[Ludi]

he was willing to die for what he believed in.

What did he believe in? Making a hash of his financial situation, ruining his family, and then chickening out in a spectacular way?

What exact point was he trying to make? What "injustice" did he face?

[Roy]

did you read it?

He quoted the statute specifically.

He believed the IRS to be a tyrannical arm of a government run amok.

I can't say I disagree with that sentiment.

You are echoing the MSM interpretation of the events. No offense, but I don't think they're telling the whole story.

The point he was trying to make was that he was sick of the IRS I reckon. Again, if you had read his paper, then you would know exactly what he was talking about. Reading the portions quoted in the MSM certainly would lead one to believe his actions were 'crazy' and would leave the reader/viewer without a full understanding of the circumstances leading up to the incident. That's the idea eh? I covered that in my previous post.

Everyone has a breaking point. He reached his. Instead of going to a mall and killing random people, for example, he turned his anger in what he felt was the appropriate direction. You may think he was wrong. I think he did it to inspire others to stop laying down and taking what he perceived as injustice. He died for what he thought was right. I'm not judging it either way, but certainly one who is willing to give their life in such a way is no coward IMHO.

Now if you don't have any problem with your tax dollars being used to fund occupations (and collateral damages -- ie innocents being killed in other countries, depleted uranium munitions etc) and to bail out ridiculously wealthy bankers, then that's on you. I have a problem with it and no amount of letters or phone calls by me to my 'elected' reps has made one iota of difference. I voted D in 06 because they promised "it will be different this time". Guess what? It wasn't. Then a bunch of people voted for Obama, apparently forgetting the 06 elections, and guess what? He put the pedal to the metal and accelerated or continued the worst policies of the Bush admin. The very policies that are bankrupting the country and destroying our civil liberties and the Bill of Rights.

The pols in DC don't care what we think until election time, then they say whatever the people want to hear. The people then vote for them and it's back to business as usual. Then they honor the wishes of their sponsors -- those who actually funded their election campaigns -- not us.

I think in the future more people are going to figure out what the real source of their anger is and turn the violence on that source rather than random innocent people.

I suppose the events are open to interpretation. You have yours and I have mine. My views have NEVER fallen in line with the mainstream, which is part of the reason I found this place.

It's funny because I was having an email discussion with Mrs Roy earlier and her responses sounded very similar to yours. She had not read his paper, only the MSM approved excerpts. Coincidence?

Maybe it's a gender thing? I don't know.

[Olaf]

Reminds me of Michael Douglas in "Falling Down".

"I'm the bad guy?"

In either case. crashing your plane into a building where you are more likely to kill some poor sap civil servant making photo copies is something I don't approve of.

Olaf

P.S. I did read his manifesto, and while rambling, wasn't particularly crazy. He was just tired of being ignored and pissed on.

[Ludi]

did you read it?

He quoted the statute specifically.

He believed the IRS to be a tyrannical arm of a government run amok.

I can't say I disagree with that sentiment.

You are echoing the MSM interpretation of the events. No offense, but I don't think they're telling the whole story.

The point he was trying to make was that he was sick of the IRS I reckon. Again, if you had read his paper, then you would know exactly what he was talking about..

I read it. I could not make sense of it. His descriptions of events seemed incomplete. I could make no sense of what he was complaining about what statute.



"Return to the early ‘80s, and here I was off to a terrifying start as a ‘wet-behind-the-ears’ contract software engineer... and two years later, thanks to the fine backroom, midnight effort by the sleazy executives of Arthur Andersen (the very same folks who later brought us Enron and other such calamities) and an equally sleazy New York Senator (Patrick Moynihan), we saw the passage of 1986 tax reform act with its section 1706.

For you who are unfamiliar, here is the core text of the IRS Section 1706, defining the treatment of workers (such as contract engineers) for tax purposes. Visit this link for a conference committee report (http://www.synergistech.com/1706.shtml# ... tteeReport) regarding the intended interpretation of Section 1706 and the relevant parts of Section 530, as amended. For information on how these laws affect technical services workers and their clients, read our discussion here (http://www.synergistech.com/ic-taxlaw.shtml).

SEC. 1706. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TECHNICAL PERSONNEL.

(a) IN GENERAL - Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection:

(d) EXCEPTION. - This section shall not apply in the case of an individual who pursuant to an arrangement between the taxpayer and another person, provides services for such other person as an engineer, designer, drafter, computer programmer, systems analyst, or other similarly skilled worker engaged in a similar line of work.

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE. - The amendment made by this section shall apply to remuneration paid and services rendered after December 31, 1986.

Note:

· "another person" is the client in the traditional job-shop relationship.

· "taxpayer" is the recruiter, broker, agency, or job shop.

· "individual", "employee", or "worker" is you."


I have not read or heard ANY MSM interpretation, so I can't be "echoing" them. What "treatment" was he having trouble with, specifically? That his status changed from an independent contractor to an employee? Or what? I have been in that situation myself. So what? It's nothing to kill yourself over.

[highlander]

Reminds me of Michael Douglas in "Falling Down".

"I'm the bad guy?"

In either case. crashing your plane into a building where you are more likely to kill some poor sap civil servant making photo copies is something I don't approve of.

Olaf

P.S. I did read his manifesto, and while rambling, wasn't particularly crazy. He was just tired of being ignored and pissed on.

I guess the big issue is, at what point does one quit being a civil servant and become an extension of gov't policies. Is the cook in the mess hall any less a soldier, hence a target, than the marine in the foxhole.

Being a civil servant myself, It is a sometimes troubling question.

[Ludi]

P.S. I did read his manifesto, and while rambling, wasn't particularly crazy. He was just tired of being ignored and pissed on.

Of course it isn't particularly crazy. Troubled people often make apparent "sense". But their experience may have next to nothing to do with reality. In what way was Joe especially ignored or pissed on compared to, say, the lady who cleans the toilets? His problems seem mainly to have been caused by himself (such as withdrawing his IRA and - I guess - expecting not to have to pay taxes on it).

[Outcast_Searcher]

did you read it? He quoted the statute specifically. He believed the IRS to be a tyrannical arm of a government run amok. I can't say I disagree with that sentiment.

While I can CERTAINLY understand why folks are angered by the complexity, capriciousness, etc. of the tax code, I don't know why they seem to almost ALWAYS target their anger at the IRS!

The IRS is just the agency charged to enforce the MESS/IDIOCY that congress made - the tax code. Folks should be directing their federal tax related anger, generally, at the idiots on capitol hill. (Secondarily at their fellow citizens who keep clamoring for ever-more programs while not wanting to pay the taxes to fund them, as this will eventually result in yet more taxes).

While an IRS agent may sometimes get out of control or snippy, the agency overall has checks and balances, and generally actually is reasonable and even courteous, UNLESS you ignore them or "wave a red flag in the face of the bull" (which is unwise in almost any context, not just dealing with tax enforcement).

[Olaf]

I guess the big issue is, at what point does one quit being a civil servant and become an extension of gov't policies. Is the cook in the mess hall any less a soldier, hence a target, than the marine in the foxhole. Being a civil servant myself, It is a sometimes troubling question.

The cook in the mess hall (and since you're using military terminology, I'm assuming the cook is a service member) at least has an accepted element of danger associated with what he/she is doing. Should folks start getting hazardous duty pay for processing tax returns? I work in an active train station with offices in it. I occasionally worry about it.

Olaf

[Olaf]

Of course it isn't particularly crazy. Troubled people often make apparent "sense". But their experience may have next to nothing to do with reality. In what way was Joe especially ignored or pissed on compared to, say, the lady who cleans the toilets? His problems seem mainly to have been caused by himself (such as withdrawing his IRA and - I guess - expecting not to have to pay taxes on it).

Oh I don't disagree. We've only got his side of the story in the way he wanted to present it so far; and well, now we can't ask for clarification.

[Ludi]

"wave a red flag in the face of the bull" (which is unwise in almost any context, not just dealing with tax enforcement).

That is what I call "flouncing" - behaving in a manner which draws attention to yourself. Generally the bureaucrats don't give a rat's ass about us and we can do pretty much as we please - as long as we don't flounce.

Fly under the radar, not into a building.

[Roy]

I admit I was wrong here.

I had a long discussion with my wife about this last night. She, being a former attorney, has a knack for breaking down issues into component parts.

She helped me see that there are two issues here, not one. I think it's the how, and the why.

I agree with the why, but not so much with the how. I can empathize with the how. But hurting innocent people isn't right no matter what the cause. This is one reason I oppose the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Certainly this is an emotional issue, and when I first read his note, I got pretty fired up.

And stopped thinking rationally. This is why I love my wife. She has similar views to me but a totally different way of looking at things, which helps ground me at times when I get a little too radical.

I understand why he did what he did, and I think I understand what he hoped to accomplish in the way waking people up. The MSM didn't mention this story last night while I viewed. Tiger Woods was the top story. Also not mentioned were the stories of the Mossad using European passports, obtained illegally, to assasinate a Hamas operative in Dubai. Also not mentioned was the Pres meeting with the Dalai Lama and subsequently pissing the Chinese off pretty good.

I saw those last two stories on Democracy Now. But not on CNN, FOX, or MSNBC.

I guess Mr. Stack figured flying a plane into a building would get some media attention. It did, but not enough to override the peoples' fascination with Tiger Woods.

Again, I apologize if I offended. After thinking about it some more and getting some guidance I can see now that the how was wrong.

But I still think the why was right on the money. If people keep ignoring the government and voting for the status quo, things are going to continue to deteriorate in terms of our civil rights and sensible government.

[mattduke]

Let's not lose sight of the arrangement the IRS has with US citizens: give us taxes or we will come to your house and kill you.

[Ludi]

I guess Mr. Stack figured flying a plane into a building would get some media attention.

The press does not have a "hook" with which to discuss this issue. If Mr Stack were a brown person, or a Muslim, there would be a story. A white (agnostic? atheist?) guy mad at the Catholic Church and the IRS who quotes Marx does not give them a clear direction.

Mr Stack is too complex for the media to handle.

[mattduke]

Griffiths says there is only one way to characterize what happened.

"This is police brutality pure and simple," said Griffiths, who plans to file a civil lawsuit against police on McKenna's behalf.

Griffiths says the beating is only half the story. This is the sworn statement of charges against McKenna by the police alleges assault on a police officer and disorderly conduct. It claims McKenna "struck those officers and their horses causing minor injuries," and that McKenna was "kicked by the horses and sustained minor injuries."

The video does not support either of the police claims.

In this isolated incident, the police mischaracterized the behavior of their victim.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=at1q3lIpK3c

[mattduke]

At least half a dozen police officers and the Rockingham County commonwealth's attorney raided the offices of James Madison University's student newspaper Friday, confiscating hundreds of photos of an off-campus riot last weekend, the paper's editor said.

The pictures would incriminate the behavior of the police. Therefore they raided the newspaper office.
http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/243790

[mattduke]

In 2008, the Seattle Police illegally arrested security consultant Eric Rachner for refusing to show ID. After Rachner filed a formal complaint, he was prosecuted for obstructing, and the police claimed that videos of the arrest were unavailable — until Rachner's research uncovered proof that the police had the videos all along."

Rachner didn't hack the police computers, but with attorney Stockmeyer's advice he spent several late nights starting in October poring line-by-line over technical aspects of the video and audio recording system. He examined the Houston-area manufacturer's contracts, specifications and procedures.

...

Rachner hit pay dirt when a procurement contract and system specs revealed that a computerized log is kept permanently on every video and audio recording, showing when anyone uploads it, flags it for retention, plays it, copies it or deletes it.

Another case of police hiding evidence of their own wrongdoing. What a hero!
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/418746_video.html

[mattduke]

A picture is worth a thousand words. This cop is nuts. The department faked warrant papers and raided his home to try and steal the video evidence.
http://carlosmiller.com/2010/04/16/mary ... -with-gun/

[mattduke]

"The server that manages those cameras automatically overwrites at a certain point, and it just overwrote and it didn't give us a opportunity to copy this particular piece," Williams said.

But just hours later, the university said the disc had been found. The disc, however, was missing two minutes of footage, officials admitted. Details on the timeline of the gap were not immediately, nor was an explanation of how a two-minute gap could appear.

In another bizarre coincidence, the campus police official in charge of the video surveillance system, Lt. Joanne Ardovini, is married to one of the National Capital Park police mounted officers who was named in the complaint Prince George's County police filed against McKenna.

Maybe we need a "bizarre coincidence" thread in addition to the "isolated incidents" thread!
http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0410/727719.html

[mattduke]

Elderly Gay Couple Forcibly Separated, Abused, Robbed By County Officials in California

One evening, Harold fell down the front steps of their home and was taken to the hospital. Based on their medical directives alone, Clay should have been consulted in Harold’s care from the first moment. Tragically, county and health care workers instead refused to allow Clay to see Harold in the hospital. The county then ultimately went one step further by isolating the couple from each other, placing the men in separate nursing homes. Ignoring Clay’s significant role in Harold’s life, the county continued to treat Harold like he had no family and went to court seeking the power to make financial decisions on his behalf. Outrageously, the county represented to the judge that Clay was merely Harold’s “roommate.” The court denied their efforts, but did grant the county limited access to one of Harold’s bank accounts to pay for his care.

What happened next is even more chilling: without authority, without determining the value of Clay and Harold’s possessions accumulated over the course of their 20 years together or making any effort to determine which items belonged to whom, the county took everything Harold and Clay owned and auctioned off all of their belongings. Adding further insult to grave injury, the county removed Clay from his home and confined him to a nursing home against his will. The county workers then terminated Clay and Harold's lease and surrendered the home they had shared for many years to the landlord.

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archiv ... -officials

[mattduke]

They shot a 7 year old girl this time.

http://www.detnews.com/article/20100516 ... use-search