Because you used the often repeated refrain of “disagreement” as if people were turning to censorship over arguments about how high taxes should be, when usually it is more about groups plotting to exterminate an ethnic group or people plotting to overturn an election violently. Calling this “just disagreement” makes many feel you are either being disingenuous or are completely oblivious.

I think it’s fairly obvious here you are extrapolating intent here that the parent clearly didn’t have. Your interpretation is likely marred by your own experiences here. It didn’t read to me (and I presume many others) the way it did to you.

You're juxtaposing legitimate beef with US policy and intervention which carries some level of nuance with the Taliban. To me, that's trying to give them some credence where they clearly have none.