Plane flies into Bldg in Austin

[tommymac]

Originally Posted by Dave

dont forget the orange traffic cone. Aint a good night unless you wake up next to one of those

been there too, or having dad ask why the cars on the sidewalk and there are 40 whitecastles all over the front lawn.

Told me he didnt even want to hear what happened

[anthonyk]

Eh, fair enough. Still annoys me.

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by tommymac

After a crazy night of drinking you could wind up with jet engines in your yard

They swore to me they were 18!

JC

[azoomm]

Originally Posted by anthonyk

Eh, fair enough. Still annoys me.

It's alright, annoys me too...

[anthonyk]

I guess we aren't the only ones asking this question...

http://www.statesman.com/news/local/...or-257971.html

By Asher Price
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Updated: 3:12 a.m. Saturday, Feb. 20, 2010
Published: 10:35 p.m. Friday, Feb. 19, 2010
Post a Comment E-mail Print Share Larger Type
No sooner had a pilot crashed his plane into Internal Revenue Service offices in North Austin than commentators, politicians and police were groping with how to describe the attack.

Was it an act of personal rage or, as many officials called it, an act of terrorism? And does such a definition matter?

In terms of legal semantics, not really. No charge of terrorism exists. Had Joe Stack, who authorities said was the pilot, somehow survived, he probably would have been charged with murder, attempted murder and destruction of government offices, according to Bobby Chesney, a University of Texas law professor who specializes in national security statutes.

Terrorism is often described as an unlawful, violent act used to advance a political goal.

"In a way it was terrorism, and in a way it wasn't," said Ami Pedahzur , the head of the Terrorists, Insurgents and Guerrillas in Education and Research lab at UT. "It was targeted at a very symbolic place — the IRS offices; clearly the method was a copycat of 9/11; and the guy left a manifesto which seems to have some kind of political agenda in it. He wanted his message out, and he wanted support for his act.

"However, if we look at terrorism as aimed at terrorizing the masses to lead to political change, that was not his goal," continued Pedahzur. "He seems to be some kind of angered individual who channeled his animosity at the government."

Does the question of whether it was terrorism even matter?

"We are too obsessed with terrorism," Pedahzur said. "If there is a psychological atmosphere of being preoccupied with them, then the terrorists are successful."

Defining the act as terrorism can have "troubling political outcomes," he said, because it can lead to "restrictions on free speech" for people who express anti-government opinions similar to those posted on the Internet by Stack.

Calling it a terrorist act can matter, said Mark Potok , the head of the hate-group-monitoring Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center, for the very reason that it describes participation in a wider movement.

"If the crime is fundamentally a political crime, ideologically driven, then it's a wider phenomenon than one angry man who has a lousy life who's shooting people around him," said Potok, whose project has noted at least 75 cases of domestic terror plots, many of them racist rampages, since 1995. "What this really tells us is that the tax protest movement is becoming much more violent." After the attack, officials disagreed on whether it was terrorism.

Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo, for example, steered clear of the term, saying he did not want to spread panic.

He said that referring to it as terrorism would imply that other planes might be flying into other buildings in Austin or elsewhere.

"This was an isolated event with no ties to international terrorism," said U.S. Rep. Mike McCaul , R-Austin, who serves on the Homeland Security Committee. "But any time you fly an airplane into a federal building to kill people, that's an act of terror."

A similar debate took place after the Fort Hood shootings, which McCaul also called an act of terrorism, drawing links between the shooter and an overseas cleric who had incited violence against the United States.

In a sign of the sensitivity around the terrorism label, the Council on American-Islamic Relations issued a statement Thursday condemning the act as a terrorist one.

"Whenever an individual or group attacks civilians in order to make a political statement, that is an act of terror," said council Executive Director Nihad Awad . "Terrorism is terrorism, regardless of the faith, race or ethnicity of the perpetrator or the victims."

The group said it would hold a news conference Monday in Washington on what it says is a double standard on the use of the label "terrorism" for acts of violence committed by non-Muslims.

But Michael Welner , a New York City psychiatrist who heads the Forensic Panel, a group of forensic scientists who consult on legal cases, said the attack was one of "spectacle murder" and not terrorism.

"The point of terrorism is to bring life to a standstill," Welner said. "This was not to cause fear in others but to cause rebellion."

asherprice@statesman.com; 445-3643

[Homeslice]

"This was an isolated event with no ties to international terrorism," said U.S. Rep. Mike McCaul , R-Austin, who serves on the Homeland Security Committee. "But any time you fly an airplane into a federal building to kill people, that's an act of terror."

If you're going to call it that, what about school shootings or post office shootings, why aren't they terrorism?

Fuck the "terrorism" word, it is used by simpletons.

[Smittie61984]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

If you're going to call it that, what about school shootings or post office shootings, why aren't they terrorism?

We call those "good kids who where just misunderstood".