>I agree. Hell, many of the "most outraged" need a few lessons in history, They don't know what a real riot looks like.
>At 5:40 p.m., a determined crowd of 35,000 headed for the Pentagon. A smaller segment at the front stormed forward, scaled the walls, and forced their way into the Pentagon. The Deputies and soldiers were taunted and assaulted with vegetables, rocks, and bottles. The troops inside the Pentagon rushed outside as the violence escalated. A full-scale riot erupted.
>Hidden inside the Pentagon and other government buildings were five to six thousand Army troops armed with rifles and bayonets.
>October 21, 1967 https://www.usmarshals.gov/history/civilian/1967a.htm
>And, this was a demonstration for peace.
>
Point taken.
When evaluating the merits - or lack - of a protest, you can't ignore the cause in question and that's a personal distinction.
Thoreau wrote Civil Disobedience to encourage resistance to a government that supported slavery.
MLK and Ghandi both cited that essay as having inspired them in their quests for justice from what they perceived to be unjust governments.

Both MLK and Ghandi spent a lot of time in jail for violating laws they thought to be unjust.

Hundreds of millions of Indians revered Ghandi. Churchill called him a “malignant subversive fanatic” and “a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the East, striding half-naked up the steps of the Viceregal palace.”

Same acts seen from two different perspectives.

During the 1960's you could have gotten similarly widely varying assessments of MLK. Those who sympathized with his causes called him protests acts of heroism. Those who disagreed called him a criminal traitor.

I don't think that it's possible to compare the Pentagon invasion you cite with the recent Capitol invasion, since any assessment will be heavily influenced by one's feeling about the causes involved.

I personally don't recall the Pentagon invasion, but I probably would have thought that kind of behavior was out of line, given the cause - peace, but I knew some serious minded people who probably would have supported it.

I can't for the life of me see how anyone can possibly find any justification for the capitol invasion, because I think that the whole idea that the election was stolen is mass lunacy. I'm aware that 50 million of my fellow citizens disagree, but it's still mass lunacy.