EU court decides Sweden can not deport terrorist migrants

[fredtoast]

(01-16-2018, 02:12 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: The topic was a bit larger than a politician being yelled at....

The topic may be, but not the info you have posted to support your claims.

EU is not overreaching.  If Sweden does not like the rules they agreed to then they need to leave the EU.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-16-2018, 06:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The topic may be, but not the info you have posted to support your claims.

EU is not overreaching.  If Sweden does not like the rules they agreed to then they need to leave the EU.

The EU forced the Lisbon Treaty which gave them this power. Three nations voted against it in a referendum. Those were ignored and the EU seized power they should have never had.

This is precisely why there is such a wave of people wanting to leace across Europe.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-16-2018, 04:33 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The topic is regurgitating a false narrative from a garbage tabloid website. The title is still incorrect. 

That the EU courts can over rule a nation? That’s not a false narrative at all.

[BmorePat87]

(01-16-2018, 10:05 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: That the EU courts can over rule a nation?  That’s not a false narrative at all.

No, that the "court decided that Sweden cannot deport terrorist migrants".

That's your title. 

That didn't happen.

[Dill]

(01-16-2018, 02:12 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: The topic was a bit larger than a politician being yelled at....

Go back and read the posts and then do a little digging.

Lucy, are you saying it is a good thing to vet posts and issues before posting on them?

A little digging here might reveal that EU courts cannot "rule over" Zambia or Mexico or Thailand which are not part of the EU--only countries which have signed written agreements with other countries to become part of the EU.

Imagine your college joins the NCAA and the SEC conference, which then forbid your players from taking gifts from alumni. Is that "tyranny"? Are you now all surprised they are "ruling over" your college and telling people what to do?

[StLucieBengal]

(01-18-2018, 02:40 AM)Dill Wrote: Lucy, are you saying it is a good thing to vet posts and issues before posting on them?

A little digging here might reveal that EU courts cannot "rule over" Zambia or Mexico or Thailand which are not part of the EU--only countries which have signed written agreements with other countries to become part of the EU.

Imagine your college joins the NCAA and the SEC conference, which then forbid your players from taking gifts from alumni. Is that "tyranny"? Are you now all surprised they are "ruling over" your college and telling people what to do?

They forced the Lisbon Treaty on members who voted it down JN a Red. It was a sham they got this power in the first place.

[GMDino]

(01-24-2018, 09:51 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: They forced the Lisbon Treaty on members who voted it down JN a Red.   It was a sham they got this power in the first place.

Without me going to look it up:

Was there a vote and majority ruled?

[StLucieBengal]

(01-24-2018, 09:55 AM)GMDino Wrote: Without me going to look it up:

Was there a vote and majority ruled?

That’s not how it works. Go back and look up the controversy of the Lisbon Treaty.

[GMDino]

(01-24-2018, 10:13 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: That’s not how it works.    Go back and look up the controversy of the Lisbon Treaty.

Can't you just explain it?  Was there a treaty and each country voted and the majority ruled or was it something the courts forced on everyone?

[BmorePat87]

You ever going to edit this thread so that it's factual?

[StLucieBengal]

(01-24-2018, 10:20 AM)GMDino Wrote: Can't you just explain it?  Was there a treaty and each country voted and the majority ruled or was it something the courts forced on everyone?

I have explained this quite a few times.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4592243.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7069181.stm

[StLucieBengal]

(01-24-2018, 10:29 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You ever going to edit this thread so that it's factual?

Idk are you ever going to stop finding something to cry about?

If you don’t like the thread then by all means ignore it. It’s not like you are adding anything anyway.

[BmorePat87]

(01-24-2018, 10:40 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Idk are you ever going to stop finding something to cry about?

If you don’t like the thread then by all means ignore it.  It’s not like you are adding anything anyway.

I added the truth. That's a far better contribution than posting misrepresentations of articles.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-24-2018, 10:45 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I added the truth. That's a far better contribution than posting misrepresentations of articles.

Ah so you are going to continue to cry. That’s fine if I had to walk in your shoes I would probably be petty and find something to cry about as well. I truly hope things get better for you and you can get back to fun pat.

Have a great day.

[BmorePat87]

(01-24-2018, 10:52 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Ah so you are going to continue to cry. That’s fine if I had to walk in your shoes I would probably be petty and find something to cry about as well. I truly hope things get better for you and you can get back to fun pat.

Have a great day.

My post will be here if you want to address it. I am willing to engage in a conversation that is fact based whenever you are ready to.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-24-2018, 10:59 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: My post will be here if you want to address it. I am willing to engage in a conversation that is fact based whenever you are ready to.

Then feel free to add in about the Lisbon Treaty. Since this is all a problem given the powers seized despite numerous referendums to stop them.

[GMDino]

(01-24-2018, 09:51 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: They forced the Lisbon Treaty on members who voted it down JN a Red.   It was a sham they got this power in the first place.

So I was able to look up some info.

It looks like every country except Ireland approved the EU treaty on the first go.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratification_of_the_Treaty_of_Lisbon

The first referendum was reject by 6% with a 53% turnout.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eighth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_Bill_2008_(Ireland)

The Irish government updated the referendum and it passed by 35% with a 59% turnout.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eighth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_Bill_2008_(Ireland)#Passage_of_the_bill

How is this a court "forcing" anything on any country?

[BmorePat87]

(01-24-2018, 11:10 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Then feel free to add in about the Lisbon Treaty.   Since this is all a problem given the powers seized despite numerous referendums to stop them.

You're apparently upset that a treaty ratified by all members of the UN was ratified by all members of the UN and are suggesting that anything that comes from it is a "sham".

The reality of all of this is that the member nations of the EU agreed to changes and now nearly a decade later a single court ruling is being misrepresented as a rallying call for alt right White Europeans. We've moved away from discussing the fact that this ruling didn't tell Sweden it can't deport terrorist migrants and are now discussing whether or not the treaty that gave the courts more power is legitimate. 

It's a moot argument that is a poor excuse for ignoring the reality of what the courts actually said. 

[StLucieBengal]

(01-24-2018, 11:15 AM)GMDino Wrote: So I was able to look up some info.

It looks like every country except Ireland approved the EU treaty on the first go.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratification_of_the_Treaty_of_Lisbon

The first referendum was reject by 6% with a 53% turnout.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eighth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_Bill_2008_(Ireland)

The Irish government updated the referendum and it passed by 35% with a 59% turnout.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eighth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_Bill_2008_(Ireland)#Passage_of_the_bill

How is this a court "forcing" anything on any country?

The French and Dutch also rejected it.

The problem with the Lisbon Treaty is the EU packed in a clause that allows them to amend the treaty as needed going forward. Meaning there is not other treaties coming. It would be the same if whoever was in charge could change the constitution on a whim without consulting the public or in the EU’s case.... the people of the member nations.

Lisbon Treaty might as well be considered the constitution. With the ability to change it whenever they need so. Without voting or even public discussion. It gave the European courts power over national courts. It’s really scary what the EU can do.... this is Soviet Union type stuff.

[GMDino]

(01-24-2018, 11:22 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: The French and Dutch also rejected it.  

That was two years before the final treaty. Perhaps changes changed their decision just like in Ireland.

(01-24-2018, 11:22 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: The problem with the Lisbon Treaty is the EU packed in a clause that allows them to amend the treaty as needed going forward.  Meaning there is not other treaties coming.     It would be the same if whoever was in charge could change the constitution on a whim without consulting the public or in the EU’s case....   the people of the member nations.

On a whim? Wouldn't all the countries have an equal say?

Our constitution has been changed and added to without adding a new one.

(01-24-2018, 11:22 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Lisbon Treaty might as well be considered the constitution.   With the ability to change it whenever they need so.   Without voting or even public discussion.   It gave the European courts power over national courts.   It’s really scary what the EU can do.... this is Soviet Union type stuff.

I think it's just a little paranoia to look at it that way.