Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building • Hacker News Board

Re: Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building

#171

Post by delackner » Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 4:10 AM UTC

BigZaphod wrote: post #56

dkimball wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he has a point about the sloppiness and unresponsiveness of the government -- although the sloppiness and unresponsiveness of a large, bureaucratic organization hardly justifies carrying out his own miniature September 11th! Doubly painful in that the people he killed probably liked the IRS no more than he did -- few workers in government bureaucracy _enjoy_ what they have to put up with... Killing others and…

It's just a bug in our design as humans, IMO, but it's that same bug which allows us to occasionally do monumentally amazing things. It just depends how you spin your perceptions to yourself, I suppose, and if you can accept that greatness is, more or less, a large scale way of turning a frown upside down. :)

Whatever it is in a culture that leads desperate people to decide to kill strangers before commiting suicide has far more to do with the culture than with human DNA.

Re: Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building

#172

Post by delackner » Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 4:17 AM UTC

moron4hire wrote: post #121

madair wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what he says. He just quotes the creed in order to play off of it regarding capitalism.

and that would be why I said "suggests".

Except that without any editorial text accompanying the two quotes, two readings are possible: "here's the motto of a good system and a bad system," OR: "everyone's heard of the moronic motto of this system, but the current system is just terrible in its own different way." Reading the whole thing my impression was that the second interpretation was what he was getting at.

Re: Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building

#173

Post by timdorr » Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 4:29 AM UTC

jsz0 wrote: post #95

I'm convinced that domestic terrorism is going to be a bigger problem over the next couple of decades than foreign attacks. The political discourse/tolerance in this country has gone downhill significantly even in my lifetime. I can only imagine at the extreme fringes these people have gone off the deep end. We see it over and over again. Probably the most disturbing sign of what to come is the 2008 election where th…

How old are you? There's been plenty of political discourse all through time. That's how this country was founded and nearly split up. Just look at the 70's. I'm not that old and even I know how much protest was going on at that time. It's just that the fire is being fanned by mainstream media and the growth of the Internet, and that gives it more visibility than before. The Teabaggers are a perfect example of this.

Re: Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building

#174

Post by JohnnyBrown » Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 4:32 AM UTC

johnrob wrote: post #96

inc wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The deck is stacked everywhere, but so what? Get over it. An engineer has the ability to improve the world by building better things without resorting to destruction.

Easier said than done. In the long run, I don't see humanity surviving if it doesn't figure out how to keep smart, disgruntled people in check.

if the "smart, disgruntled" were so smart, they would figure out how to get what they want so as to be no longer disgruntled. getting frustrated with life and throwing your hands up isn't smart.

Re: Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building

#175

Post by pyre » Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 4:33 AM UTC

grandalf wrote: post #150

robotblake wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if a and (b1 or b2 or b3) and c terrorist = true end

(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State So an attack designed to destroy an unoccupied building would not be terrorism under the structure you describe above.

I think that the law would still hold detonating a bomb in an unoccupied building as 'dangerous to human life' if you didn't follow all of the safety precautions that a real building demolition would have to follow. If you put a bomb in an abandoned building at set to detonate in 2 hours and then flee the scene, there's not guarantee that someone won't enter the building in the interim.

Re: Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building

#176

Post by pyre » Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 4:34 AM UTC

alanstorm wrote: post #44

CoryMathews wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree, The way I see it is that if its a criminal act against the government it because terrorism. Had he been out to kill someone in that building it would have been a criminal act. This was terrorism.

The most common definition of is usually along the lines of the one I found on google [ http://www.google.com/dictionary?aq=f&langpair=en|en&#38... ]. > Terrorism is the use of violence, especially murder and bombing, in order to achieve political aims or to force a government to do something. This was a single, possibly mentally unstable, man crashing a plane into a building. He may have thought he was trying to ach…

So which organization was behind the Oklahoma City bombing?

Re: Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building

#177

Post by pyre » Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 4:40 AM UTC

BigZaphod wrote: post #72

scott_s wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the final two paragraphs of his screed (posted in this thread). He says that he wants his act of violence to initiate change - I assume in the IRS specifically, but also in American politics in general. That's the definition of terrorism. Terrorism does not have to be initiated on behalf of a group or a specific ideology. The definition is "the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for politi…

In my mind the difference here is that he was alone, committed his crime in a singular act, and now he's effectively out of commission. There's no terrorist at large to further perpetuate the terror. There's no looming sense of threat from this guy personally, and since he wasn't part of an organization, there's no nebulous "other" threat from that, either. Had he enacted a long term plan where he was shooting at peo…

I think that the point is that the government selectively applies the 'terrorism' label when it benefits them (i.e. using the 'terrorism' label to get records to bolster a case against criminals that are certainly not terrorists).

Re: Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building

#178

Post by electromagnetic » Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 4:43 AM UTC

pw0ncakes wrote: post #170

johnrob wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was probably nothing like 9/11 1000 years ago. Technology is a lever, improving it increases the power of small groups.

In terms of death toll, I'd probably disagree. It seems that 20 men from the upper classes (on horseback, armed and trained to use weapons) could destroy an 11th-century town of 1000-3000 inhabitants (although suffering heavy losses on their end) if they were so inclined. A powerful nobleman could assemble the knights. In terms of impact, you're probably right. I think it's likely that 9/11 is the first news story to…

If the Gunpowder Plot had succeeded, it wouldn't have been the destruction of parliament that would have been the issue, it would have likely been a full out campaign to kill every catholic in Briton by the most gruesome methods possible. The public reaction to the Gunpowder Plot was very 9/11 in terms of public opinion against the Catholics. In fact the Gunpowder Plot likely delayed the Catholic Emancipation by potentially two-centuries and increased intolerance towards Catholics quite dramatically.

Honestly if the Gunpowder Plot had succeeded, I have little doubt it would have turned into a massacre of Catholics in Briton and likely devolved into a full out war. Ireland would have received a full massacre for the guerilla war it had waged against Briton, and Spain would have likely come under full attack for supporting the Irish Catholics during that time.

It would be hard to see any result that isn't total war for a successful bombing. Ironically the plot was the worst thing to happen to Catholics but simultaneously the best outcome for the situation.

Re: Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building

#179

Post by pyre » Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 4:58 AM UTC

Deestan wrote: post #128

wedesoft wrote: post #97

In 2008 somebody in Germany got fed up with the high taxes on fuel. He couldn't afford to run his business (which required a car) any more. So he parked the car on a lawn in the city centre of Frankfurt, wrote "Fuel Profiteering http://www.acidware.de/ in big letters on it, and put it on fire. I just want to say that there are other routes to explore before taking it this far. http://www.spiegel.de/auto/aktuell/0,151…

> I just want to say that there are other routes to explore before taking it this far. Yes, but they are much less effective. E.g., I have never ever heard of him or his protest before.

There aren't that many 24-hour cable news stations in Germany that are broadcast around the world in a language that a fair number of people internationally can speak.

Re: Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building

#180

Post by invisible » Fri, Feb 19, 2010, 4:59 AM UTC

danieldon wrote: post #129

javert wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, this guy's goal was not to incite terror, hence not a terrorist. I'm not necessarily defending the way the government labels different crimes, though. AFAIK the Unibomber was pretty much like this guy.

He's absolutely a terrorist according to 18 USC 2331: (5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that— (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended— (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a…

I wonder at which point "domestic terrorism" is instead considered "rebellion/revolt?" [1] I guess it's a hard concept given the media's decisive unanimity on the topic, but I do believe Great Britain probably felt similarly when we started killing the soldiers they sent over.

I'm not confident to which side I am on: I think the government is mostly stupid, not draconian to the people at large. It's hard for me to believe they are innocent at times.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States#Political_divisio...; sentence #2