You've been looking in the wrong direction, the dangers are coming from the Left - read OP

It has vast majority of representatives; ff, fg - centre right, sf, lab, soc dems, greens - centre left.

You must think 90% of the world is communists

completely disingenuous. You didn’t handle it at all you ignored it and hoped the thread would move on without anyone noticing. Do you care about evidence or not? You picked the example, I provided the direct, primary source of evidence.

Placed under arrest for suspicion of inciting violence, a charge some on this thread were claiming couldn't be made under current UK legislation (See pages 60-61 of this thread as displayed on mobile site 10th of July, exchanges between myself and One Eyed Jack).

Baker was.honest about her beliefs. You are not.

You both spread lies and propaganda. You both try and cite people. You pretend it's anti far left sentiment. You spew phobic propaganda and we've all seen how dangerous purveyors of phobic propaganda are - look at Trump, look at De Santis

Look at Baker for example. The only difference is that you've stopped short of suggesting people start fights but beyond that you're exactly the same.

I've presented plenty of evidence over the last few weeks - you ran away from it all, remember?

Another tweetdump. And it’s the same tweet you already dumped here before. No thanks again. Even the leftover Twitter users fact checked that tweet lol

indeed why are you just reposting basically what you already said about this? To try and cover up questions about the school curriculum you have “concerns” with?

Just stating it’s legitimate doesn’t make it legitimate.

Can you answer my questions about the school curriculum we have primary evidence for now that you are replying to my posts again?

As told by the CEO who has told proven lies and even sock puppets on Alt accounts. There’s a thread on here detailing all of that farther. A new post in it just now notes revenue is still nosediving at Twitter, having 2 weeks ago been on its hind legs after failing to pay its bills to Google. Platform usage being up by 3.5% doesn’t make tweets 3.5% more credible, which is what is relevant here. Nobody cites Wikipedias view count to defend it as a source either.

As… amusing, as it is to read your consistent misrepresentation (and that’s about the extent of your commitment to consistency), the activists claims above are equally absurd as your own claim that anyone was arguing that women should be punched in the face.

The comments referenced TERFs, not women. For the purposes of clarification, TERF is a political term rooted in Feminism, a political ideology which is not exclusive to women, as men have been involved in Feminist activism since its inception, even more so in recent years as Feminism has evolved from representing women’s liberation, to gender equality.

There is no evidence to support the claim that Suella Braverman encouraged police to reinvestigate the case; there is evidence that she thanked the police for doing so -

There’s a couple of ways to interpret her tweet (God I detest twitter with a passion, even having to use the word ‘tweet’ like that, it’s too stupid! 😔), but I prefer to give her the benefit of the doubt that she hopes to bring an end to the petty squabbling and politicisation of the issues involved. It would certainly be more consistent with the statement she made a couple of months ago about encouraging police to prioritise freedom of expression by keeping it at the front of their minds, and her concerns about police getting wrongly involved in lawful debate in the UK -

Home Secretary Suella Braverman said:

I have been deeply concerned about reports of the police wrongly getting involved in lawful debate in this country.

We have been clear that in recording so called non-crime hate incidents, officers must always have freedom of expression at the forefront of their minds.

The new code will ensure the police are prioritising their efforts where it’s really needed and focusing on tackling serious crimes such as burglary, violent offences, rape and other sexual offences.

The draft code introduces new safeguards to ensure that personal data may only be included in a non-crime hate incident record if the event is clearly motivated by intentional hostility and where there is a real risk of escalation causing significant harm or a criminal offence.

It addresses concerns that those who express views which some consider offensive, but are not against the law, are at risk of becoming the subject of a non-crime hate incident report, and that this may result in their personal data being stored on a policing record.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/police-will-prioritise-freedom-of-speech-under-new-hate-incident-guidance

The activists you’re referring to haven’t characterised the individual in question as a political prisoner, they have characterised the arrest as a political attack, which it does appear to be, but they have mischaracterised what was actually said in claiming it was a hypothetical self-defence.

It’s clear from the context in which the comments were made that it was intended as a joke, never intended to be taken literally, and the person who made the comments could not reasonably have been expected to believe that anyone would take it literally, a requirement in order to support a charge of incitement to violence. Reckless? Possibly, and the reason I say possibly is because anything is possible at this point.

It’s exactly the sort of circumstances Dame Cressida Dick, former Met Police Commissioner warned against - the politicisation of policing in the UK:

But her letter did not forgo criticism of the UK's "politicisation of policing".

She said: "The current politicisation of policing is a threat not just to policing but to trust in the whole criminal justice system.

"Operational independence from local and central government is crucial for an effective democracy and is a model respected around the world. We must all treasure and protect it."

She ended the letter by saying she was "sad" that her time "in this great job is fast drawing to a close", but expressed her excitement for the Met's future.

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/dame-cressida-dick-outgoing-met-chief-warns-against-politicisation-of-policing-in-farewell-letter-to-london-12585412

Her excitement for the Met’s future will obviously be tempered by the fact that Conservative Right-wing politicians are quite eager to show they mean business and have begun as they mean to go on by consistently contradicting themselves when and where it suits them, as opposed to making any kind of an attempt to promote and uphold democracy and Human Rights in the UK.

I’m not sure what this incident is doing in this thread at all tbh as it has all the hallmarks of a threat coming from the Right, given they have the political influence, power and authority to ensure people who are transgender aren’t treated fairly and are held to a much higher standard than anyone who is not transgender.

Dunno how that's what you interpret from that as my claim sorry. My claim was that the tweet from a user without even a blue check at that, is only evidence of a tweet. I'm glad I have inspired you to take up your burden of proof a bit farther however by linking through to photos of the rally. They don't look particularly dangerous IMHO, they even stand orderly behind their own banner. All I see though is "free sarah Jane Baker" signs I don't see "punch a TERF" signs or anything like that, so it is unclear if they support punching TERFs or simply support someone's rights to political speech, or perhaps they believe like most people do, in the presumption of innocence before the law. I'd love to know if anyone interviewed them to that effect.

Again still waiting for your comments on your concerns about the school curriculum we have prima facie evidence for. You are in no place while that is outstanding at the very least to be attacking anyone for "deliberate falsehoods and disingenuous responses"

To who? Gemma O'Doherty? Nigel Farage? Elvis?

Why is every linkdump you make about trans activist violence?

Why do you have concerns about trans content on the school curriculum?