Not that I believe people should be jailed for speech, but merely referring to what he said as “anti-immigration” is very much burying the lede

> Yarwood replied: ‘Head for the hotels housing them and burn them to the ground.’

That's terrorist speech tho. My problem is that everyone can reasonably get on board with banning speech that indicates violent action, and that the reliance on "muh free speech!!!" has been a net negative for actually defending the right of people to have privacy, because people rely on that sans any other (better) arguments.

What were the tweets?

That would be important context to mention, don't you think?