You both are actively lying. I'm not talking about Tyler Kay, I'm talking about Wayne O’Rourke, whose tweets did not advocate for murder at all, let alone “set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards”. Not once did I mention Tyler. That's something you fabricated to deceive and mislead.
It's people like you that enable authoritarianism around the world by gaslighting others and justifying suppression of speech.
1. The original meaning is that people must be killed.
2. The more common meaning these days is that people must be punished in some less dramatic way (usually fired).
It is typical of racists to use phrases with double meanings like this. The idea ia that when their words are quoted back at them they can attempt to avoid consequences by claiming they intended the other meaning.
>> It is typical of racists to use phrases with double meanings like this.
Using phrases with double meaning (euphemisms) is a sign of people who read a book or two and have the intelligence to understand the play on words. Some people unfortunately don't have this ability and they take everything as literal.
You actively lied about the person that was jailed to further a political agenda of suppressing free speech, protest, and democracy. That's not a mistake, that's malice. Your bad indeed.
I didn't lie, I got the wrong guy because you weren't specific. In the context of his tweet I think it was clearly a call to violence. Almost always is not the same as always.
> I got the wrong guy because you weren't specific
That doesn't make it any less of a lie - you said something factually false about the person I was referring to. You also made an assumption that you knew could be false in order to push a political agenda and deceive others.
> Almost always is not the same as always.
This is grasping for straws, and has the tyrannical premise of "guilty until proven innocent" behind it. I really hope that you're not in a position of power in my country, or any one for that matter.
> and has the tyrannical premise of "guilty until proven innocent" behind it
No it doesn't, for three reasons.
1. This is an internet forum not a court of law
2. He already plead guilty to his crime and been convicted, hes no longer in the "innocent until proven guilty" phase
3. Calling for violence wasn't even the crime he was convicted of. That was "publishing written material to stir up racial hate" [1].
Now you can reasonably say (and I expect you would) that you don't think that publishing written material to stir up racial hate should be a crime. Personally I think it should, because stirring up racial hatred is pretty damaging.
It's people like you that enable authoritarianism around the world by gaslighting others and justifying suppression of speech.