Hasan Piker detained at the border and questioned for hours over politics

If you go around punching people for kicks, you deserve to be punched back. Especially when you refuse to listen to others who tell you that you shouldn't punch.

Sometimes, people deserve what they directly cause. They reap what they sew. It's the nature of the world.

Are you willfully ignorant in order to be argumentative?

We teach toddlers to have manners and act politely and treat others with respect.

The reason we have all those things is to prevent an emotional lash out from those others. We do it because we don’t know what kind of control they might have at that moment and we do our best to maintain calm. We keep the peace.

THAT is the point. Go back and read it again.

Maybe read "Those who walk away from Omelas" and realize there's many more productive ways to work against an oppressive nation, ranging from damaging its function to not participating in the systems which you don't approve of.

There's also the concept of 'activation', which is the slow process of learning to oppose authority in increments. It takes time to unlearn the docility the system imposes on us. Most Americans don't even feel comfortable showing up to protests, let alone violently opposing the state.

If I die from middle eastern retaliation, I'm not gonna act surprised. If our nation was invaded, I'm not exactly gonna be lining up to volunteer defending it. We live in a country that does a vast amount of damage to the world, and I'm sick of pretending like us US citizens aren't all small parts of the problem, because we're letting this happen .

So is our foreign policy. We live in a fucked up world. US citizens don't deserve more respect than Middle-Eastern peoples, and far more Middle-Easterners have died unjustly prior to and after 9/11 than Americans did in 9/11. You either pretend like middle-eastern lives are without worth, become overwhelmed from the sheer amount of death, or you grow callous.

I'm not a tankie, so I wouldn't be on a tankie instance. Other radical views exist outside Maoism and Marxist-Leninism.

I'm not saying those 3000 people deserved to die. It is sad that they died. The US as a whole had it coming, and it would have been better if only the government or combatants were targeted. But to act like the US citizens who died on 9/11 were completely innocent bystanders is also unrealistic. It's sad that settler families were slaughtered by native Americans, but I'm not going to act like it was completely evil that they were targeted, especially after we were slaughtering tribes en masse with our military.

I'm an anarchist on the same instance as you are, I agree with the idea that US's geopolitical games had to have a blowback at some point.

Should the 3000+ died? Probably not. Would someone at some point have died due to the blowback at some point? Most likely. Can't say when or where, or how many.

But people were (understandably) seething with hatred for what America did to their nations and cultures. Removing elected leaders for autocratic dictators, assassinating people to help aid in anti-communist efforts, and so on. America was not innocent in the region pre-9/11.

The people in the towers probably had nothing to do even tangentially related to the reasons for 9/11 to be done in the eyes of the Al Queda, beyond "they are in the buildings tied to American capitalism, valid target in our eyes."

Ye the Palestinians should just die already and let the last of their land be stolen by Jizzrael and the Ussa

Tell me what trial did bush or subsequent war criminal administration faced to make it an argument that people don't support their actions?

One even got a nobel peace prize, despite war crimes. Got no pushback from the populace.

If you harbor criminals with open records (who knows how many closed records), be ready for some retaliation?

Isnt this what US/Israel claims when they attack civs? But somehow they're never labeled poorly as "war crimes" or "terrorists". hmm… makes you think

But don't be afraid call all the region terrorists, if it makes you sleep better.

Promoting terrorism by saying Israel "has every right to defend themselves," is 100% protected. Both by the current application of the law, and by its proper intent. I'm actually not very concerned with the current application of the law to pro-Palestinian advocacy ("Palestine has every right to defend themselves") because the current application is a bunch of tyrannical bullshit, and I hope we are able to restore it to something sort of adjacent to good sense and the intent of the framers soon.

You're advocating for it being legal to advocate for terrorism, or in fact to commit it, but illegal to make terrorists uncomfortable by making edgelord statements, if the terrorists or their friends happen to be in power. That is a profoundly fucked up point of view. Pretty much every terroristic regime has usually labelled any resistance to them as "terrorism" as one of the key steps in making it illegal to resist their terrorism.

If you're having trouble grasping what I am saying, I am saying that Israel's mass slaughter of civilians including torture, starvation, bombing of hospitals, deliberately shooting children, basically any type of war crime you could think of, is terrorism. So far they have committed roughly 50 September 11ths in Gaza, at least, and they have plans to do many many more.

Hamas does commit terrorism also, yes, although far less than Israel. But the main thing I am saying is that supporting terrorism is unequivocally legal, and very popular, in the United States, as long as the terrorism is being done by our friends.

Nobody's asking you to "give Hasan a pass" but we're asking you to see the Palestinian issue from the eyes of a neighbour who doesn't see any recourse from the international community against the heinous acts perpetrated by the Israeli regime and the IDF against civilians in Gaza and other regions nearby. If nobody punishes a bully am I a bully myself if I intervene to defend the bullied person? I personally don't think so, especially if the teachers and the principal constantly side with the bully against the bullied.

This will never sit well with me, I'll personally take matters into my own hands anytime I see a situation where someone powerful acts against someone poor, especially when the institutions tasked with defending those who aren't powerful sit in a corner fiddling their fingers and not acting in line with their declared objectives.

This being said I despise any kind of religious extremism (any religion at all in fact, but I don't expect everybody to become atheist all of a sudden. I completely expect everybody not to be an extremists tho) so I also despise the founding reasons of Hamas, the houtis, the islamic brotherhood or any other religious organisation. But still I understand and justify their reasons for being in a fight against Israel.

I don't understand and I don't justify the stances of international organisations which should be defending the Palestinian people and who are the cause why I have to support religious extremists in this specific context (looking at UN aggressively)

“America kidnapped civilians”

It would actually read something more like "US Navy detains cargo crew in violation of blockaid"

I don't think most Americans know just how much they're propagandized, even through mundane things like headline word choices.

Do you not think what they did was terrorism?

Operating a shipping blockaid is a boilerplate armed conflict strategy. No, this doesn't qualify as terrorism IMO.

Do you think Americans are doing a good thing?

the context was "America kidnapped civilians" and someone said "I think what the Americans are doing is a good thing", then yes, that would paint a bad picture.

I think you are framing the argument in an incomplete perspective. I don't think the context is just that houthis are kidnapping people, moreso that they are standing up to what he believes is western powers projecting power and supplying weapons and resources to a nation commiting genocide. The kidnappings did not occur in a vacuum, and is secondary to their actual objective.

Do you not think what they did was terrorism?

I think terrorism is a word people utilize to stop people from intellectually engaging in a complex problem. I personally don't think it's terrorism, as you described.... it's kidnapping. Which isn't great, but states do terrible things all the time. ICE is currently engaging in kidnapping people off the streets without due process, would you also consider that terrorism?

My whole point is that labeling something as terrorism is mostly used to disuade people from applying nuance to a topic, and it seems that's really your only argument.

I don't view it any differently to someone saying they have "no issue with America". America has done unimaginable crimes against humanity, far worse than Hezbollah, but I suspect you give them more leeway; That's the real hypernormalisation.