When Is Crashing A Plane Into A Federal Building Not Terrorism?

[P F Tinmore]

"All of this underscores, yet again, that Terrorism is simultaneously the single most meaningless and most manipulated word in the American political lexicon."

"Terrorism" is nothing more than politically motivated, third grade name calling.

 

[dilloduck]

Only terrorists themselves should be allowed to say the t-word. It's highly offensive

 

[Luissa]

Only terrorists themselves should be allowed to say the t-word. It's highly offensive

You are such a terrorist!

And your mom lives in Alaska!

 

[Darkwind]

Classic domestic terrorism. He is a tea bagger from what I determined from his ramplings. Thanks Glenn Beck.

Of course he's one of those damn communism praising, capitalism disparaging tea baggers....... or to put it in Mr. Stacks words

"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"

Yeah sounds just like a typical tea party enthusiast to me.

Either that or Stack was just a deranged kook with a warped perception of reality and you're just a another hyper-partisan drone with the common sense of a fruit fly.

He is a guy tired of paying taxes. He is a tea bagger. OH and this "poor" guy owned an airplane and he didnt pay taxes for a couple years. He also tried to do some things under the table.

He is a right wing tea bagger and I am ashamed Glen Beck is an american.

I'm ashamed you are an American. What I see in this post is fear. It rolls down your brow and covers you in its stink.

You fear that if this guy is doing what the Tea Party people want; that you could end up on their list of targets....After all, you support the regime that is slowly destroying everything he loved and believed in.

Are you sure that there are no tea party members in your neighborhood? Maybe they are holding secret meetings in darkened dens and writing documents that you will never get to read! Maybe they are gathering together to pick one of their own and they.....

OH GAWD.....

they plan tO VOTE FOR HIM!

Run! My god run! A terrorist tea party member is on the loose!

BTW...Is this the second or third attack Mr. Obama has allowed to happen on American soil?

 

[Darkwind]

Only terrorists themselves should be allowed to say the t-word. It's highly offensive

You are such a terrorist!

And your mom lives in Alaska!

Can she see Russia?

 

[Luissa]

[/QUOTE]BTW...Is this the second or third attack Mr. Obama has allowed to happen on American soil?[/QUOTE]

YOu ruined it with that part!

You can't say to him you are ashamed of him, and then make a stupid comment like that.

 

[Luissa]

Only terrorists themselves should be allowed to say the t-word. It's highly offensive

You are such a terrorist!

And your mom lives in Alaska!

Can she see Russia?

Are you saying Palin is a Russian terrorist?

 

[Modbert]

If this guy's first name was Muhammad and he happened to be Muslim, I can only imagine how differently this story would be taken.

 

[Luissa]

If this guy's first name was Muhammad and he happened to be Muslim, I can only imagine how differently this story would be taken.

Fox would for sure move into the orange.

 

[Modbert]

Fox would for sure move into the orange.

But it's just a white guy who's "angry at the government" yet no use of the correct word here which is terrorism. Why anyone is surprised that one of the Anti-Government wingnuts finally went through with something is beyond me.

 

[QUENTIN]

To be perfectly honest I could care less about what his political views were, right, left, up, down doesn't matter, once you set out to kill innocent civilians your viewpoints automatically become invalid and you immediately fall into the "evil kook who should have never been born" category in my book.

So then, for instance, FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, Bush Jr., and Obama's viewpoints are automatically invalid and the are "evil kooks who should have never been born"?

I'm not disagreeing, just checking to see if, like the application of "terrorist" by others, you are consistent and mean what you say.

 

[xotoxi]

When it's an accident as opposed to being done on purpose.

Are you trying to say that Stack's crash was an accident?

Or is your post just off topic?

Yeah that's what I was trying to say....

Read English much? try it with it comprehension any?

So, do you also think that his house accidentally caught on fire?

And his manifesto just accidentally appeared on his computer screen after he closed his eyes and just randomly started hitting keys?

 

[MIPS]

Are you trying to say that Stack's crash was an accident?

Or is your post just off topic?

Yeah that's what I was trying to say....

Read English much? try it with it comprehension any?

So, do you also think that his house accidentally caught on fire?

And his manifesto just accidentally appeared on his computer screen after he closed his eyes and just randomly started hitting keys?

I dunno, tell me, how much does tea cost in china?

 

[xotoxi]

Only terrorists themselves should be allowed to say the t-word. It's highly offensive

Bein' a terraryst...it's a T-thang!

 

[Darkwind]

BTW...Is this the second or third attack Mr. Obama has allowed to happen on American soil?

YOu ruined it with that part!

You can't say to him you are ashamed of him, and then make a stupid comment like that.

Well, not stupid. My timing has been off all day. I think I need more coffee.

 

[xotoxi]

Yeah that's what I was trying to say....

Read English much? try it with it comprehension any?

So, do you also think that his house accidentally caught on fire?

And his manifesto just accidentally appeared on his computer screen after he closed his eyes and just randomly started hitting keys?

I dunno, tell me, how much does tea cost in china?

A cake of two-year-old Ye Sheng Gucha tea costs 260 yuan (about £18), while the 13-year-old tea sells for 1,800 yuan.

Tea in China costs six times as much as gold - Telegraph

Now back to Stack...

Would you theorize that he just had a bad day? He was getting ready to head out for a fly, but left a cigarette burning in the house.

Then, while flying, the rudder got stuck and he couldn't steer away from the building.

And finally, after he hit the building, a satirical post that he'd made on a political message board surfaced, which looked like a manifesto against the IRS.

BUMMER FOR THAT DUDE!

 

[MIPS]

So, do you also think that his house accidentally caught on fire?

And his manifesto just accidentally appeared on his computer screen after he closed his eyes and just randomly started hitting keys?

I dunno, tell me, how much does tea cost in china?

A cake of two-year-old Ye Sheng Gucha tea costs 260 yuan (about £18), while the 13-year-old tea sells for 1,800 yuan.

Tea in China costs six times as much as gold - Telegraph

Now back to Stack...

Would you theorize that he just had a bad day? He was getting ready to head out for a fly, but left a cigarette burning in the house.

Then, while flying, the rudder got stuck and he couldn't steer away from the building.

And finally, after he hit the building, a satirical post that he'd made on a political message board surfaced, which looked like a manifesto against the IRS.

BUMMER FOR THAT DUDE!

Hic puer est stultissimus omnium!

 

[xotoxi]

Hic puer est stultissimus omnium!

Latin immigrants!

LEARN ENGLISH, DUDE!!!

 

[QUENTIN]

When it's an accident as opposed to being done on purpose.

Are you trying to say that Stack's crash was an accident?

Or is your post just off topic?

Yeah that's what I was trying to say....

Read English much? try it with it comprehension any?

See, that's what I think you think I was saying with my first post when all I did was agree with the poster that yes, when a crash is accidental it is not terrorism.

But that brings up the issue of, why would anyone bother posting that in the first place when they're fully aware it's off-topic and we're talking about the Austin terror attack?

I need not be any more careful with how I word the title, I'm aware it's an open-ended question except the only on-topic answer is... when the perpetrator is unaffiliated with Islam (and white and American, etc. ). That accidents are not acts of terrorism is obvious to all and unquestioned, but it's also pointless to "point out" as though it provides any insight, or is clever, beneficial, or anything but off topic to the discussion of the thread.

You're taking xotoxi to task here for assuming there was an implication in the post that it was an accident, which is an erroneous assumption (and tried to do the same to me even though I made no such assumption or comment), but reasonable considering otherwise the post is a nonsensical tangent unrelated to what we're talking about. Responding literally to the title of the thread while ignoring the content within it seems, well...dumb. It lends itself to being misconstrued because the only other interpretation is that you're Captain Obvious.

 

[MIPS]

Are you trying to say that Stack's crash was an accident?

Or is your post just off topic?

Yeah that's what I was trying to say....

Read English much? try it with it comprehension any?

See, that's what I think you think I was saying with my first post when all I did was agree with the poster that yes, when a crash is accidental it is not terrorism.

But that brings up the issue of, why would anyone bother posting that in the first place when they're fully aware it's off-topic and we're talking about the Austin terror attack?

I need not be any more careful with how I word the title, I'm aware it's an open-ended question except the only on-topic answer is... when the perpetrator is unaffiliated with Islam (and white and American, etc. ). That accidents are not acts of terrorism is obvious to all and unquestioned, but it's also pointless to "point out" as though it provides any insight, or is clever, beneficial, or anything but off topic to the discussion of the thread.

You're taking xotoxi to task here for assuming there was an implication in the post that it was an accident, which is an erroneous assumption (and tried to do the same to me even though I made no such assumption or comment), but reasonable considering otherwise the post is a nonsensical tangent unrelated to what we're talking about. Responding literally to the title of the threat while ignoring the content within it seems, well...dumb. It lends itself to being misconstrued because the only other interpretation is that you're Captain Obvious.

Answering the question posed in the topic of your thread with what I believe to be true in a succinct a fashion as possible is off topic? hmmmm.. I must say that's a new twist, whatever floats your boat I suppose.