The tolerant left

[Fasglas]

Astonishing that there were no arrests. Not a single one...

UC Berkeley cancels right-wing provocateur?s talk amid violent protest - SFGate



UC Berkeley cancels right-wing provocateur’s talk amid violent protest

By Michael Bodley and Nanette Asimov, San Francisco Chronicle Updated 11:37 pm, Wednesday, February 1, 2017


A protest at UC Berkeley over a scheduled appearance by right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos turned fiery and violent Wednesday night, prompting police to cancel the event and hustle the Breitbart News editor off campus.

But even after the event’s cancellation, hundreds of protesters spilled off campus into the city streets, where the violence continued as they confronted drivers, engaged in fights, smashed storefront windows and set fires.

Protesters decried President Trump’s policies as much as they did the visit by Yiannopoulos, a gay conservative who has been making the rounds at college campuses across the country with his “Dangerous Faggot” talks, specializing in remarks meant to insult, offend and disgust liberals who disagree with his ideas.

Milo speaks: ‘The Left is absolutely terrified of free speech’

The trouble began around 6 p.m., two hours before Yiannopoulos was to begin his speech inside the student union building on Sproul Plaza. Protesters outside the building began throwing fireworks and pulling down the metal barricades police set up to keep protesters from rushing inside. Windows were smashed and fires were set outside the building as masked protesters stormed it. Police quickly evacuated Yiannopoulos for his own safety.

Berkeley police said five people were injured and some people, including a man who said he had hoped to see Yiannopoulos speak, were seen with their faces bloodied. There were no arrests.

Police said protesters threw bricks and fireworks at police officers. University police locked down all buildings and told people inside them to shelter in place, and later fired pepper balls and paint balls into the crowd of protesters who defied orders to leave the area. Police called in support from nine of the 10 UC campuses and the Oakland Police Department and Alameda County sheriffs department.

A portable light unit burns after demonstrations forced the cancellation of a talk by right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos. Photo: Scott Strazzante, The Chronicle

“This is what tolerance looks like at UC Berkeley,” Mike Wright of Berkeley College Republicans, the group that invited Yiannopoulos to the campus, said outside the student union building as smoke bombs went off around him.

As he spoke, someone threw a glass bottle of red paint at him. The bottle shattered and splattered paint on his clothing. “It’s sad,” he said.

On Berkeley’s city streets, protesters took their rage against construction sites and businesses, smashing windows at banks and stores. They also confronted motorists, and at one point a driver sped off with a protester on the car hood.

University officials had earlier rejected requests to cancel Yiannopoulos’ appearance. In a letter to the campus community last week, Chancellor Nicholas Dirks said, “The U.S. Constitution prohibits UC Berkeley, as a public institution, from banning expression based on its content or viewpoints, even when those viewpoints are hateful or discriminatory.”

Protesters argued that what Yiannopoulos specializes in is hate speech, and that it didn’t deserve to be protected.

“It’s not a question of free speech,” a protester said via megaphone, riling up the hundreds of protesters. “It’s about real human beings.”

Yiannopoulos’ appearances at some universities have resulted in violent confrontations between protesters and his supporters. Some private universities have barred him, and Twitter banned him in July for repeatedly breaking harassment and abuse policies.

Berkeley College Republicans said all 500 tickets had been sold for Yiannopoulos’ scheduled appearance in Pauley Ballroom in the student union building. Yiannopoulos was expected to use the event to kick off a campaign against “sanctuary campuses” that have vowed to protect students in the country illegally as President Trump cracks down on illegal immigration.

Campus police had been hoping to avoid a repeat of the chaos at UC Davis
on Jan. 13, when protesters overwhelmed their barricades and shut down Yiannopoulos’ speech.

In an interview with Fox News after Wednesday’s cancellation, the 32-year-old Yiannopoulos — a self-described “libertarian, gay, Trump-supporting provocateur” — said college campuses are places where “you should be able to engage with different ideas.”

Those who attend his appearances, he said, include people who “don’t necessarily agree with me but just want to hear the other side. They were prevented from doing so this evening by violence from the left — the left that is terrified of anyone who they think might be persuasive or might be interesting or might take people with them.”

But UC Berkeley sophomore Jonathan Gow, 19, rejected Yiannopoulos’ insistence that free speech took a hit.

“The whole reason we’re here is for free speech,” Gow said. “Milo’s hate speech is not allowed here. When it’s hate speech, our free speech is to shut him down.”

Three lines of zip-tied metal fencing separated the crowd of protesters from campus police officers who had secured the building where Yiannopoulos was supposed to speak. He had arrived earlier, escorted by security, and had been waiting inside the student union building when the protests erupted.

The protest turned violent around 6 p.m. when dozens of masked anarchists, dressed in black and wearing backpacks, emerged from the otherwise peaceful crowd.

As “Milo has got to go” chants broke out, they struck: in small groups, at first — knocking down the fences, cutting through the zip ties. Then they came in droves, as the dozens of university police officers in riot gear quickly retreated to an inner ring of fencing.

Seizing the opportunity, the masked protesters ran toward the student center and breached the inner ring, picking up pieces of fencing and hurling them into the building’s windows. Glass shattered, but no one went inside, where Yiannopoulos was waiting for the event to begin.

As some protesters yelled obscenities at police, others toppled a generator and light pole police had set up, spray-painting “Milo” with an X through it. Then they lit it on fire. From their backpacks, the protesters hurled dozens of fireworks.

One of the black-dressed anarchists said he had been hit by nonlethal ammunition.

“The cops shot me with pepper balls,” said the 26-year-old man, who called himself Zombie. “It hurt.”

Carrying a thick black shield and wearing a milk-soaked kerchief over his face to protect against potential tear gas, Zombie said, “We’re anarchists.” Fellow protesters unfurled a banner reading, “This is war.”

Police soon declared an unlawful assembly and ordered everyone to leave, but hundreds of protesters stayed, filling the entire upper and lower plaza. “Turn on the dance music,” one masked woman yelled.

UC Berkeley junior Fatima Ibrahim, 20, who clutched a “resist fear” sign with a red fist, said the timing of Yiannopoulos’ scheduled appearance stung.

“As a black Muslim woman, all three of those identities have been targeted throughout (Trump’s) campaign,” Ibrahim said. “To have someone like (Yiannopoulos) come into my campus and affirm those people’s beliefs, it’s very, very hurtful.”

Hours after the event was canceled, the College Republicans issued a statement declaring the Free Speech Movement dead. “It is tragic that the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement is also its final resting place,” the statement said.

[99 pewtercoupe]

Incredible that there were no arrests. What those SJWs don't realize is that if they were truly dealing with fascists, there would have been bodies lying in the street (theirs)

[VITE1]

Originally Posted by 99 pewtercoupe

Incredible that there were no arrests. What those SJWs don't realize is that if they were truly dealing with fascists, there would have been bodies lying in the street (theirs)

They admit to having Outside agitators start teh trouble but no arrests were made. My guess is the local and school police were told to let them go.

[GentleBen]

Originally Posted by VITE1

They admit to having Outside agitators start teh trouble but no arrests were made. My guess is the local and school police were told to let them go.

And who would have told the police not to do anything? Why, who else, but the President of the University of California (UC) Board, Janet Napolitano, who was formerly Secretary of Homeland Security? You will remember that she was appointed by the late and unlamented President Obama in 2009 and she served until 2013.

She was quoted by the LA Times a week ago as saying, “UC Chancellors and I have reaffirmed our intentions to ensure that every corner of the University of California remains welcoming, safe and inclusive for all,” Napolitano said at a two-day meeting of the Board of Regents in San Francisco.

[99 pewtercoupe]

Originally Posted by GentleBen

And who would have told the police not to do anything? Why, who else, but the President of the University of California (UC) Board, Janet Napolitano, who was formerly Secretary of Homeland Security? You will remember that she was appointed by the late and unlamented President Obama in 2009 and she served until 2013.

She was quoted by the LA Times a week ago as saying, “UC Chancellors and I have reaffirmed our intentions to ensure that every corner of the University of California remains welcoming, safe and inclusive for all,” Napolitano said at a two-day meeting of the Board of Regents in San Francisco.

as long as you agree with us

[Rob]

Thought came to me today.....The people that are ok with illegal immigration are also the ones that choose to allow legal murders.

[99 pewtercoupe]

Originally Posted by Dixievet

Thought came to me today.....The people that are ok with illegal immigration are also the ones that choose to allow legal murders.

Same folks generally oppose capital punishment as being cruel and inhumane

[Rob]

Originally Posted by 99 pewtercoupe

Same folks generally oppose capital punishment as being cruel and inhumane

I have had some profound thoughts lately. For instance

What are the households like where the women that consider abortion the best choice? Will those children be a drain on society to an amount greater than what is spent on he abortion.

And the other side of that...if the woman was willing to carry the child to term and the child put up for adoption, what are people willing to pay for a child and could part of that money be used to encourage the mother to maintain a healthy lifestyle during that pregnancy to ensure a healthy born child for the adoptive parents.

[bill_daniels]

Originally Posted by Dixievet

I have had some profound thoughts lately. For instance

What are the households like where the women that consider abortion the best choice? Will those children be a drain on society to an amount greater than what is spent on he abortion.

And the other side of that...if the woman was willing to carry the child to term and the child put up for adoption, what are people willing to pay for a child and could part of that money be used to encourage the mother to maintain a healthy lifestyle during that pregnancy to ensure a healthy born child for the adoptive parents.

The adoption solution is a fallacy. There aren't enough adoptive parents currently to adopt all of America's unwanted kids. Now, let's say we make abortion illegal again. We just added to the number of unwanted kids who won't find homes....especially the kids who have severe physical and/or mental handicaps. These will end up being more kids who end up getting supported by the taxpayers, and, in many cases, being raised by women who right up front admit they don't want the kid. Can you say next generation of sociopaths? Sure, one of those unwanted kids might beat all the odds and develop the cure for cancer, but most of them will turn out just like the current crop of kids the taxpayers are paying full freight for. Their main contribution to society will be propagating the NEXT generation of kids the taxpayers will pay to raise.

[Aerovette]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

The adoption solution is a fallacy. There aren't enough adoptive parents currently to adopt all of America's unwanted kids. Now, let's say we make abortion illegal again. We just added to the number of unwanted kids who won't find homes....especially the kids who have severe physical and/or mental handicaps. These will end up being more kids who end up getting supported by the taxpayers, and, in many cases, being raised by women who right up front admit they don't want the kid. Can you say next generation of sociopaths? Sure, one of those unwanted kids might beat all the odds and develop the cure for cancer, but most of them will turn out just like the current crop of kids the taxpayers are paying full freight for. Their main contribution to society will be propagating the NEXT generation of kids the taxpayers will pay to raise.

The statement above is a bit misleading. See the real issue is that any two people that bump uglies and DON'T want a kid, can have one, but any couple that wants one, has to go through a vetting process that would cripple terrorism globally. We'd rather give "clockmakers" the whole country, than give loving couples a child.

I would have liked to adopt, but there was no way I wanted some beyotch with her clipboard telling me my stair railing is a 1/4 inch too low and my car isn't new enough.

[bill_daniels]

Originally Posted by TxAg

While possibly true (as no numbers have been posted here and I don't have any one way or the other), I think we can almost all agree the current adoption/foster care system SUCKS.

It needs to be reworked so quality parents can adopt a US child as easier than going overseas. :yesnd:




Now let's say instead of the government taking care of the kids we have private organizations who receive donations take care of those "unwanted" kids.

Now let's also say instead of making making it nationally illegal we let each state choose how to handle (which is how it should have been in the first place).

I don't agree with abortion but I don't agree it should be a national law either.



This is speculation based on quite a few assumptions.

Private organizations currently have the ability to donate to take care of unwanted kids. How's that going? They also have the ability to provide legal and other help to prospective parents who want to adopt the US kids currently up for adoption.

And yes, I based my thoughts on assumptions. Women with some kind of means will fly to Canada, Mexico, or wherever else they need to to have an abortion, leaving just the unwashed masses of poor women who aren't privy to an illegal hookup (no coathanger pun intended) on an abortionist to have their babies, which will immediately be on welfare. Immediately. Actually, even prior to immediately, as the women themselves get their WIC on top of their taxpayer provided medical care.

[OddBall]

I'm surprised they didn't accuse and arrest Milo for instigating a riot.
The hysteria from the far left is really starting to get scary. It's like the 60's in reverse.