On Thursday, February 18, 2010, a terrorist in Austin, Texas named Joseph Stacks, flew a plane into a U.S. government building and killed former U.S. Vietnam Veteran and IRS employee Vernon Hunter.  There has been a lot written about the terrorist Joseph Stacks, and his “manifesto,” that calls for a “body count” and calls for Americans to “revolt” before change will happen in our U.S. government.

But whether it is a murderous attack on our soldiers at Fort Hood by Nidal Hasan who also wanted to use violence to change the U.S. government, or it was a murderous attack on a U.S. government building killing an IRS employee by Joseph Stacks for his ideological views, there is no question in my eyes that such political violence is anything other than “terrorism.”

We cannot decide one is “terrorism” and one is not, based on political sympathy, political correctness, or political appeasement to one view or another — whether it is Nidal Hasan or Joseph Stacks.  We cannot ignore that terrorist attacks of political violence have been committed and simply dismiss them as a “crime.”  Most of all, we cannot have a double standard on terrorism, and be outraged by some terrorist attacks, and flippantly dismiss terrorist attacks by others.  There is no “good” terrorism; there is no “acceptable” terrorism.  Terrorism is terrorism, and terrorism is wrong.

To those who don’t grasp that either Nidal Hasan’s or Joseph Stacks’ attacks on America’s government were terrorist attacks, I reiterate what I have said many times before, too many simply are in deliberate denial on what terrorism is and its ideological basis used by those who seek to use violence to further political goals and agendas.  But we will never begin to challenge terrorism until we are consistent in recognizing it, consistent in denouncing it, and consistent in challenging political extremist ideologies that encourage it.

What has happened to America that someone can fly a plane into a government building, murder a government employee, for a political “manifesto” that believes it is necessary to have a “body count” to achieve political change, and there are those who dismiss his acts as something less than “terrorism”?

Just like there are those who promote hate that called terrorist Nidal Hasan a “hero,” as I reported on February 21, there are those such as the Stormfront “white nationalists” who would praise such acts of terror, with Stormfront members describing Joseph Stacks’ terrorism as the acts of a “hero,” and describing his suicide bomb by plane attack on a U.S. government building as “going out with a bang.”

As the son of murdered IRS employee Vernon Hunter states, “How is it heroic to take upon acts that Al Qaeda used on September 11 of 2001? What makes that heroic?”  Ken Hunter continues “Are you telling me that an American citizen committing an attack of terrorism against the United States is heroic?”

The most telling indicator of Joseph Stacks’ act as one of “terrorism” may be how readily those, such as many Stormfront “white nationalist” members, not only praised his terrorist attack, but also called for more such terrorist attacks, next time with a “bigger plane,” hoping that the next terrorist to escapes next time to “live to fight another day,” expecting the next attacks to be on the media, banks, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), and expressing disappointment that such terrorist attacks have not yet targeted Washington DC.

If these were comments on an Islamic group’s web site, there would be widespread calls for investigations into those praising and promoting acts of “terrorism”, but when such comments are on a non-Islamic group’s web site, the response is (to be most generous) “muted.”

How would we have felt if that was our father, Vernon Hunter, who was murdered by Stark’s terrorist attack? How would we have felt if it was an attack on our town, where we worked, or someone we knew, and we heard people call the attacker a “hero,” or we heard people dismissing the terrorists’ suicide bombing as “going out with a bang”?

Has our nation’s people become so heartless, so vindictive, so merciless, and so cruel?

What type of a nation are we living in that we can accept this as civilized discussion?

An attack on the U.S. government is an attack on all Americans, because whether you like it or not, whether you agree with it or not, it is your representative government.  That is what it means to live in a democracy.  The majority make decisions to choose our representative government.  If you don’t like those decisions, you have many political means to effect change yourself.

But a terrorist attack that murders one our fellow Americans is an attack on all Americans, because the message sent by the terrorist is they don’t respect human life – theirs or ours – and they will take it at will.

If America is a nation that is responsible for equality and liberty, it is also nation of people who also love our inalienable right to life.  In its defining declaration, America is a nation that loves life, not death.  A nation where life itself is an inalienable right that defines our very identity can never afford a double standard on the deadly disease of terrorism, which ultimately seeks political and ideological change through death.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) spoke out to condemn Mr. Stacks’ terrorist attacks on February 18, 2010.  What too many have failed to acknowledge is that CAIR’s leader, Nihad Awad, has been a documented supporter of the terrorist group Hamas.  CAIR has also been an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorist trial, and the FBI has identified CAIR at that trial as a “front group” for the Muslim Brotherhood organization, a group that has provided an ideological basis used by many who support tactics of violent Violent Extremist terrorism.  I have publicly and repeatedly spoke challenging CAIR as an organization, its affiliations, and the support of Hamas terrorist group by its leaders.  While all responsible Americans denounce Joseph Stacks’ terrorist activity, I recognize that CAIR too has a double standard on terrorism.

But I also recognize that, if it had been a Muslim-American flying a jet into a U.S. government building and killing a U.S. government employee, there would have been little hesitancy among many Americans in deciding whether or not it was an act of “terrorism.”  Everyone reading this knows this is a fact. We cannot hold a double-standard on terrorism where we can assume terrorism for some, but not for others, based on their different ideologies. Terrorism is terrorism.

Certainly in America, a nation that suffered repeated attacks by planes flown into commercial and government buildings on 9/11, one would think that Americans would be uniquely sensitive and outraged at those who seek to use planes as terrorist weapons against our government, regardless of their political views.  Given the untold millions who have been endlessly inconvenienced by terrorist use of planes demanding extraordinary security measures for the traveling public, one would think that Americans would be furious at anyone who dared to try to use a plane again to attack Americans, whether it is Farouk Abdulmutallab in Detroit or Joseph Stacks in Austin. The muted response by Americans and the world to this latest abuse of air travel by the terrorist Joseph Stacks is disturbing and disheartening.

But just as disturbing are those who would challenge the double standard on terrorism by organizations like CAIR with a double standard on terrorism of their own.  On February 22, 2010, the group “Jihad Watch” published an article by its contributor Hugh Fitzgerald who sought to criticize CAIR’s historical double standard on terrorism with CAIR’s comments on the Joseph Stacks’ terrorist attack.

But Mr. Fitzgerald didn’t leave it at that.  Instead, he had to offer his own double standard as an answer to CAIR’s double standard, dismissing Stack’s terrorist attack, not as terrorism, but as “simply Going Out with a Bang.” Mr. Fitzgerald pointed out in comments later below his posting that it should be “obvious” that he did not “promote” such activity by Joseph Stack, but simply was dismissing it as “terrorism.”

I was stunned, gap-mouthed as I read the posting by a group that states that it seeks to oppose jihadist terrorism, who simply dismissed the suicide bombing by Joseph Stack as “going out with a bang.”  Unbelievable.  Mr. Fitzgerald argues that unless you are “inculcated from a young age with hatred” or unless you have a well-understood political ideology, this means that attacks of political violence against U.S. federal government offices are somehow not “terrorism.”

In his rambling political manifesto, terrorist Joseph Stacks called for Americans to “revolt,” stating that it takes “a body count” to effect political change against “a government full of hypocrites,”  and appears to be defending his terrorist actions as one of those “dying for their freedom in this country.”  But for Mr. Fitzgerald that is not a sufficient political ideology to constitute Joseph Stacks’ actions as “terrorism.”  If it had been another ideological argument by Violent Extremists, there is no doubt that “Jihad Watch” would have little hesitation in defining it as “terrorism.”

I had contacted Jihad Watch and strongly suggested that Mr. Fitzgerald should revisit his posting and reconsider the comments in his article dismissing Joseph Stack’s murderous attack on America’s government as something less than “terrorism.”  But that has not happened.  I continue to urge Jihad Watch to reconsider what Mr. Fitzgerald has stated on Joseph Stack’s terrorist attack on U.S. government offices in Austin, Texas.

Imagine if it had been any Muslim group or CAIR writing on their website, dismissing a terrorist attack on America by a Muslim-American using a plane, as someone “simply going out with a bang,” while stating that they did not “promote” such activity.  There would be a hue and cry across the nation’s airwaves, and calls for an investigation.  But when this is stated about a non-Muslim terrorist attack, there is merely a shrugging of shoulders.  We must not have a double standard on terrorism, and certainly we must never answer a double standard with a double standard of our own.

I recognize that it will not make me popular to point this out, or to criticize Mr. Fitzgerald’s own double standard on Joseph Stack’s terrorist attack in Austin.  But our human rights mission prioritizes consistency and credibility first.  Like all people, I and my organizations would also wish to have popularity.  But as the recent debacle with Amnesty International has shown, there are no shortcuts to credibility and consistency on human rights issues.  I would rather stand alone with my conscience than compromise our credibility on human rights to look the other way at those who would praise or to those who would dismiss terrorist attacks.

There are many who believe that to challenge those who would promote jihad, we must never criticize or challenge those perceived as leaders against jihad.  The argument goes that if you criticize, challenge, or disagree with someone viewed as a leader against jihad, then you are somehow “helping the enemy,” and you are better off “to look the other way.”  The idea that we can have frank and honest debate is not even considered as an option by some who seek to be fighting for our freedom against jihadists.  The very idea that anyone leading the “anti-jihad community” could be wrong is not an idea that some leaders will even countenance.  To those challenging violent extremism, that has to change.  You won’t ever influence others by tactics which are only designed to close your ranks and keep them that way.

I have worked at recognizing my own limitations and imperfections.  I make mistakes like other normal human beings.  Moreover, I frequently publicly apologize for such mistakes, which I have found some to find quite infuriating.  But that won’t stop me from apologizing or also from making other human mistakes as all of us do from time to time.  I learned years ago if you are afraid to be wrong, you will also be afraid to do anything in your life.  But courage is not the same as arrogance. We must all be willing to recognize when we need to make corrections in things we say or do.

So here is another one of my own apologies. From a public perspective, I have been one of those who has too often “looked the other way” at mistakes by some within the “anti-jihad community.” Instead, I have often tried to privately communicate and hope to influence others.  But sometimes there has to be a moment where one can no longer “look the other way” at such mistakes.  Today, this is mine here.

I think of Vernon Hunter’s wife and son.  I think of the congregation that prayed for him Sunday in Texas.  I think of all of those around the country who don’t even know his name or anything about him as a victim of a terrorist attack.  I think of those who dismiss the terrorist attack against our government, murdering a veteran in our armed forces as someone “simply going out with a bang.”  No, Vernon Hunter and our government deserve more respect, more dignity, and more mercy than such comments.

And to those at Stormfront and elsewhere who view the terrorist Joseph Stack as a “hero,” I feel sorry for you and your hate.  I urge you to release the hate from your heart, and learn that in the civilized world of humanity, “heroes” are not terrorist murderers.

There comes a time when you must face a fork in the road in your life’s journey as to what direction you will head.  Sometimes you have decide whether you want to spend your life fighting against something or fighting for something.  I would rather be for something.

So as for me, I will be Responsible for Equality and Liberty.

God Bless America, and God Bless Vernon Hunter – a real “hero.”

Choose Love, Not Hate.  Love Wins.