MILO EVACUATED AS MASKED RIOTERS START FIRES
AND SWARM BUILDING
University of California at Berkeley, home of the free speech movement in the 1960s erupts in mass violence to silence Milo, a libertarian gay activist. Leftist American students are now violent defenders of the Islamic ideology that executes homosexuals, oppresses everyone, and perpetrates violence against women all over the Muslim world.
Elite California school forced to cancel speech by Trump-supporter Jewish gay activist Milo Yiannopoulos as students set off fireworks at cops, tear down barricades and set the campus ablaze in protest
- Violent protests have broken out at UC Berkeley campus over plans for Beitbart News editor Milo Yiannopoulos to give a speech
- Event has been cancelled and Yiannopoulos has since been evacuated
- Reports of protesters setting off fireworks, tearing down barricades, setting fires and throwing rocks at the university
- Police reportedly responded by opening fire with non-lethal bullets
- Campus has been placed on lockdown and students ordered to take shelter
- Visit was last stop on the 32 year old Milo's anti-political correctness tour of US campuses
- Milo is unpopular among the left for his denunciation of Muslim countries death penalty against homosexuals, and various forms of violence against women.
- Leftists have repeatedly tried to force the cancellation of his speeches, even using violence to do it.
- Universities have tried to pre-empt his talks by imposing thousands of dollars fees "to cover security expenses".
- Milo and others noticed that police appeared to just let the riot happen
VIDEO WITH SEGMENT OF ONE OF MILO'S CAMPUS TALKS
where Muslim women and leftists heckle Milo
VIDEO - Milo's statement after the Berkeley riot
THE NIGHT BERKELEY BETRAYED THE FREE SPEECH MOVEMENT
By Tom Ciccotta, Breitbart News
On Wednesday night, fires blazed across the University of California, Berkeley campus, the site of the student Free Speech Movement of the 1960s, as protesters violently derailed the finale of MILO’s college lecture tour.
In 1964, Berkeley student Mario Savio addressed his peers in a speech about the importance of the free and open discussion on college campuses. In his address, Savio argued that the university must return to it’s intended function where students are invited to explore all ideas – both radical and mainstream – freely and without fear of social or academic repercussion.
Before discovering the work that the Berkeley free speech activists did under Savio in the 1960s, MILO inspired me to write a manifesto for college students who, in 2016, desired a similar return to form for American universities. Interestingly, a lot of the language in my manifesto echoed the sentiment offered by Savio over 50 years ago.
Savio directly called for a return to the university’s original function; a place where scholars of all political persuasions can come together and participate in free inquiry. In my early 2016 rally cry to my conservative and libertarian peers, I argued for something very similar.
The tides are changing on the American college campus. Authoritarian administrators and faculty members and pearl-clutching campus social justice warriors are finally being challenged by a new brand of radicals poised to reclaim the American university and return it to its original function and purpose: expanding young minds.
Aside from being champions of free speech on our campuses, Savio and I are both of Sicilian-American ancestry. We also both put in time as altar servers at our local Catholic churches. Despite our similarities, Savio and I diverge when it comes to personal politics — except when it comes to free speech.
Savio joined the socialist party as a symbolic rejection of the two-party system that dominated the politics of not only the country but also the University of California in the 1960s. But despite our ideological differences, Savio and I sought something very similar for our campuses – the return of the university to a place where students and faculty of all political persuasions are encouraged and feel welcome in expressing themselves without fear of social or academic repercussion.
Tonight, fires blazed across the same parts of the University of California, Berkeley campus from which Savio once addressed his fellow students. Attendees were attacked and left bleeding by mask-wearing thugs. Windows were smashed. A girl was pepper-sprayed.
By responding to MILO’s call for “no restrictions on the content of speech” as Savio did so many years ago with riots and violence, the Berkeley socialists of 2017 have betrayed the efforts of those that came before them.
Tonight, Fox 10 Phoenix anchor John Hook, during a live broadcast of the Berkeley riots, argued that “MILO made his point without saying a word.”
Now more than ever, we need to listen to Savio’s impassioned plea for a return to a university that values a diversity of perspectives, keeping in mind that, tonight, the students who follow in the tradition of socialistic activism at UC Berkeley burned the ground on which he once spoke in the demand that the university censor speech that they found objectionable.
Tonight, Berkeley betrayed the free speech movement for which the institution is famous. The university has much work to do if it is to protect the legacy of Mario Savio and reclaim the values espoused by the Free Speech Movement of some 50 years ago.
For the rioters, engaging with MILO’s call for free and open discussion on college campuses wouldn’t be a bad start.
UPDATE 26: UC Berkeley release statement condemning rioters:
We condemn in the strongest possible terms the violence and unlawful behavior that was on display, and deeply regret that those tactics will now overshadow the efforts to engage in legitimate and lawful protest against the performer’s presence and perspectives.
The University and the UCPD went to extraordinary lengths to plan for this event and put the appropriate resources in place in order to maintain security. Officials were in contact with other campuses and paid close attention to lessons learned at the speaker’s prior events. Dozens of additional police officers were on duty. Multiple methods of crowd control were in place. Ultimately and unfortunately, however, it was simply impossible to maintain order given the level of threat, disruption, and violence.
We regret that the threats and unlawful actions of a few have interfered with the exercise of First Amendment rights on a campus that is proud of its history and legacy as home of the Free Speech Movement. As Chancellor Dirks made clear in his message to the Berkeley campus community, while Mr. Yiannopoulos views, tactics and rhetoric are profoundly contrary to our own, we are bound by the Constitution, the law, our values, and the campus’s Principles of Community to enable free expression across the full spectrum of opinion and perspective.
University of California at Berkeley, in more peaceful times
Live Updates - http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2017/02/01/protesters-gather-uc-berkeley-milo-show-police-helicopters-appear/
Milo on his campus lecture tour
MILO YANNOPOULOS YouTube channel
Articles by, and about, Milo at Breitbart
DNC boots candidate from chairmanship race for criticizing Islamic law’s discrimination against gays
“DNC boots candidate from chairmanship race for criticizing Ellison’s Islamic faith,” by Jonathan Easley, The Hill, January 31, 2017:
The Democratic National Committee is kicking a candidate out of the chairmanship race after he told The Hill that Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) should not be the party’s next leader because he is a Muslim.
In a Jan. 5 email to The Hill, Vincent Tolliver, a former House candidate in Arkansas, said that Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, should not be chairman because of Islamic positions on homosexuality.
“His being a Muslim is precisely why DNC voters should not vote for him,” Tolliver wrote. “Muslims discriminate against gays. Islamic law is clear on the subject, and being gay is a direct violation of it. In some Muslim countries, being gay is a crime punishable by death.”
“Clearly, Mr. Ellison is not the person to lead the DNC or any other organization committed to not discriminating based on gender identity or sexual orientation,” Tolliver continued.
“I’m shocked [the Human Rights Campaign] has been silent on the issue. A vote for Representative Ellison by any member of the DNC would be divisive and unconscionable, not to mention counterproductive to the immediate and necessary steps of rebuilding the Democratic Party.”
A spokesperson for Tolliver said he stands by the statement.
The Hill did not report on the remarks in early January because it was unclear whether Tolliver would be an active candidate for chair.
However, on Saturday, Tolliver participated in the DNC-sanctioned candidates forum in Houston.
The DNC announced on Tuesday that Tolliver would also be one of 11 candidates participating in the next forum in Detroit on Feb. 4.
But Tolliver is no longer invited to participate in the event.
“The Democratic Party welcomes all Americans from all backgrounds. What we do not welcome is people discriminating against others based on who they are or how they worship,” interim Chairwoman Donna Brazile said in a statement to The Hill.
“We expect candidates for Chair of the Party to conduct a respectful campaign based on issues. To assure that, we ask all our Chair candidates to pledge ‘to uphold the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States,’ and to participate in the process ‘in good faith.’ Mr. Tolliver’s disgusting comments attacking the religion of a fellow candidate fall far short of that standard. Accordingly, Mr. Tolliver is no longer a candidate for DNC Chair.”
Ellison’s spokesman, Brett Morrow, responded to Tolliver’s remarks in an email to The Hill:
“A few days after Donald Trump instituted a racist and unconstitutional Muslim ban, it’s disappointing that a fellow DNC candidate would fan the flames of intolerance,” Morrow said, although Tolliver made his statement weeks before President Trump signed his Friday executive order temporarily banning refugees and citizens of seven predominately Muslim countries from entering the United States.
“Keith has shown first-hand his commitment to our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, organizing tirelessly against the Minnesota anti-marriage equality amendment in 2012, which led to a resounding win for love at the ballot box. Trump is taking away health care for millions of people, separating families, and alienating our allies. Keith will continue to focus on uniting the Democratic party to fight back against division and hate, and to fight for the core Democratic values of tolerance and inclusion.”…
Tolliver should have known from the outset that this would happen. It has long been established that in the hierarchy of politically correct causes, Islam trumps homosexuality.
When AFDI ran ads highlighting the mistreatment of gays in Islamic law, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors issued a resolution condemning not that mistreatment, but our ads. Gay advocates such as Theresa Sparks and Chris Stedman attacked us for daring to call attention to the institutionalized mistreatment of gays under Islamic law.
Tolliver said of Ellison: “His being a Muslim is precisely why DNC voters should not vote for him. Muslims discriminate against gays. Islamic law is clear on the subject, and being gay is a direct violation of it. In some Muslim countries, being gay is a crime punishable by death.”
That is quite correct. But in response, instead of challenging Tolliver on the facts, which they couldn’t do in any case, the Democrats rallied around Ellison. Said interim Chairwoman Donna Brazile: “The Democratic Party welcomes all Americans from all backgrounds. What we do not welcome is people discriminating against others based on who they are or how they worship.”
So noting correctly that Islam discriminates against and persecutes gays is now “discriminating against others based on who they are or how they worship,” at least according to Donna Brazile (and, no doubt, many other enlightened Leftists). And Ellison’s spokesman, Brett Morrow, declared that it was “disappointing that a fellow DNC candidate would fan the flames of intolerance.” He didn’t say anything about Sharia states fanning the flames of intolerance against gays.
Morrow added: ““Keith has shown first-hand his commitment to our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, organizing tirelessly against the Minnesota anti-marriage equality amendment in 2012.” That’s not the same thing as saying that he rejects Islam’s teaching that homosexuals should be put to death. Many Islamic groups supported same-sex marriage solely for tactical reasons: they knew it would open the door to the legalization of polygamy.
Meanwhile, it is interesting to note that The Hill, which is reporting here how the DNC has become Sharia-compliant and is prohibiting criticism of Islam, is itself also Sharia-compliant.