1. The Brandenburg Test is a process to depict whether a statement should put consequences on somebody. According to the test, when a statement is both intended and likely to produce violence, the sayer would then be punished in some way. But the clear and present danger test was overruled by the Brandenberg test. This test is described to take action when a statement causes a sense of panic in a community. They are different because the new Brandenburg test takes action when somebody says a threat of some sort and is most likely going to follow through with that plan. While the other test relies off of how bad the community reacts to a statement.
2. It is a communication amognst a large group of people targeting on person or group which leads to acts of violence and terrorism. 
3. It is difficult to tie certain acts into the Brandenburg test because in the 1st amendment it is not a crime to make false statements. Even though it happens to place an effect on people and could drive them to do violent things. Apparently, this  often doesn’t specifically qualify for requirements of the test on a person who has caused an event with their untrue statement.
4. When people attack something or somebody else with words. It can cause many things that can be dangerous, or absolutely nothing. A big controversy in today’s world is whether or not false statements that can lead to people getting hurt can be allowed.  In the article, legal scholars wrote,”False speech does not serve the public interest the way that true speech does … and indeed, there is no constitutional value in false statements of fact.”(Jared Keller para. 10)  This quote adds to the 1st amendment of free speech in America. These scholars are saying that if a statement is false it shouldn’t be a big deal in our world. Well, that is the problem. People tend to get so attached to a person to the point where anything they say they believe it is real.So if you ask me, I’d say false claims often grab people in one way or another. I believe when a false statement is committed one side would be for it and on board. The other, totally offended and want to prove them wrong. The more nasty a false claim can get, the bigger the reaction will be. Which can lead to violence. The New York Times magazine jumped into the conversation and cited what the FBI believes. “The FBI deemed this alternative to be less likely because these conspiracy beliefs have motivated, at least in part, several high profile violent acts, or have influenced their perpetrators to the extent that they attributed their actions to their conspiratorial beliefs before or after their arrests.” By the FBI stating the effects of what these conspiracies have done for and to people, it shows that these acts can cause violence that should not be taking place. Therefore, I believe that conspiracy theories and theorists should be paid more attention to by authorities and potentially react with new guidelines in order  to stop unnecessary violence from happening.