(02-28-2017, 01:00 PM)Cormac Wrote:

(02-28-2017, 12:54 PM)Belschaft Wrote: If you reach back four years in time to get around their failure to really meet the criteria, and make use of an event that did not see them designated under this law when it occurred.

Straws are being grasped at.

You're creating criteria that don't exist except in your mind. They've met the first criterion. In the intervening time since meeting that criterion, they have done nothing at all to demonstrate they are no longer a threat, and plenty to demonstrate they remain a threat. They did not need to do anything else but meet the first criterion in order to be designated a prohibited organization.

There is no reason to go by Belschaft's personalized criteria for this. We have actual criteria. The Black Hawks meet those criteria.

This is nothing about "personal" criteria and everything about legal criteria. The only incident you've presented that can be considered applicable dates back four years - it's actually older than this law.

I would suggest that this indicates an extremely weak case.