Question regarding hatred or other denial of accessibility of trademarks of persons

It should be ok, to recommend, under the guidelines of the enforced legal rights of public and private access, if it is one's opinion, only using someone's intelligence in the quiet cause of love, by right to be thought and communicated without someone choosing to recommend it other than as free for need and happiness, including free as brokenn or from any other difference of person, group, or experience, without extra discriminatory emphasis there, and without judgement due to desire, in any nature general or concomitant as right to others (with the place of rights of all! others being its own construct of power and allowance).

Violations to be of structure's own continuing/surviving glory, past redress, of other pain having a limited fair chance and value of benefit.

If it is found to be at all unnecessary to have restricted a person's free speech, once access to communications is available in the event of a crime - a crime in and of itself to have allowed - under law, anyone who did that illegally ought to be prosecuted (as an effective sentiment;  they'll always get away with everything beyond evil to people, worse than the means). They also should have been prosecuted before, but practically speaking more light needs to be shed on the wrong of criminal treatment of someone.