Can Flush Limpbough be charged for the crime of attempting to incite riot?
May 06, 2008 02:51 PM EDT
(Updated: May 06, 2008 06:17 PM EDT)
views: 76
|
rating: 10/10
(11 votes)
|
comments: 23
I was watching The Daily Show With Jon Stewart last week and they showed a video clip of On-Air Flush saying that people rioting and cars being set on fire at the Democratic National Convention was exactly what he wanted; and what America needs. Limpbough called it Operation Chaos or something like that. I'm wondering just how is it that America and Americans are supposed to benefit and be well served by car burnings, window smashings and the other destruction created by the masses Flush says he wants to stoke? But I'm also wondering... isn't it illegal to incite riot in this country? Link to just one of the Limpbough videos -- http://youtube.com/watch?v=0QOSSZEA1so
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
|
|
|
Comments: 23
But have a little compassion, people. He didn't get to go to Vietnam, so he has this unfulfilled desire for war, operations and... er, strategeries.
18 U.S.C. §2102.
A public disturbance involving (1) an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons, which act or acts shall constitute a clear and present danger of, or shall result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual or (2) a threat or threats of the commission of an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons having, individually or collectively, the ability of immediate execution of such threat or threats, where the performance of the threatened act or acts of violence would constitute a clear and present danger of, or would result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual.
Now . . . if he said that from a soapbox pulpit at the scene he would be violating federal law. I'm certain he would never place himself into the center of a riot. He's probably hoping to give the sheeple the idea so they can do it and take the fall too.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Vicky P. - Now, Now.... settle down...
Peter - Yeah. He needs to be locked up in the booby-hatch.
Unequal treatment under the law seems too common a Republican value.
Aniko - Yeah. It is disquieting how the passion of his War Lust caused him to mangle such a common tactical term.
Doyle - So, what the law seems to say is that it is illegal to actually start, and/or take part in an actual riot; and it is illegal to threaten someone with a riot, but it is perfectly okay to try and stir one up from a distance, so long as you are not threatening anyone with it.
Yeah, that figures.
Which is exactly why he should be held responsible. In my opinion, there is nothing worse than purposely misleading ignorant people. Doing it for money makes it even more disgusting.
Imagine if this got the publicity Reverend Wright's speech did.
It looks like Rush's chaos is working..............especially on this thread. The Libs are getting all worked up. All it takes is one spark and they're out in the streets with torches, storming the castle.
I guess Rush pegged them perfectly......lol.
John Doyle -- Yeah.. Dang good point !
Sandy Knauer -- Exactly !!
Bret W. -- I am so glad you came in to comment on this article. Now I know what kind of graphic I should make for this. Thanks !!
So Rush predicted that Libs would get all worked up, and sure enough it happened. Is that really such a spectacular prognostication?
I mean, is all that Liberal picketing so different than angrily rioting in the streets? All you have to do is just put down your sign and start attacking any passing Mercedes as "the evil Rich".
Rush will never be held to account. He got off on the drug trafficing. Not once but twicde. Several of the right wing whacko commentators regularly advocate voter fraud. Go figure. Several also advocate assasinating public figures.
The thing is this; how would you know which members of the angry mob are protesting Democrats and which ones are Republican provokers?
'Cause if Flush's Corps do it his way, nobody will be able to tell the difference, right? Flush wants to send out whole mobs of covert Republicans to "act up" under the guise of "angry Democrats" in order to disrupt the Democrat's democratic process, even to the point of fiery devastation. He fully acts like he'd be giddy if people died or were maimed; he blatantly shows his giddiness over contemplating property damage.
Dude should be a comedian.
It also makes me wonder why his ilk of Republicans are so afraid of fair and accurate elections. Do they already know that they would lose every time if everything stayed, and was handled, on the up and up?
Kind of seems that way.
What's it say about people when they can't win without cheating?
Double losers.
There are many laws on the books that need to be updated and/or considered in the current technological environment. Many were constructed before present technology was even imagined, never mind common. I see no difference between a madman screaming for chaos and violence over the public airwaves and a madman standing on a crate in the middle of the village square doing the same.
Right now, there are people out there such as Bret who think that because this man agrees with their particular policitical philosophies, he's funny and should be left alone, and they take pleasure in laughing at people (crazy liberals in their terminology) who take exception to someone abusing the airwaves and pushing the laws and common public decency and responsibility to their limits and beyond.
Someday, there may be someone doing the same, but with a political agenda opposite of their own. Then, their little minds will wake up and scream, "Hey! They can't do that!". Until then, they cannot see the overarching implications of these actions in a lawful society. Sad. It used to be that people, even uneducated people, could at least look at something from a number of points of view. Now, people's minds have become so little, petty, closed and diminished, they cannot see the forest for the trees.
"Bret W. -- "..is all that Liberal picketing so different than angrily rioting in the streets? .."
Bill : The thing is this; how would you know which members of the angry mob are protesting Democrats and which ones are Republican provokers? "
The ones in the suits are the Conservatives.
But we'd never be caught dead at a picketing or a protest or a "The World Can't Wait" rally.
The college kids and the ones in dread-locks with dirty t-shirts are the Liberals. Unless you count the ones in suits with a latte in their hands. Use your nose and sniff for the smell of pot too. That's a dead giveaway.