Anti-IRS Rant of Software Engineer who Today Flew Plane into IRS Building
embeddedart.com
embeddedart.com
This guy wasn't targeting individual people in the IRS, he was targeting the whole establishment. This is akin to the Oklahoma City bombing. If that was a terrorist incident and 9/11 was a terrorist incident, this is too. He even has an IRS hate manifesto.
I think it is a shame that the government uses certain words to its advantage, but I guess propaganda is just the nature of the beast.
Here's a key, in case it gets confusing again:
- Guy in an airport with a Koran and an accent: terrorist.
- White software developer who flies a plane into buildings for ideological reasons: not terrorist.
I'm not necessarily defending the way the government labels different crimes, though. AFAIK the Unibomber was pretty much like this guy.
(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 government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
His explicitly stated goal was to affect the conduct of the government and coerce the civilian population via mass destruction.
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
He may not be linked to the international Islamic terrorist networks, like the underpants bomber or the guy who shot up Fort Hood. But just because he's not a Muslim terrorist doesn't mean he isn't a terrorist.
(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 government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
By clause B a person who writes his congressman and threatens not to vote/donate in the next election cycle is a terrorist (threat/coercion).
If the key is intent, then a poet who writes an anti-government poem is a terrorist.
if a and (b1 or b2 or b3) and c
terrorist = true
endSo an attack designed to destroy an unoccupied building would not be terrorism under the structure you describe above.
The definition does not state that all of the clauses must be satisfied for something to qualify as terrorism, and as I showed above, satisfying a single clause is trivial (and clearly not terrorism).
Logic would dictate that the meaning of that is "if A and (B[1] or B[2] or B[3]) and C", but it's not explicitly there.
I think the guy is nuts, and i think the best description is that he chose a really screwed up way of committing suicide.
I'm not in a state of terror about Osama, are you?
The term can be used to describe asymmetrical warfare techniques whose objective is more to motivate fear in the target population than to achieve a classic military objective, but if you think about it, the neighbor kid being sent home from the front lines in a body bag also has that effect, albeit a bit more indirectly.
I think by definition an asymmetrical conflict that doesn't result in the weaker side quitting outright must include some sort of different moral standard about things like civilian life, soldier sacrifice, etc.
> 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 achieve something politically or to force the government to do something, but without any larger organization behind him it seems silly to label this as a domestic terrorist attack. It's giving the guy far more credit than he deserves.
... just another casualty to propaganda spreading disinformation.
While this is an act of terrorism for sure, this is not the Terrorism that originates from those we are supposedly fighting in the War on Terror, therefore we should not raise our country's alertness level, have reason to panic, or mobilize our armed forces in response.
(my 2 cents)
"premeditated politically motivated violence, perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience."
I'd say it's clear he fits the government's own definition quite clearly.
I suspect they don't believe the term applies because he didn't claim to be acting on the part of an organized group or even a very specific ideology. His note made it pretty clear he thought of himself as some kind of lone warrior for justice.
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 political purposes."
Had he enacted a long term plan where he was shooting at people randomly for days and making demands or something like that, then that's different in my eyes. At that point it becomes about using the fear of further violence as a tool and that's when you cross into terrorist land.
But who knows. I think DHS decided it'd be called a criminal act for now - so I guess that's what it gets to be called. Perhaps that label was politically motivated, but I can certainly understand the decision. Everything need not be a conspiracy and every large scale crime need not be a terrorist attack.
Tell that to Thomas Jefferson and George Washington...
Please don't use apostrophes for plurals. It makes my eyes bleed.
He was angry and violent, but he didn't have any objective he was trying to achieve through the act. The objective in terrorism isn't the violence, it's a means to an intended end (such as changes in policy, release of prisoners, etc.).
His obsession with, and resentment of, the IRS started when he and others tried to create their own religious organization, ostensibly to draw attention to the capricious laws exempting religious organizations from taxes. How this plan was supposed to work is unclear. L. Ron Hubbard saw the same opportunity and was better at exploiting it.
People don't respond well to acts of violence directed against them or those with whom they empathize. Timothy McVeigh's act caused shock and anger yet achieved nothing. Whatever message Stack wanted to convey has been utterly discredited by attempting to murder people going about their day. And if he wanted to give the government a way to dismiss him, he couldn't have made it any easier.
In behavioral economics there's the game called the "Ultimatum Game"
Essentially it's when one side thinks the deal is so biased and unfair he'd rather tip over the board and have both get nothing than accept what he considers to be a rip-off offer.
This guy decided to tip over the board...
There's another concept in communication called "no acknowledgement"... which arise when you are trying to get someone's attention and they just don't seem to notice you're there... which causes people to essentially start pulling their hair out with frustration.
SO...
It makes sense for politicians to be very nervous about citizen anger over perceived favoritism to the wealthy... and feeling like they're not being listened to.
This isn't political conclusion...
It's a scientific one!
The site's been holding up surprisingly well. Not bad, T35 Hosting.
EDIT: It looks like it's gone now. Here's the home.htm that was on the site as well: http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://celes.niran.org/~ni...
<o:Author>Joe Stack</o:Author>
<o:LastAuthor>Joe</o:LastAuthor>
<o:Revision>27</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>1848</o:TotalTime>
<o:Created>2010-02-16T19:24:00Z</o:Created>
<o:LastSaved>2010-02-18T06:42:00Z</o:LastSaved>http://synergistech.com/ic-taxlaw.shtml
"20 Questions" of the IRS to determine status http://synergistech.com/20qs.shtml
Has anyone had any trouble with this? As an early indie contractor, I'm pretty damn concerned about this.
If you’re reading this, you’re no doubt asking yourself, “Why did this have to happen?” The simple truth is that it is complicated and has been coming for a long time. The writing process, started many months ago, was intended to be therapy in the face of the looming realization that there isn’t enough therapy in the world that can fix what is really broken. Needless to say, this rant could fill volumes with example after example if I would let it. I find the process of writing it frustrating, tedious, and probably pointless… especially given my gross inability to gracefully articulate my thoughts in light of the storm raging in my head. Exactly what is therapeutic about that I’m not sure, but desperate times call for desperate measures.
We are all taught as children that without laws there would be no society, only anarchy. Sadly, starting at early ages we in this country have been brainwashed to believe that, in return for our dedication and service, our government stands for justice for all. We are further brainwashed to believe that there is freedom in this place, and that we should be ready to lay our lives down for the noble principals represented by its founding fathers. Remember? One of these was “no taxation without representation”. I have spent the total years of my adulthood unlearning that crap from only a few years of my childhood. These days anyone who really stands up for that principal is promptly labeled a “crackpot”, traitor and worse.
While very few working people would say they haven’t had their fair share of taxes (as can I), in my lifetime I can say with a great degree of certainty that there has never been a politician cast a vote on any matter with the likes of me or my interests in mind. Nor, for that matter, are they the least bit interested in me or anything I have to say.
Why is it that a handful of thugs and plunderers can commit unthinkable atrocities (and in the case of the GM executives, for scores of years) and when it’s time for their gravy train to crash under the weight of their gluttony and overwhelming stupidity, the force of the full federal government has no difficulty coming to their aid within days if not hours? Yet at the same time, the joke we call the American medical system, including the drug and insurance companies, are murdering tens of thousands of people a year and stealing from the corpses and victims they cripple, and this country’s leaders don’t see this as important as bailing out a few of their vile, rich cronies. Yet, the political “representatives” (thieves, liars, and self-serving scumbags is far more accurate) have endless time to sit around for year after year and debate the state of the “terrible health care problem”. It’s clear they see no crisis as long as the dead people don’t get in the way of their corporate profits rolling in.
And justice? You’ve got to be kidding!
How can any rational individual explain that white elephant conundrum in the middle of our tax system and, indeed, our entire legal system? Here we have a system that is, by far, too complicated for the brightest of the master scholars to understand. Yet, it mercilessly “holds accountable” its victims, claiming that they’re responsible for fully complying with laws not even the experts understand. The law “requires” a signature on the bottom of a tax filing; yet no one can say truthfully that they understand what they are signing; if that’s not “duress” than what is. If this is not the measure of a totalitarian regime, nothing is.
How did I get here?
My introduction to the real American nightmare starts back in the early ‘80s. Unfortunately after more than 16 years of school, somewhere along the line I picked up the absurd, pompous notion that I could read and understand plain English. Some friends introduced me to a group of people who were having ‘tax code’ readings and discussions. In particular, zeroed in on a section relating to the wonderful “exemptions” that make institutions like the vulgar, corrupt Catholic Church so incredibly wealthy. We carefully studied the law (with the help of some of the “best”, high-paid, experienced tax lawyers in the business), and then began to do exactly what the “big boys” were doing (except that we weren’t steeling from our congregation or lying to the government about our massive profits in the name of God). We took a great deal of care to make it all visible, following all of the rules, exactly the way the law said it was to be done.
The intent of this exercise and our efforts was to bring about a much-needed re-evaluation of the laws that allow the monsters of organized religion to make such a mockery of people who earn an honest living. However, this is where I learned that there are two “interpretations” for every law; one for the very rich, and one for the rest of us… Oh, and the monsters are the very ones making and enforcing the laws; the inquisition is still alive and well today in this country.
That little lesson in patriotism cost me $40,000+, 10 years of my life, and set my retirement plans back to 0. It made me realize for the first time that I live in a country with an ideology that is based on a total and complete lie. It also made me realize, not only how naive I had been, but also the incredible stupidity of the American public; that they buy, hook, line, and sinker, the crap about their “freedom”… and that they continue to do so with eyes closed in the face of overwhelming evidence and all that keeps happening in front of them.
Before even having to make a shaky recovery from the sting of the first lesson on what justice really means in this country (around 1984 after making my way through engineering school and still another five years of “paying my dues”), I felt I finally had to take a chance of launching my dream of becoming an independent engineer.
On the subjects of engineers and dreams of independence, I should digress somewhat to say that I’m sure that I inherited the fascination for creative problem solving from my father. I realized this at a very young age.
The significance of independence, however, came much later during my early years of college; at the age of 18 or 19 when I was living on my own as student in an apartment in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. My neighbor was an elderly retired woman (80+ seemed ancient to me at that age) who was the widowed wife of a retired steel worker. Her husband had worked all his life in the steel mills of central Pennsylvania with promises from big business and the union that, for his 30 years of service, he would have a pension and medical care to look forward to in his retirement. Instead he was one of the thousands who got nothing because the incompetent mill management and corrupt union (not to mention the government) raided their pension funds and stole their retirement. All she had was social security to live on.
In retrospect, the situation was laughable because here I was living on peanut butter and bread (or Ritz crackers when I could afford to splurge) for months at a time. When I got to know this poor figure and heard her story I felt worse for her plight than for my own (I, after all, I thought I had everything to in front of me). I was genuinely appalled at one point, as we exchanged stories and commiserated with each other over our situations, when she in her grandmotherly fashion tried to convince me that I would be “healthier” eating cat food (like her) rather than trying to get all my substance from peanut butter and bread. I couldn’t quite go there, but the impression was made. I decided that I didn’t trust big business to take care of me, and that I would take responsibility for my own future and myself.
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#ConferenceCommitteeRe...) 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.
Admittedly, you need to read the treatment to understand what it is saying but it’s not very complicated. The bottom line is that they may as well have put my name right in the text of section (d). Moreover, they could only have been more blunt if they would have came out and directly declared me a criminal and non-citizen slave. Twenty years later, I still can’t believe my eyes.
During 1987, I spent close to $5000 of my ‘pocket change’, and at least 1000 hours of my time writing, printing, and mailing to any senator, congressman, governor, or slug that might listen; none did, and they universally treated me as if I was wasting their time. I spent countless hours on the L.A. freeways driving to meetings and any and all of the disorganized professional groups who were attempting to mount a campaign against this atrocity. This, only to discover that our efforts were being easily derailed by a few moles from the brokers who were just beginning to enjoy the windfall from the new declaration of their “freedom”. Oh, and don’t forget, for all of the time I was spending on this, I was loosing income that I couldn’t bill clients.
After months of struggling it had clearly gotten to be a futile exercise. The best we could get for all of our trouble is a pronouncement from an IRS mouthpiece that they weren’t going to enforce that provision (read harass engineers and scientists). This immediately proved to be a lie, and the mere existence of the regulation began to have its impact on my bottom line; this, of course, was the intended effect.
Again, rewind my retirement plans back to 0 and shift them into idle. If I had any sense, I clearly should have left abandoned engineering and never looked back.
Instead I got busy working 100-hour workweeks. Then came the L.A. depression of the early 1990s. Our leaders decided that they didn’t need the all of those extra Air Force bases they had in Southern California, so they were closed; just like that. The result was economic devastation in the region that rivaled the widely publicized Texas S&L fiasco. However, because the government caused it, no one gave a shit about all of the young families who lost their homes or street after street of boarded up houses abandoned to the wealthy loan companies who received government funds to “shore up” their windfall. Again, I lost my retirement.
Years later, after weathering a divorce and the constant struggle trying to build some momentum with my business, I find myself once again beginning to finally pick up some speed. Then came the .COM bust and the 911 nightmare. Our leaders decided that all aircraft were grounded for what seemed like an eternity; and long after that, ‘special’ facilities like San Francisco were on security alert for months. This made access to my customers prohibitively expensive. Ironically, after what they had done the Government came to the aid of the airlines with billions of our tax dollars … as usual they left me to rot and die while they bailed out their rich, incompetent cronies WITH MY MONEY! After these events, there went my business but not quite yet all of my retirement and savings.
By this time, I’m thinking that it might be good for a change. Bye to California, I’ll try Austin for a while. So I moved, only to find out that this is a place with a highly inflated sense of self-importance and where damn little real engineering work is done. I’ve never experienced such a hard time finding work. The rates are 1/3 of what I was earning before the crash, because pay rates here are fixed by the three or four large companies in the area who are in collusion to drive down prices and wages… and this happens because the justice department is all on the take and doesn’t give a fuck about serving anyone or anything but themselves and their rich buddies.
To survive, I was forced to cannibalize my savings and retirement, the last of which was a small IRA. This came in a year with mammoth expenses and not a single dollar of income. I filed no return that year thinking that because I didn’t have any income there was no need. The sleazy government decided that they disagreed. But they didn’t notify me in time for me to launch a legal objection so when I attempted to get a protest filed with the court I was told I was no longer entitled to due process because the time to file ran out. Bend over for another $10,000 helping of justice.
So now we come to the present. After my experience with the CPA world, following the business crash I swore that I’d never enter another accountant’s office again. But here I am with a new marriage and a boatload of undocumented income, not to mention an expensive new business asset, a piano, which I had no idea how to handle. After considerable thought I decided that it would be irresponsible NOT to get professional help; a very big mistake.
When we received the forms back I was very optimistic that they were in order. I had taken all of the years information to Bill Ross, and he came back with results very similar to what I was expecting. Except that he had neglected to include the contents of Sheryl’s unreported income; $12,700 worth of it. To make matters worse, Ross knew all along this was missing and I didn’t have a clue until he pointed it out in the middle of the audit. By that time it had become brutally evident that he was representing himself and not me.
This left me stuck in the middle of this disaster trying to defend transactions that have no relationship to anything tax-related (at least the tax-related transactions were poorly documented). Things I never knew anything about and things my wife had no clue would ever matter to anyone. The end result is… well, just look around.
I remember reading about the stock market crash before the “great” depression and how there were wealthy bankers and businessmen jumping out of windows when they realized they screwed up and lost everything. Isn’t it ironic how far we’ve come in 60 years in this country that they now know how to fix that little economic problem; they just steal from the middle class (who doesn’t have any say in it, elections are a joke) to cover their asses and it’s “business-as-usual”. Now when the wealthy fuck up, the poor get to die for the mistakes… isn’t that a clever, tidy solution.
As government agencies go, the FAA is often justifiably referred to as a tombstone agency, though they are hardly alone. The recent presidential puppet GW Bush and his cronies in their eight years certainly reinforced for all of us that this criticism rings equally true for all of the government. Nothing changes unless there is a body count (unless it is in the interest of the wealthy sows at the government trough). In a government full of hypocrites from top to bottom, life is as cheap as their lies and their self-serving laws.
I know I’m hardly the first one to decide I have had all I can stand. It has always been a myth that people have stopped dying for their freedom in this country, and it isn’t limited to the blacks, and poor immigrants. I know there have been countless before me and there are sure to be as many after. But I also know that by not adding my body to the count, I insure nothing will change. I choose to not keep looking over my shoulder at “big brother” while he strips my carcass, I choose not to ignore what is going on all around me, I choose not to pretend that business as usual won’t continue; I have just had enough.
I can only hope that the numbers quickly get too big to be white washed and ignored that the American zombies wake up and revolt; it will take nothing less. I would only hope that by striking a nerve that stimulates the inevitable double standard, knee-jerk government reaction that results in more stupid draconian restrictions people wake up and begin to see the pompous political thugs and their mindless minions for what they are. Sadly, though I spent my entire life trying to believe it wasn’t so, but violence not only is the answer, it is the only answer. The cruel joke is that the really big chunks of shit at the top have known this all along and have been laughing, at and using this awareness against, fools like me all along.
I saw it written once that the definition of insanity is repeating the same process over and over and expecting the outcome to suddenly be different. I am finally ready to stop this insanity. Well, Mr. Big Brother IRS man, let’s try something different; take my pound of flesh and sleep well.
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.
Joe Stack (1956-2010)
02/18/2010
Furthermore, any US citizen who decides to renounce his or her citizenship is assumed to have expatriated for tax reasons if the tax liability is over $127,000 or the individual's net worth is at least $2 million. (Though those, of course, are not the only reasons that an individual will be assumed to have expatriated for tax purposes.) An individual who has expatriated for tax reasons must pay US taxes on all US-derived income for 10 years and if the individual returns to the US for 30 days in those ten years, all income earned abroad is taxable by the US government. If such an individual has the misfortune of dying during any year in which he or she spent at least 30 days in the US, the entire estate is taxable by the US government.
I'm not sure Stack's tax liability was $127,000, but given his problems with the IRS, I wouldn't be surprised if the IRS would have declared him expatriated for tax reasons had he tried to leave the country. Escaping the long arm of the IRS can be easier said than done.
I know a lot of people who have relocated to NL (me), UK, DE, or FR.
1. Americans can travel freely to most countries in Europe, for business or vacation, no visa required. Once there, you can go on job interviews, and firms with many internationals will have no problem arranging a work visa for you. Alternatively, you can arrange the work visa yourself, which is also pretty easy.
2. Many countries (Holland, for example) have agreements that American entrepreneurs can start their own businesses. You just have to show that you will not be a drain on society (i.e. you buy health insurance and have some money in the bank), and that you will be making a 'substantial investment' in your company (usually less than $10k)
3. I studied here, a one-year M.Sc. (which cost less than $15k and was of a surprisingly high quality), and they gave me a green card for a "job-seeking-year", during which I can work anywhere... but have switch my visa to a normal work permit before it expires. It took me 5 days from getting the permit to switching it to a regular permit.
4. Or you can just find a foreign partner, you don't even need to marry them in some countries. Sometimes that's enough, other times they need to show that they earn enough to take care of you both (in case you can't find work), but the threshold is so low it's a joke ($30-35k yearly salary).
Bad news is: Americans living abroad still have to pay US-income tax, if you make a lot of money. You'll have to stay in your new home for a while and get citizenship (5+ years), renounce your US citizenship, and even then they can come after you for a while...
I know so many US expats over here, and only a few have had visa-related issues (all resolved well). Most of those were because someone didn't do their homework, or didn't take it seriously. All of them pale in comparison to the visa-issue that I've heard from expats living in the US.
survivorship bias
I met most of my expat friends at the beginning of their visa processes (vacationers or students who want to stay, or fell in love with someone here), so I don't think survivorship bias plays a role in my own observations.
Keeping them in check just delays the inevitable meltdown.
The societal problem is convincing everyone that they're a genius. When life hands them less than the best and they have to overcome it, they just get disgruntled, because "they're too smart" to deal with it.
Parents, remind your children that there's always going to be someone smarter/faster/stronger/etc than them, and that they should focus on doing as well as they can with the circumstances they're given. There's more good in being the best you can be than there is in being the best; for a lucky few, those things are identical, but for the rest of us they aren't.
However in this country (the US) the gaps are wider and the deck is stacked more than in any other industrialized nation in pretty much every category.
Try complaining against the state in an industrialized nation like China.
Is it just that they have better control of their media (so we don't hear about it), better control of the people (so they don't get a chance to do it), or something else?
By the way, there were also some incidence of pupils shooting up their schools in recent years in Germany. I guess you are just much more exposed to American incidents than to the rest of the world. (E.g. have you heard of the whole ugly neo-nazi stuff in east Germany in the 90ies? It still goes on, though at a much lower level of intensity. It's quite hard to find English language sources on the anti-asylum-seekers riots in Hoyerswerda in 1991 but http://www.jstor.org/pss/4146935 is on.)
In terms of impact, you're probably right. I think it's likely that 9/11 is the first news story to have reached half the world's population in a few hours. However, there are pre-modern events that rival it in terms of potential impact. I can't think of any from the 11th century, but the Defenestration of Prague comes to mind, as would the Gunpowder Plot had it succeeded.
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.
Yet more of people's hard-earned money going to perks for jerks rather than health-care for those paying the premiums.
1) Because of how governments deal in collective punishment, private aviation is likely to suffer further regulatory decimation even though events of this type are extremely rare, statistically speaking.
2) His rambling, narcissistic screed will be broadcast widely, and his immature and senseless actions used to paint those with legitimate and sensible criticisms of our tax system or systems of governance.
Maybe to you. Most of his rant just sounded honest and true to me.
"Federal and state officials, many facing record budget deficits, are starting to aggressively pursue companies that try to pass off regular employees as independent contractors. President Obama’s 2010 budget assumes that the federal crackdown will yield at least $7 billion over 10 years."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/business/18workers.html?em
Would they legally be required to? IANAL but I can't think of any reason.
I would also want a host to keep sites online for as long as they'd been paid for.
"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."
(this was cited in the letter)
Like many people on HN, I am pretty close to the guy's profile. I've been negatively effected by SEC. 1706 - now, I'm far to cynical to think such things can be changed, and I'm not really the murder/suicide type but, uh, I certainly fit the profile.
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.
If you look deep and examine what is happening here, 106 comments later, you see that people are thinking. A great thing.
Another question I stop to ask myself: His method was poor and for a lot of people that disqualifies his perspective. But should it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6lzEhoXads
how innocent are people who work for evil empires?
Later finds himself losing work due to working in aerospace as Air Force bases are closed in the 90's, leading into 9/11 and a meltdown in his ability to generate personal revenue. Blames IRS.
Runs out of money, blames IRS.
Flies plain into IRS building with the intent to indiscriminately murder anyone who happens to be in the building at the time, ending his pathetic life. Doesn't even garner a headline on the Huffington Post. Forgotten two weeks later.
However, here was the kicker for me: "But here I am with a new marriage and a boatload of undocumented income". Let me get this straight -- he was in love and married. Forget all the money stuff, tax liens, unemployment, whatever it was. He was so in love that he just got married. And then what does he do? He pilots a plane into the IRS building. I also read somewhere that he burned his house down before doing that. It's probably anyone's guess that his wife was at work while all this was going on. So this troubles me that a man focuses so myopically on purity principles such as anti-corruption, that he would block out one of the purest principles at all, which is love.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/18/austin-plane-sui...
Killing others and committing suicide are both very serious matters, so I hate to say this, but his rant on the IRS reminded me of nothing so much as Timecube. What have we done wrong in this society, that we get people like this, especially the deadly ones? I don't think it's a political, moral, or social-outlook problem; but I hardly know what it is. A more honest and competent government would have removed this man's particular grievance, but it wouldn't have fixed the root problem; someone in his mental state is probably going to find something to be aggrieved with regardless...
If you've ever listened to any significant amount of Coast to Coast AM, you've probably heard any number of conspiracy theorists and paranormalists justify and build their books and beliefs upon the books, beliefs, or incidents of others. My untested hypothesis is that if you unraveled all those interdependencies and book citations, references, etc. you'd end up with an entirely self-contained cloud of "evidence" that is disconnected from objective reality.
The general feeling I get from this is that the guy cares way too much about money and tit-for-tat.
Most Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck (about 60% last I heard).
It's not like the amount of the cable bill would go very far to pay for things that other civilized nations take for granted, like medical care and education.
"Of course a conservative policy center will tell me that poor people are wasteful and/or lazy."
An excellent way to write off an opinion without consideration. Come back when you have a valid reason to write their numbers off (not that there isn't one, just don't parrot "conservative" or "republican" at me because that puts you in the majority of people who cite the same BS over-generalizations).
[Edit: While I don't agree with lliiffee, I think it's a valid point of view and I wouldn't vote it down. I wavered between wanting to understand this person's state of mind, and not wanting to "reward" him with attention. But even if he were alive I don't think he'd get any satisfaction from people's reactions to this meaningless, incoherent screed.]
It made perfect sense to me. I see exactly where he is coming from, and why he did what he did. I have been wondering how long until someone did something like this. I would bet this will be the first of many things similar, where people start to rebel against the government. The less violent the better however.
"I filed no return that year thinking that because I didn’t have any income there was no need. The sleazy government decided that they disagreed..."
Why is he just assuming that there's no need to file, rather than looking it up himself or asking someone for advice? Oh yeah:
"After my experience with the CPA world, following the business crash I swore that I’d never enter another accountant’s office again."
...because he once had a bad experience with accounting (which as far as I can tell he never actually describes), he decided that all accountants are frauds and there is no way to find an honest person to help him. It sounds like he was an antisocial crank long before flew a plane into a building.
government employees are just people.
here's a book about this:
http://www.amazon.com/Perfectly-Legal-Campaign-Rich-Everybod...
If you're looking to take some kind of memorable action to get people to notice you, probably the least effective way is to do the same thing someone else just did.
HOWEVER due to copycats and the general suggestability of the public, organisations who broadcast should think twice before broadcasting this text. This is because it provides a "reward" for people contemplating doing this kind of thing, fifteen minutes of fame. Unfortunately this is exactly what news channels typically fail to do. E.G. High school shootings