3 ms·

Wow! that 1st amendment doesn't really work anymore. When I lived in the US on a green card (for 20 years) I was leary about political activity, there were nev

Wow! that 1st amendment doesn't really work anymore. When I lived in the US on a green card (for 20 years) I was leary about political activity, there were never any obvious rules against it, and I was in this "taxation without representation" state so had to find outlets other than voting in order to have a say about how my taxes were spent (I'm from NZ where people with green card equivalents are very much allowed to vote) Seems like this guy was doing all the right things, even applying to become a citizen - I guess the american dream has rather soured under an authoritarian government

dekozaken 2y ago
[flagged]
- Gud 2y ago
  Where did he do this? Seems like a pretty serious allegation to make without a solid source.
- mjburgess 2y ago
  One has to imagine it's vanishingly rare to hear anyone call for "the use of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological aims" -- esp. by students at western universities. Expressing support for groups who have taken such actions is not calling for terrorism -- almost every state in the world has engaged in terrorism. Plausibly the CIA's (recent) use of torture prisons and kiddnapping was in large part about terror for political ends. Yet one can express support for the US, and indeed, the CIA in other actions (eg., non-terror actions against military targets). In very many cases today it seems "terrorism" is a political accusation that is used to suppress political expression and as a way around free speech and freedom of assembly laws. It is, I suppose, especially effective when acts of terrorism have recently been committed. The state, in having the prerogative to decide who counts as a terrorist and therefore what kinds of speech count as "support for terrorism" thereby basically grants itself universal licence to suppress any kind of speech it dislikes. In the case of israel/hamas, since gaza has been flattened by military bombardment and has no effective capability to resit or mount any opposition to israel -- speech in support of israel's enemies is particularly powerless. There's bascially nothing anyone can do, let alone as a student. So even to care, at all, what students in universities are saying shows this cannot plausibly be about the actual actions of hamas. The most charitable interpretation of why this is happening is that pro-israeli students and civil society groups (perhaps often leftwing) are engaged in a moral panic about their peers who have turned against israel. And higher-ups in power are responding to this moral panic. The backfire effects from this on US society will be enormous --- lots of people will be asking, "why is the US state engaged in violent actions against students for the sake of another country who is in an extremely powerful position?". Knowing US citizens, I think this will rub a lot of people the wrong way, in the end.
- pmarreck 2y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grj328-hlhA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grj328-hlhA Um, no. Watch this please. This is the same guy you're talking about. You won't be able to pull a "these people" after watching this. > The petition describes him as a committed Buddhist who believes in "non-violence and empathy as a central tenet of his religion." He's openly Buddhist, which means he is willingly enduring the risk of getting killed for being an apostate of Islam (a religion that I am openly a critic of, by the way). This still sound like the "these people" you're unquestioningly grouping everyone into? Do better next time.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- const_cast 2y ago
  It's not 2002 anymore - you can't just call anyone vaguely brown a terrorist. Yeah, you actually have to, you know, _try_ now. Sorry to break the news.

dekozaken 2y ago

[flagged]

Gud 2y ago
Where did he do this? Seems like a pretty serious allegation to make without a solid source.
mjburgess 2y ago
One has to imagine it's vanishingly rare to hear anyone call for "the use of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological aims" -- esp. by students at western universities. Expressing support for groups who have taken such actions is not calling for terrorism -- almost every state in the world has engaged in terrorism. Plausibly the CIA's (recent) use of torture prisons and kiddnapping was in large part about terror for political ends. Yet one can express support for the US, and indeed, the CIA in other actions (eg., non-terror actions against military targets). In very many cases today it seems "terrorism" is a political accusation that is used to suppress political expression and as a way around free speech and freedom of assembly laws. It is, I suppose, especially effective when acts of terrorism have recently been committed. The state, in having the prerogative to decide who counts as a terrorist and therefore what kinds of speech count as "support for terrorism" thereby basically grants itself universal licence to suppress any kind of speech it dislikes. In the case of israel/hamas, since gaza has been flattened by military bombardment and has no effective capability to resit or mount any opposition to israel -- speech in support of israel's enemies is particularly powerless. There's bascially nothing anyone can do, let alone as a student. So even to care, at all, what students in universities are saying shows this cannot plausibly be about the actual actions of hamas. The most charitable interpretation of why this is happening is that pro-israeli students and civil society groups (perhaps often leftwing) are engaged in a moral panic about their peers who have turned against israel. And higher-ups in power are responding to this moral panic. The backfire effects from this on US society will be enormous --- lots of people will be asking, "why is the US state engaged in violent actions against students for the sake of another country who is in an extremely powerful position?". Knowing US citizens, I think this will rub a lot of people the wrong way, in the end.
pmarreck 2y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grj328-hlhA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grj328-hlhA Um, no. Watch this please. This is the same guy you're talking about. You won't be able to pull a "these people" after watching this. > The petition describes him as a committed Buddhist who believes in "non-violence and empathy as a central tenet of his religion." He's openly Buddhist, which means he is willingly enduring the risk of getting killed for being an apostate of Islam (a religion that I am openly a critic of, by the way). This still sound like the "these people" you're unquestioningly grouping everyone into? Do better next time.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
const_cast 2y ago
It's not 2002 anymore - you can't just call anyone vaguely brown a terrorist. Yeah, you actually have to, you know, _try_ now. Sorry to break the news.