]Politics[

"Spanfeller is a twat" (theaspiringengineer) 11/26/2019 at 20:23 • Filed to: None

2

19

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

There are several reasons why:
A. This would only make things worse
B. This is very impractical
C . It doesn’t mean anything

ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > Spanfeller is a twat 11/26/2019 at 20:37

1

He might want to, but I’m not sure how he would actually do it... Terrorism has a very specific, codified meaning in federal law, and dto’s aren’t it. Doing bad things for money isn’t terrorism .

Spanfeller is a twat > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 11/26/2019 at 20:39

2

I’m sure a resolution could label them as a “terrorist-like” organization.

but again, rather pointless. It seems like another stint of Art Of The Deal diplomacy

ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > Spanfeller is a twat 11/26/2019 at 20:44

0

Pretty much.  Terrorist-like doesn’t mean anything beyond the publicity he would get out of it.  

Just Jeepin' > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 11/26/2019 at 20:47

4

The law is a deep state construct.

Spanfeller is a twat > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 11/26/2019 at 20:50

0

In the end, we’ll get the short end of the stick, Ebrard has been quite a passive foreign affairs secretary.... we’ll probably agree to a ridiculous extradition agreement in order to avoid this. 

For Sweden > Spanfeller is a twat 11/26/2019 at 20:51

0

If the cartels are attacking government institutions (they are), I can understand the classification

For Sweden > Just Jeepin' 11/26/2019 at 20:52

1

Hammurabi is the Deep State

Spanfeller is a twat > For Sweden 11/26/2019 at 20:56

0

They do behave at times like terrorists... some could argue (Like the Le Barons did) that they are terrorists.

More than anything, I don’t think it would make things any better. 

NKato > Spanfeller is a twat 11/26/2019 at 21:29

0

Doesn’t matter. If they wanted to avoid getting the classification, they should've avoided being a bunch of murderous lunatics. 

NKato > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 11/26/2019 at 21:30

0

They killed a family known for political activism in the region. (The Mormons)

That’s terrorism.

Danimalk - Drives a Slow Car Fast > Spanfeller is a twat 11/26/2019 at 21:40

0

Fuck that racist lying adulterer. The only thing more embarrassing are the people who support him. 

ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > NKato 11/26/2019 at 21:43

1

The legal definition of terrorism and what differentiates it from criminal acts   deals with intent, not results. To be terrorism, that incident would have to have been committed for a political purpose. Because a M ormon family drives into an ambush doesn’t make it any more political than any other family killed in Juarez just over the border from me.

Getting from what cartels do (including what they do in every state of this country) to a legal definition of them trying to persuade, overthrow or otherwise alter the political process or policy of the United States is pretty far-fetched.

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > Spanfeller is a twat 11/26/2019 at 22:13

0

“ C. It doesn’t mean anything”

Au contraire

“ Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States:”

https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ40/PLAW-107publ40.pdf

It would mean any action wouldn’t violate US law. mexican or international law is a whole other story.

NKato > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 11/26/2019 at 22:15

0

They have assassinated politicians as well, which I consider to be an ironclad example of terrorism. I'm done giving the cartels excuses. 

ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > NKato 11/26/2019 at 22:34

0

Who’s politicians? There might be an argument for certain group as domestic terrorists, on the assumption such a thing exists in Mexican law. It doesn’t in ours. The word doesn’t mean what you might think it means.

Even if it did, what do you think treating as terrorists would do?  Have you been paying attention to what has been happening in Mexico for last 10 years?

Spanfeller is a twat > gmporschenut also a fan of hondas 11/26/2019 at 23:01

0

As ITA said, getting them legally registered as terrorists would be hard...

MrSnrub > Spanfeller is a twat 11/27/2019 at 00:19

1

“This would only make things worse” is the guiding star of US foreign policy, so it’s playing to type at least.

Spanfeller is a twat > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 11/27/2019 at 00:32

1

Terrorism is a civilian crime here... I’m not a lawyer, but I think the closest thing would be declaring them “enemies of the nation” and there war rules apply.

Most policing and detentions are extrajudicial here to begin with... so they’re already treated with as much respect as a terrorist under the US designation ... giving more power to the government would only mean more human rights violations , more torture, and more innocent people in jail.

pip bip - choose Corrour > Spanfeller is a twat 11/27/2019 at 02:48

0

good, i then hope he sends in USA troops to shoot and kill the drug czars