Looks like terrorism, quacks like terrorism ...

Last week, a madman flew his plane into a federal building in Austin, Texas. He killed not only himself, but also Internal Revenue Service manager and family man Vernon Hunter.

Without question, this act, committed by software engineer Joseph Stack, immediately brings up the issue of terrorism. Since Sept. 11, most Americans would qualify flying a plane into a government building to enact a political manifesto as terrorism.

On the contrary, the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo have all denied this was an act of terrorism.

The real question remains: Where do we draw the line?

The FBI defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”

It’s hard to argue against labeling Joseph Stack’s actions as terrorism according to the FBI’s definition. He used unlawful force against both people and property. He intended to coerce the IRS, as stated in his ranting suicide note. He acted upon a political agenda: He didn’t like paying taxes.

Nonetheless, last Friday a spokesman for the FBI’s San Antonio office said the FBI was handling the case “as a criminal matter of an assault on a federal officer” and that it was not being considered as an act of terror for the time being.

Georgetown University professor and terrorism expert Bruce Hoffman has argued that in order for an act to be considered terrorism, there must be a political motive that sends a broader message for policy change.

“From what I’ve heard, that doesn’t appear to be the case. It appears he was very mad at the (IRS) and this was a cathartic outburst of violence. His motivation was the key,” Hoffman said.

However, his motivation is apparent after an analysis of his suicide note.

His actions were obviously pre-meditated, as his suicide note was written two days before the attack and revised 27 times.

His suicide note states, “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.”

Stack continues his assertion that a violent act is the only method of effecting a policy change: “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.”

This undoubtedly validates his attack as an act of domestic terrorism. Stack clearly intended to create a movement for policy change through his actions, specifically within the IRS. Although these actions were those of a cowardly, deranged man, he is a terrorist nonetheless.