The man Stack killed, Vernon Hunter, served two tours of duty in the Vietnam War. Yet the hero is apparently his murderer.

And in a simplistic world in which there can be only one of a set to be said to possess a property, the SUPPOSED nomination of one of a pair denies that quality to the other. This also applies to simplistic minds operating in a more complex world.

Stack is the latest in a long string of violent right-wing attacks in recent years. On May 31, 2009, Dr. George Tiller, one of the nation's few late-term abortion providers, was shot and killed in his church by the anti-abortion activist Scott Roeder. On June 27, 2008, an unemployed truck driver named Jim Adkisson walked into the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee and opened fire, killing two. He attacked the Unitarian church for its acceptance of gays and support of abortion rights, and claimed he wanted to kill every Democrat in the House and Senate.

I believe that we can certainly qualify most violent crime being committed today as "leftist". The prisons are chock-full of folks who would vote Democrat if felons could vote. The excuses given for the worst crimes are all essentially leftist in their explanation. The claim of pursuing "social justice" is common amongst them.

The right-wing Tea Party movement has employed violent rhetoric as well, including a speaker at a Washington state rally claiming she wanted to hang Washington Democratic Senator Patty Murray.

And if Murray's effigy were to be hanged with the same frequency as G.W.Bush's, I would expect the same level of inquiry.

Some have called Stack the first Tea Party terrorist.

Some more "some" has been applied. I wonder if the writer has the fortitude to come out from behind the skirts of "some" and make that claim himself.

While Stack doesn't seem to have had explicit connections to organized right-wing activism, his actions come from the same conservative anger at the federal government and liberalism.

In summary: The writer has no reason to believe his own circular argument, but it is just SO satisfyingly circular!

The most famous example of right-wing terrorism occurred in April 1995, when Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, two men with long-connections to right-wing militias, blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. 168 people died that day.

Observe the use of "long-connections" [sic]. Not "long-standing connections", but something suggestively similar. In fact, connecting Oklahoma City to militias is a stretch. Oh, I get it! A stretch IS a "long-connection". What a clever word smith! He used an accusation the veracity of which can be defended with reference to the opposite of its intended suggestion.

These rural-based militias preach anti-government extremism, often mixed with white supremacy, and constitute a real threat, as McVeigh and Nichols proved. Yet the United States has yet to have a serious public dialogue about increasingly frequent right-wing terrorism.

And, of course, rural-based militias are morally defective in comparison to their urban counterparts, the inner-city street gangs, the politics of which are decidedly left-leaning and who kill far more than died at OKC.

We have three major public spaces to remember victims of terrorism and to think about terrorism's impact upon national identity. The first is the former World Trade Center site in New York. The second is where Flight 93 crashed in rural Pennsylvania. And the third is the Oklahoma City Memorial.

Yeah, two out of three. I have long observed that nothing offends those who lack a sense of proportion quite as much as does proportion.

At the first two, visitors can visualize the bad guys, but the Oklahoma City Memorial does a remarkably poor job at contextualizing the attacks. The site is tremendously heartbreaking, but you get no sense that McVeigh and Nichols had right-wing connections.

This would, then, be in balance with all the exhibits which present the public with the leftist face of terror as displayed from the late Sixties into the early Eighties. I kid, of course. During that time nearly all domestic terror was practiced by political activists of the leftist persuasion. I can tell that the neglect of this subject pains the writer, but only if he thinks that right-wingers are getting off the hook.

They read like isolated crazy people who just wanted to kill innocent women and children. You see the McVeigh and Nichols as two evil men, not as representatives of a larger terrorist movement.

What?! Does he want S-T-E-R-E-O-T-Y-P-I-N-G?

Politics do enter the Oklahoma City Memorial.

Get ready, folks. This is his COMPLAINT.

The exhibits have several references to so-called “eco-terrorism.” The museum paints eco-terrorism as a serious threat to American national security. Examples of this horror include groups like the Earth Liberation Front setting fire to SUVs in car lots and the 2008 arson of a luxury home development in a Seattle suburb. While I'm not excusing such actions, they aren't terrorism.

We should thank him for moving the bar. We now know that the Tea Partiers can go at least as far and not be called terrorists. Except that they haven't and he is still calling them that.

They aren't attacks upon government institutions, they are not designed to inspire terror in the American population. They are stupid acts of outrage over the destruction of the environment.

No, he doesn't excuse them. He just accepts their premise in justifying their actions, that's all.

When environmentalists start killing CEO’s of chemical companies or blowing up Exxon-Mobil office buildings, then we can make legitimate comparisons between radical environmentalists and right-wing terrorists.

The Unabomber doesn't count? I must be good to be the one who gets to define all these terms.

Discussing this dubious threat at the Oklahoma City Memorial obscures McVeigh and Nichols’ political leanings.

Because in a simplistic world, we can only talk about ONE thing, ever. This also applies to simplistic minds operating in a more complex world.

Of course, conservatives don't want you to make these connections. They worked hard to ensure an apolitical Oklahoma City Memorial.

He detects conspiracy! Given the nature of the memorial, the Masons are the likeliest suspects. Watson, fetch my deerstalker!

Say what they will, but events like Oklahoma City, Knoxville, and Austin serve conservative purposes.

Yes readers, this writer is bent so far to the left he feels that an admittedly "apolitical" approach to a subject serves right-wing interests. According to this "historian", in order for an exhibit to be 'correct' it must represent the leftist viewpoint. 'Centrist' is wrong because it is still right-of-left.

The whole reason for this response is to highlight this very attitude amongst leftist so-called historians who treat on this subject of memorial exhibits. It is not just this guy. The revision of park memorials in pursuit of this agenda is a silent epidemic.

Talk-radio and the internet spew an endless expectoration of hate. Republicans might publicly distance themselves from this, but Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, et al have created a powerful conservative movement with the potential for violence. Jim Adkisson explicitly cited right-wing radio as having influenced his actions.

By what measure does the Professor assess this threat? The left has a body-pile which can only be matched by plague and famine. I think it is high time we started treating everyone who espouses Marxist or Rousseauvian theory as the dire threat to humanity that they actually are.

The threat of right-wing domestic terrorism provides at least as great a threat to the nation as Islamic terrorism. And it's far past time we started talking about this. How many Americans have to die before we take right-wing terrorism seriously?

To recap: Throughout the Twentieth Century, the two principal sources of practiced terror were leftists and Muslims. This trend has not abated with the new century. This Professor, therefore, according to his political inclinations, has decided that the proper function of memorial exhibits to the victims of terror is to deliberately misinform the public about the origin and threat of terrorism. That's just the sort of "historian" he is.

It is twats like this that sully my field of study and deflate the value of my education.

43 posted on 03/01/2010 12:37:50 AM PST by Brass Lamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
At the first two, visitors can visualize the bad guys, but the Oklahoma City Memorial does a remarkably poor job at contextualizing the attacks. The site is tremendously heartbreaking, but you get no sense that McVeigh and Nichols had right-wing connections. They read like isolated crazy people who just wanted to kill innocent women and children. You see the McVeigh and Nichols as two evil men, not as representatives of a larger terrorist movement.

That's becasue they were two evil (deluded) men, and not representatives of a larger terrorist movement. That's because there IS no larger right-wing terrorist movement.

44 posted on 03/01/2010 2:03:28 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ETL

Amen!

This Loomis loon — is he even worthy of a hard fight?

Stack was right wing? Stack? Hah!

Austin Terror Flier was a Leftist Loon [Stack, the IRS Kamakazi]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2454242/posts

Leftists are far more likely to be terrorists than conservatives. Proven time and again.


45 posted on 03/01/2010 2:35:47 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm. [Geniuses don't pick their nose.])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Brass Lamp; TigersEye

It’s very basic and simple — conservatives want prosperity while leftists hate it. You can’t have prosperity if your nation turns into Lebanon. Very simple.


46 posted on 03/01/2010 2:39:51 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm. [Geniuses don't pick their nose.])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Brass Lamp
Well said!Very well said!

The FACT that so many will pant,fawn and nod sagely in agreement with "...twats like this..." is a sad and dangerous testament to folks inability or just plain unwillingness to think.

I learnt plenty from your post and tips me hat to you in gratitude.

47 posted on 03/01/2010 3:13:51 AM PST by mitch5501 (Yeah,but is it shatterproof?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Joe Stack: who will take right-wing terrorism seriously?

Just as soon as there is some I'm sure lots of people will take it seriously...but in the meantime we just have examples of "terrorism" (or whatever else one cares to call it) from the Left...including Joe Stack.

48 posted on 03/01/2010 3:24:00 AM PST by highlander_UW (Obama has lost or not saved over 4 million jobs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

Actually, it’s also because there is ample evidence that McVeigh and Nichols were associated with a foreign-run Islamist conspiracy and the government at the time didn’t want to call attention to this.


49 posted on 03/01/2010 4:02:09 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

This is too nuts for words. Stack ended his screed with a quote from Marx and spent most of it attacking capitalism, which he held to blame; his grudge against the IRS was not merely political, but was based on the fact that he and his wife owed thousands of dollars in back taxes and he felt that the debt was ruining his life.

Also, on the subject of the IRA, they were awful, and they were terrorists (not for religious reasons, but for political reasons). They came out of the leftist terrorist bombing tradition that had destabilized Europe at the early part of the 20th century. The IRA was so good at explosives that they were actually recruited by the Palestinians to train Muslim bombers, and also trained and worked with the Marxist Basque separatist group, ETA.

The difference, of course, was that the IRA was not a religious group and did not do suicide bombings with some sort of extra-political objective. The IRA had a political objective, wanting to drive out the British and install a Marxist government (run by them on the model of Albania!), and the same was true of ETA in its bombings in Spain. The bombings were meant to destabilize the national government.

I think the thing that ramps it up a bit with the Islamic bombings is that their objective was simply total destruction, even if it meant dying themselves, until such time as the surviving population would simply submit to Islam. In scope, it was little different from laying seige to a city and killing its inhabitants until they were too weak to resist, as Mohammed had done in his salad days.

The difference is in the fact that bombings could come at any time, from any place or person, with no advance warning, sowing even more terror and having a psychological impact far greater than a military attack, which can be resisted and for which a defense strategy can be developed. In the case of Islamic bombings, unless a society is willing to wipe out its Muslim population, there is no defense strategy other than constant vigilance and acceptance of a state of fear as the normal way of living, until such time as the population gets too tired and too worn down by doing this and finally accepts Islam.


50 posted on 03/01/2010 4:17:55 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson