That comment is the result of watching, again and again, the same one-sided logic applied in these cases. I can apologize for the tone and also for some of the words used in my main comment here, but the message is something I can not apologize for as is what I believe now. The event in Berkeley showed two factions that are very real in this Trump America: The “peaceful resistance” and groups that passed from angry tweets to action. What happened next? No one was arrested for burning the city down, the “peaceful resistance” play the pity card and the only bad guys was a person who came to the university to give a speech.
On the news and the internet, people supporting the protest that only gave 5 minutes of fame to some mobsters and ended up costing the city and private citizens who know how much in damages. Where is the real justice here? It was the same when they “peaceful” protested on the inauguration: it ended in violence, and some even burned a limousine that was the property of a company of a Muslim migrant. Who helped the real victim? The protestors? It was Trump supporters who came along to help raise some money to cover the damages.
Here, the Milo event. Hot air venting in a closed room, what was the damage of that? He has been doing it for months around the US and even the UK, and the only thing that the protestors did was giving him an opportunity to film them and upload videos of him laughing at them on YouTube. Where is the crime? Spreading Alt-Right ideals? Hell, one man did it and worse in the election, and he became president. Has Twitter shut down his account? nope.
I was raised in a country that fought an ideological civil war, and I know of first hand censoring people is not the right way to do this. The protestors got their 5 minutes of fame and Milo, and the other ended up with more ammunition for their fictitious war against the liberals and remember that the guy on the red button watches Fox News.
Trump is cancer that for their enemies would be difficult to eradicate and I know that very well. One tyrant got into power in the same way he did and in the same situation (with an open war on terror), and we only got rid of him because of video evidence of acts of corruption that mobilized the entire country. This acts of violence and debates if the freedom of speech, a big deal in this holy country, could be limited under some circumstances are the only way to divide the country more.
I don’t know if after the first comment you would even read this or give me the satisfaction of a reply, but I am sorry to repeat that the war on freedom of speech is just shooting you in the foot.