It's an interesting position: the paper says they defend the right of their assembly, but even then, at the end says if they cross the line, they should be held

It's an interesting position: the paper says they defend the right of their assembly, but even then, at the end says if they cross the line, they should be held legally accountable. What's interesting is that their stated goals are in fact against the law. The paper sort of does a dance about this issue. You're allowed to hate. You're not allowed to act upon that hate. Where does that leave us? In my thinking, they're the ones who have to change. How to bring that about? We watch the watchmen. By "we", I mean the world. It's not the same situation we are in now as back when this paper was written. Should we now then, knowing what are the fruits of their assembly when they did so before, tolerate even the scheming of their purposes? I like one thing that happened this last time: the pictures of them all over the social networks asking if their employers would tolerate them. I say, let them assemble. Take note of them, now that they are emboldened to show their faces. And if they take one step to fulfill their agenda, then unleash hell on them.