Alternative
March 29, 2024, 01:55:10 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Greece

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Greece  (Read 983 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
John
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506




Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Voter
« Reply #105 on: November 28, 2011, 02:44:33 pm »

The UK's legal system has not been changed by the EU.

Rubbish. Hitherto it has been a requirement for anyone seeking an extradition order for a Brit ti produce a prima facie case against him. The UAW overrides and negates that requirement thereby changing the law of England.

It is over-fishing that has destroyed the fishing grounds.

Agreed, and if we`d remained in control of our fishing grounds there would have been no overfishing because we would not have allowed it. Remember the `Cod Wars`? or are you too young? That was Iceland, the same thing applied to us.

It is an abomination.

It is indeed. Afdter floods or Tsunami in Sri Lankja their prime Minister said "Wer are very grateful for your kind aid" but he added ruefully "But it would help us much more if you`d lift your tarif against our shrimp imports"

The HRA is not an EU thing. It is an Act of the UK Parliament passed in 1998. Long overdue but nevertheless an excellent and noble thing which guarantees to us the rights defined by the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.



As I understand it the HRA empowers the European Declaration of Human Rights which empowers the UNDHR. But it is Europe which makes us toe the line not the UN, and the only bits I want to see changed are the stupidity of those which prevent us from deporting criminals and illegal immigrants and in their places deport the ludicrous judges which go along with it.




Twice I`ve tried to post this and twice when I try to upload the screen says `Oops. The page is broken` or something equally infuriating.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2011, 02:46:04 pm by John » Report Spam   Logged
Lippytarian
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4656


I am a banana



Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Starter
« Reply #106 on: November 28, 2011, 06:56:48 pm »

It`s called having allies.

America couldn't give a stuff about us. Had it not been for Pearl Harbour they would have sat on their hands and watched Europe burn. Hitler would have been just as good - probably a better - bulwark against the communists than the French and the British.

We would do far better to cultivate our relations with nations who actually share common interests with us, rather than being, how can I put it gently ... a washed-out whhore kidding ourselves we still have our good looks and custody of America's heart while our grovelling attempts to ingratiate ourselves earn us only contempt and humiliation.

Some alliance.
Report Spam   Logged

Be careful what you ask for - you might get it
Lippytarian
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4656


I am a banana



Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Starter
« Reply #107 on: November 28, 2011, 07:49:53 pm »

The UK's legal system has not been changed by the EU.

Rubbish. Hitherto it has been a requirement for anyone seeking an extradition order for a Brit ti produce a prima facie case against him. The UAW overrides and negates that requirement thereby changing the law of England.

It is over-fishing that has destroyed the fishing grounds.

Agreed, and if we`d remained in control of our fishing grounds there would have been no overfishing because we would not have allowed it. Remember the `Cod Wars`? or are you too young? That was Iceland, the same thing applied to us.

It is an abomination.

It is indeed. Afdter floods or Tsunami in Sri Lankja their prime Minister said "Wer are very grateful for your kind aid" but he added ruefully "But it would help us much more if you`d lift your tarif against our shrimp imports"

The HRA is not an EU thing. It is an Act of the UK Parliament passed in 1998. Long overdue but nevertheless an excellent and noble thing which guarantees to us the rights defined by the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.



As I understand it the HRA empowers the European Declaration of Human Rights which empowers the UNDHR. But it is Europe which makes us toe the line not the UN, and the only bits I want to see changed are the stupidity of those which prevent us from deporting criminals and illegal immigrants and in their places deport the ludicrous judges which go along with it.




Twice I`ve tried to post this and twice when I try to upload the screen says `Oops. The page is broken` or something equally infuriating.

The current extradition arrangements under the EAW are not perfect, but are a great improvement on what we had before where it was far too easy for criminals to escape the law just by choosing the right country to take refuge. And the extradition arrangements among the EU partners are symmetrical, not like the arrangements we have with the US. Those are the ones you should properly be complaining about.

Again, Europe is not "making us toe the line" on the HRA. There is a twist in your mind which prevents you from properly understanding anything about European collaboration. Another telling symptom of this disease is that you believe the UNDHR became a bad thing when the word "European" was attached to it.

The UK in the person of Churchill was instrumental in setting up the European Court of Human Rights. In 1951 WE CHOSE to place ourselves under its jurisdiction and 46 other nations have done the same. NOBODY DID THIS TO US!

The main reason for passing the HRA in 1998 was not particularly to change the rights that UK citizens have, those rights were already established in the Strasbourg Court. The main purpose of the HRA was to streamline the legal process, so that matters relating to human rights could be resolved locally in the UK courts rather than having to pass these cases through to Strasbourg.

It requires an implaccable refusal to accept even the most basic facts, even when they are explained over and over again, to turn any of this into an evil conspiracy that is taking our sovereignty away.
Report Spam   Logged

Be careful what you ask for - you might get it
catfish
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #108 on: November 29, 2011, 12:35:27 pm »

One last thing. How can it be ok for the US to station 1000s of its troops on our soil, use our islands as an unsinkable aircraft carrier, and a missile launching platform, a base for secret torture and rendition flights, to pretty much take over our foreign policy including as we have seen in the last decade deciding when we shall go to war and with whom. All this with not so much as a murmeri

I think john as answered those points in his post

. Then when a club of European nations of which we are a leading member agree to limit working hours to 48 hours a week or we all agree to use energy-efficient light bulbs that is a mortal blow to our sovereignty.

I have yet to meet anyone who likes the new bulbs  and the general view is we should have kept the incandescent ones
We should certainly not have had to change to them on the EU’s say so
Like wise with the working time directive that should be a matter between the Government , trade unions and the employers not the EU
Report Spam   Logged
John
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506




Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Voter
« Reply #109 on: November 29, 2011, 02:56:31 pm »

America couldn't give a stuff about us. Had it not been for Pearl Harbour they would have sat on their hands and watched Europe burn.

But they DID have Pearl Harbour, and they DID pull our chestnuts out.
It`s quite normal, we sat back and watched them get beaten and humiliated in Vietnam.

The current extradition arrangements under the EAW are not perfect, but are a great improvement on what we had before

So the loss of Habeas Corpus is a good thing is it?
Are you aware that when you parked in that car park overnight in France had someone wished to blame you for causing damage to his car he could have taken out a EAW and our courts would have HAD to send you unless you spent a hell of a lot of money for lawyers like the young lady I mentioned previously.
That really is a great improvement.

CFP. Nothing to say about that?

HRA. Read it again. I want the bits which stop us deporting crims and illegals. You are bloody tiresome when you put words in my mouth.

The UK in the person of Churchill

I dont have time to research that to see how you are misrepresenting him.
If he did so it was to stop the French and Germans tearing Europe apart every few years.
For us it was, and is, unnecessary
Report Spam   Logged
Lippytarian
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4656


I am a banana



Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Starter
« Reply #110 on: December 02, 2011, 07:50:29 am »

So the loss of Habeas Corpus is a good thing is it?

Habeas Corpus has not been lost. If the UK police have a warrant for your arrest they can arrest you and detain you while you go through a process that is not perfect, but is for the most part a competent legal procedure to determine your guilt or innocence. Under the EAW, the UK police can issue a warrant for your arrest which is valid across the EU not just in the UK. This is a good idea, because it replaces the morass of bilateral extradition arrangements which made it all too easy for criminals to escape the law by crossing national borders.

... like the young lady I mentioned previously.

The case you are referring to is that of Tracey Molamphy, right?

Why assume her claims are accurate, coming out as they do more than 3 years after the event as she finally decides she wants to launch a lawsuit? Wouldn't it be interesting to hear what the Portuguese and German authorities had to say about what happened and why it was done? And even in the unlikely event that things are exactly as the Daily Mail would have you believe, why assume that was in any way representative of the operation of the EAW? I don't see any judicial or civil rights organisations denouncing the EAW. And it is hardly unknown for the odd foul-up by the police in the UK and since Tracey Molamphy was arrested there have been 1000s of extraditions under the EAW which the Daily Mail can't find anything to complain about.

CFP. Nothing to say about that?

You ludicrous comment:"if we`d remained in control of our fishing grounds there would have been no overfishing because we would not have allowed it. Remember the `Cod Wars`? or are you too young? That was Iceland, the same thing applied to us." didn't merit a reply. Because it was so self-evidently a piece of puffed-up blind faith that runs perfectly contrary to the known facts that I couldn't hope with mere words to amplify how hilarious it was. But since you insist....

The only reason we demanded to fish so close to the Icelandic coast was because we had fished-out our own stocks nearer to home. This we had done relentlessly for decades before we ever came under the jurisdiction of the CFP.

Since fish have little regard for national boundaries, it is self-evident that stocks can only be preserved (if we should ever acquire a genuine desire to do so) through pan-continental agreement.

I dont have time to research that to see how you are misrepresenting him. If he did so it was to stop the French and Germans tearing Europe apart every few years. For us it was, and is, unnecessary

That's right. You have the power to re-write history. You have no need to research the facts. You have your xenophobic faith and that trumps everything. This is not news.
Report Spam   Logged

Be careful what you ask for - you might get it
John
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506




Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Voter
« Reply #111 on: December 02, 2011, 06:12:14 pm »

Had she been extradited back to Portugal, she faced months in custody awaiting trial

This could not happen to her in England thanks to habeas corpus and the presumption of innocence both of which are unknown in some foreign countries.
Since the EAW requires her to be arrested and deported, without a prima facie case being meda against her, to where such things to take place it has overidden Habeas Corpus and Magna Carta.
Should she have been misguided enough to travel to one of the former communist E European countries I shudder to think what atrocities might have been visited upon her.

Why assume her claims are accurate,

Why should you suppose that they are not?

Portuguese and German authorities had to say about what happened and why it was done?

That is the whole point of my objection for chrissake. They dont have to.

I don't see any judicial or civil rights organisations denouncing the EAW.

Liberty
UKIP
Big Brother Watch
Fair Trials International.

And both Cameron and Clegg opposed the EAW in opposition.

Took me about five minutes to find them. Would you like me to find some more?

That's right. You have the power to re-write history. You have no need to research the facts. You have your xenophobic faith and that trumps everything. This is not news.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Rewrite history? You need help. What facts have I failed to research? It is a FACT that the Germans and French have started two wars in the twentieth century. Can you name any wars in Europe which we have started in the same century?
Report Spam   Logged
Lippytarian
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4656


I am a banana



Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Starter
« Reply #112 on: December 04, 2011, 11:40:41 am »

Re the EAW it is exactly as I said. The system is a great improvement on what preceded it, it is not perfect and it needs refining. Sir Scott Baker, a former senior judge, recently published his report recommending some improvements. Nobody who knows what they are talking about is calling for the EAW to be scrapped. This is what Fair Trials International has to say:

Fair Trials International has long campaigned for important reforms to be made to the European Arrest Warrant which, in 2010, led to the extradition of over 1,000 people from the UK alone. We have highlighted many cases of injustice caused by a lack of basic safeguards in this fast-track system and gave detailed written and oral evidence to the inquiry. We welcome the Review’s findings and now urge the UK Government to act on them urgently to build a fairer system of extradition within Europe.

Re Churchill, you refuse to believe the facts surrounding what Churchill did and said in the years after the war, and you said you couldn't be bothered to look it up. This is because it doesn't fit with your xenophobic faith-based ideas which would go off pop if they could ever be brought into contact with reality. As for your repeated assertion that the only real problem that exists in Europe is one involving Germany and France, well, best to politely draw a veil across that little gem.
Report Spam   Logged

Be careful what you ask for - you might get it
John
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506




Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Voter
« Reply #113 on: December 04, 2011, 09:50:14 pm »

I didn`t say I couldn`t be bothered I said I didn`t have time.
I`ve had time now so read this. READ IT All

www.globalpolitician.com/print.asp?id=4372
Report Spam   Logged
John
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506




Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Voter
« Reply #114 on: December 04, 2011, 10:00:53 pm »

As for your repeated assertion that the only real problem that exists in Europe is one involving Germany and France,

I did not so assert. I said that the main reason for the existance of the EU was to prevent the French and Germans tearing into each other every few years. Just as Churchill said.
The secondary aim of course was so that people like Jacques Delors could do what Napolean, Bismark and Hitler all tried and failed to do;to take over the whole of Europe.
Report Spam   Logged
Lippytarian
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4656


I am a banana



Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Starter
« Reply #115 on: December 05, 2011, 09:05:03 am »

I didn`t say I couldn`t be bothered I said I didn`t have time.
I`ve had time now so read this. READ IT All

www.globalpolitician.com/print.asp?id=4372

Your point being what? That Churchill was by then an internationalist, always talking up the UN, advocating that a "United States of Europe" with as many members as possible should be started. That he personally was one of the founding fathers of the Council of Europe. That he was Prime Minister when the European Convention of Human Rights came into force, which is administered by the Strasbourg Court and finally now embodied in UK law as the Human Rights Act.

From the vantage point of the unique insights and experiences he had gained, Churchill's judgement was that long-term peace in Europe could be secured only by a "United States of Europe". Whether he would have concluded in the 1970s that the UK should join the far less ambitious "ever closer Union" which had by then been created cannot be known, though that was the conclusion of his (Tory) successors. Because things had changed by then. The UK was in freefall as a world power, the Empire was gone, the economy crumbling, the Commonwealth that Churchill saw as our power-base had become an irrelevance.
Report Spam   Logged

Be careful what you ask for - you might get it
John
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506




Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Voter
« Reply #116 on: December 06, 2011, 02:55:02 pm »

Your point being what?

My point being that you lied when you said that Churchill wanted us in a United Europe during that speech. He did not.
That is all that I said so for chrissake stop puting words in other people`s mouth. i.e. Mine and Churchill`s.
Report Spam   Logged
Lippytarian
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4656


I am a banana



Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Starter
« Reply #117 on: December 08, 2011, 06:29:47 am »

Your point being what?

My point being that you lied when you said that Churchill wanted us in a United Europe during that speech. He did not.
That is all that I said so for chrissake stop puting words in other people`s mouth. i.e. Mine and Churchill`s.

Posted with no obvious sense of irony. Where did I claim that? Nowhere!
Report Spam   Logged

Be careful what you ask for - you might get it
John
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506




Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Voter
« Reply #118 on: December 17, 2011, 06:32:28 pm »

Posted with no obvious sense of irony. Where did I claim that? Nowhere!

OK I was wrong when I said you referred to Churchill`s speech.
My mistake.
My apology.

Doesn`t alter the fact that he did NOT recommend that we should join a EU,

You put words in his mouth.
Report Spam   Logged
Lippytarian
Hero
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4656


I am a banana



Badges: (View All)
Combination Topic Starter Poll Starter
« Reply #119 on: December 18, 2011, 09:48:43 am »

You put words in his mouth.

Where?
Report Spam   Logged

Be careful what you ask for - you might get it
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy