ghiluops

So are you saying that if someone tweets something ridiculous like "Did you know that Jews drink the blood of murdered Christian infants? #zionists", they should be arrested and charged for this?

That seems to me a highly disproportionate infringement of this person's freedom of expression, as well as being completely pointless. If you're going to have the police arrest people for posting conspiracist idiocy on the internet, they'd have no time left to investigate real crimes that meaningfully affect people.

That article does not preclude expressing criticism of others, or opinions about their actions.

The declaration also enshrines the right to freedom of opinion and expression.

How do you determine in advance which speech will be the precursor to an act of 'stochastic terrorism', without also penalizing speech that will not?

Is it possible to accurately define this in law and policy, such that actions against it can be fairly enforced?

Speech like credible threats to life, plotting violent assaults, and so on, should invite investigation. But this sort of thing? No. Where's the harm? Or even the potential harm?

The other thing is, do we really want a sacred caste of people who can't be criticized? This gets uncomfortably close to the incredibly oppressive lèse-majesté laws that some jurisdictions have.