That bolded bit isnāt true.
Itās up for interpretation. Letās put it that way.
Also, Odin, itās bloc.
Not sure I did. We now have unelected officials administering a contract written by our government. Thatās a great set of ingredients for quite a cake right there. But, given the decision to bolster our nuclear power generation I dont think we had much choice. Iām still not comfortable with the payment arrangements however. Itās effectively a stealth tax.
Iām waiting for the following angle to start running here (in the England) soonā¦
āSee the craziness thatās going on in the EU, and Europe more broadly, especially the mass support for Russia over in Germany and the French President being so cosy with Putin - better we are out. Build a wall! Build a wall!ā.
Itās OK, weāve already got a fuck off great moat 
But the boats of endless economic migrantsā¦ surely a wall is the best way to avoid any messy āengagementsā. Just from Brighton to Hull should be sufficient. Possibly also a second phase, from Cornwall to Hadrians wall (which is in itself in need of a significant touch up).
A wall around London, running along the route of the M25 would keep any northern rabble away from the important parts of Britain and make shopping at Harrodās so much more pleasant.
Problem with the Nuclear power stations option is that it will simply give more options for politicians and billionaires to get their hand in the till and more " Brown envelopes " for MPĀ“s and billionaires. Like the PPE and similar scandals have.
I think that goes with any centralised system doesnāt it? (at least in the end)
Of course itās easier with nuclear as you need a huge investment to build one.
I respectfully disagree. I canāt see how politicians of that era can be accused of lying when much of the discussions around joining were in the public eye.
https://twitter.com/EmporersNewC/status/1309173696641282048?s=19
I can understand if someone says they didnāt agree with the decision back in the 70ās or that they felt the project moved away from what was initially promised - but to say it was only ever about joining a trading bloc and that politicians lied about it is not true - at least I have not seen any evidence that supports that view.
You can find statements that support the notion it was as much a political union as a trade bloc but also those that sought to downplay it or dismiss the possibility. Principally it was presented as about trade.
Over time the language used to describe the partnership/union has changed. This should tell us something.
Common Market.
EEC (European Economic Community).
European Union.
Come on, itās obvious that a common market means that foreign nations can control our legal system.
I think the resident Russian and Saudis would agree!
Could they?
Great thread