Zizek, with Lurk in the middle blaming me for denial, this has turned into an unhealthy discussion.
Let me just briefly make my points again, and then you can respond as you wish, but I'm done on this subject.
I think you are taking an extreme position that is no longer supported by the facts.
For example, you mention the TWO (2) #FF tweets where Higgins mentioned ShamiWitness together with other jihadi news sources.
Sending out 2 tweets is a LOT different than claiming (as you did) that
"He provided a platform and support for a literal ISIS recruiter.".
And regarding ShamiWitness being "a literal ISIS recruiter", that is still to be determined.
The last thing I know is that he is still awaiting trial.
That's a LOT different from your claim that :
ShamiWitness is literally in jail for recruiting people to ISIS
If it were so obvious that he was "recruiting people to ISIS", then I would have expected the prosecution to move forward quickly with a trial.
But ShamiWitness mostly just parroted propaganda on Twitter, and it's not obvious he has committed any crime at all. So now it looks like India does not exactly know what to do with this guy, and that's why he has not been in trial yet (even after 4 years).
Now, I really don't know if this guy has broken the law or not.
No evidence has been presented either way.
But with your statement you make this guy guilty until proven innocent.
And that is taking an extreme position that is no longer sustained by the facts.
Incidentally, how long can India keep somebody in jail without a trial ?