As usual, you miss the point COMPLETELY.
I don't think so. This video is presented with very little context and claims are made. Looks like propaganda.
You point out that this guy has dumb views, and therefore the police are good for taking care of him.
Nope. I point out the context of a march by alt-right, counter-protesters, and a group from one side being prevented from going in a particular direction. I don't know what direction he's prevented from going in; I note that he's offered two other options. Maybe the police are trying to direct him to the alt-right guest area; ever think of that? And, in some thread a while ago about an alt-right/anti-fa clash in Quebec, wasn't it the considered opinion that it was the job of the police to keep these groups apart so there wasn't any violence?
Now I don't know anything about this guy or his group or their views.
Exactly. You also don't know much about what's going on in the video, either. You especially don't know what happened before, or even after the camera stopped recording.
I guess you had a lot of spare time to look all that up.
Took about 40 minutes; not that much time on a sunny afternoon on the patio.
Clarification: The *research* took about 10 minutes. Writing the post and copying the links over took 30.
However, I can speak English. The police keep asking for who he is and where he lives and he keeps saying "I don't have to give you any details unless I've broken the law". So your idea they know him and were thus justified in blocking him from attending a rally don't seem to go well together.
The police will ask for ideinfication details even when they know who you are: it's part of procedure, dotting their i's and crossing their t's.
Second, you took a lot of time and trouble looking into who he was and his views and I'm fairly sure if he'd ever been involved in any violence you'd have posted that. Since you didn't, I'm going to assume that he has no such history.
Given the prevalence of false news production, I am making a much more concerted effort to examine stories - even ones I want to believe - in an attempt to gain actual information and not just stupid rhetoric. Therefore, I took some time to look into the context of the video you presented - the event, and just what Section 35 means in the UK. I then followed it up with a bit of research into who the presenter of the video was. I did not look to find out if he'd been involved in violence.
So what we have here is a guy trying attend a legal rally of some sort, along with a lot of other people, being blocked by police and sent off on various pretexts.
Exactly. And from that the presenters want viewers to think that it's because they hold views that the government doesn't approve. And, instead of employing any basic critical thinking skills, some people just assumed that the video must accurately depict alt-right wingers being persecuted.
One of the first things that occurred to me, when I found out that the march was an 'alt-right'march and the presenter was alt-right activist, how anyone could think that the government was trying to shut down viewpoints with which they disagreed. If that were the case, how would the Lads have been able to have a rally at all?
The video is alt-right propaganda. Instead of whinging about it and telling me how wrong I am, do your own damn due diligence next time and make sure you aren't being gulled.