posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 09:04 PM
Let me preface this by saying that I am not advocating violent actions against or insurrection. Additionally, I'm not sure if this is the best forum
for the discussion, so please move if needed. I had plenty of reservations about this post, but I have yet to see a topic or subject that cannot be
discussed philosophically.
that being said...
For a long time there has been discussion and rumors of Americans being fed up and on the verge of revolution. I've I have even seen some say they
are just waiting for someone to make the first move.
Through one viewpoint, that day came today when Joe Stack the frustrated software engineer flew a small plane into an Austin TX IRS office. He left
behind a manifesto explaining his feelings of disillusionment and having no way to get out of or fix a broken system.
In some discussion in another thread, there was some argument that the IRS office were innocent people, and the individual IRS agents are just doing
their job; that if any great wrong exists, it was from the top levels. Others said, that like the Nazi SS, simply doing a job doesn't fly as an
excuse.
Flashback 230 years, the opposition was clear: British military, Royal Governors, and the Tax Collectors. They were not US.
Back to today, we are all Americans; the Corporate lobbiest, the wheezily politicians, and the lowly IRS clerk.
Could this fact be the only thing really holding back a violent revolution??
There are some, who cannot fathom that any violent action could or should ever be used in the US; that the system is setup to always allow for
peaceful reform through the people. If the system doesn't change, its because the people want it that way.
This group often believes that if the government is storming a house, jailing an individual, listening to a phone call, checking out the nude body
scans of 10 year olds, sending hundreds of billions to corporate entities, devaluing the currency, or increasing the national debt then it must have
a good reason, or at best or just a little miffed at the situation.
There are others, who have or believe it possible, for the system to become so corrupt that it can only ensure suppression and oppression, and the
people are manipulated to keep it that way. That through lies, un-education, distortion, double speak and polarization, the people will not care,
accept or be unable to correct the system.
So if you are on of the people who cannot ever see a situation for violence, the following is not directed towards you. For the rest, who think that
the government keeps pushing and taxing and taking from the people, and it is or could require violence as the only remaining course of action, I
ask:
What or who would constitute a valid target? Is it those who set the policy, regulation and budgets? Is it those who enforce those policies,
regulations and budgets?
I'm not looking for individual names, but positions or groups, and justification behind these choices.
Additionally, if interested, what about justification of methods of engagement?
This is not intended to be a hit list or any kind.
I've been curious after reading the other threads, what makes one person deem one individual or group guilty/valid while another person sees that
group as innocent/off-limits.
Regarding the Joe Stack incident: If this was his attack on the government, I don't think it was a valid target, and his method of attack was also
poor. I don't feel that the local IRS agents are guilty parties for their enforcement of IRS code. I don't consider mass attacks on low level
individuals justifiable.