Active Users:314 Time:19/04/2025 10:06:38 AM
It was an act of violence to prompt a political response. - Edit 1

Before modification by Joel at 19/02/2010 03:30:15 AM

but would this be considered an act of terrorism?

I see a suicidal guy who decided to take out the IRS. His target certainly wasn't indicriminate (as in a night club or marketplace). His motivation for doing this wasn't his belief system.

It may just be my personal point of view, but I would consider that guy who shot the abortion doctor to be more of a terrorist than this guy. And that guy I consider more of a classic murderer than a terrorist.

*shrug*

~Jeordam

Whether the desired response was immediate large scale government reform, or violent revolution resulting in a new government (and his statement leave room for either) is debatable. Certainly the means and target were unconscionable; we can debate whether the 911 hijackers had legitimate grievances with US CEOs, but the more likely any such execs were to be guilty of any wrongdoing, the less likely they were to be at the World Trade Center 0830 Tuesday morning. But, yes, I have to say it was an act of violent intimidation by terror, motivated by his belief system as well as well as his personal history. It was terrorism, not religiously motivated, but Trotskys terrorism wasn't religious, nor Ben Gurions; it was still terrorism. He wasn't even after specific people, just IRS employees in general, the vast majority of whom were just working stiffs trying to feed their families, just like him. It was terrorism, plain and simple.

Return to message