The platform is designed to ensure that the choices made by the consensus of the witnesses are the ones which are enforced on the blockchain. The community voted the witnesses in using their own stakes, as per the design. The nature of decentralised blockchains is that in the event that there is a disagreement regarding the rules and direction, then different investors/users can fork the chain and do their own thing. That is all by design and is to be understood by anyone buying tokens - especially by someone who runs their own blockchain already.

If I took away your ability to use your stake I am 100% convinced that you would believe I was being malicious.

It would depend on the situation. If I were Justin Sun and I knew all the details of the Steem blockchain, then I might be triggered, but I would understand the reasoning behind the decision. If my intent were not malicious (in his position), then I would empathise and understand that it might be in the best interests of the blockchain and my own investment to work with the community and meet them in a neutral way - as he inferred he would do. He did not keep his word and in fact appears to have gone as far as to bringing the global reputation of major exchanges into question by the biggest names in cryptocurrency.

No they also purchased a huge amount of Steem!

Which was never taken away from them, as I already explained.

The decision to freeze Justin Sun's Steem came from the same Centralized Authority that held the platform hostage from day 1, led our witnesses around by the nose and done everything they could to prevent mass adoption of this platform !

Who are you referring to here?