[zb]
anorak:
Carryfast:
(2) Which part of Britain is the 2nd highest net contributor to the tune of 10bn as of 2013 and probably more for 2014 don’t you understand.Or should that be don’t want to understand.
According to the Telegraph article you linked above (after editing your initially vacuous post), Germany’s net contribution to the EU was about 50% greater than GB’s. How do you square that with your earlier rant about pro-German conspiracies, or whatever drivel it was?
I think you selectively missed the bit that Germany’s payments are higher because its economy is stronger in the form of a trade surplus with the EU.
As for pro German conspiracy its economy is probably actually a lot stronger to an arguably understated level v the over stated level of the strength ours which has been in trade deficit with the EU since we entered it.In large part as I said on the basis of the import of manufactured German goods that we previously made for ourselves.Also bearing in mind Germany’s war repayments being conditional on it maintaining a position of trade surplus.All of which would fit Heath’s idea that our membership of the EU was all about ‘preventing another war in Europe’ obviously by way of economic appeasement of Germany.
In which case it would have been better for Churchill and his warmonger cronies to have thought along those lines in 1914.By concentrating on our own economy and minding our own business and looking after ourselves and only bother Germany if they bothered us.Which is why Sweden and Switzerland are where they are today. 
Bewick:
To sum up then ! When the UK was eventually allowed to join the “Common Market” membership was “sold” to us as just being part of a European trading group ! However it has turned, or is steadily turning, into both a Political and Monetary Superstate,I wonder if the devious [zb] had spelled out the true aims of the “EU” at the time of the first referendum in '75 they would have got a YES vote,doubtful I would say ! Cheers Bewick.
Having been actively on the side of the out campaign in the day but ironically refused the chance to vote by Wilson’s pro EU ‘government’.No the out campaign made the Federal government control aspects of the treaty of Rome perfectly clear.
youtube.com/watch?v=K1R3TgChPsU 3.27-3.46
While even the idea of a ‘trading group’ just effectively meant removing any right to control the trade balance by way of tarrifs/barriers.
C/F, May I remind you that if old Churchill hadn’t been around to stop your German Mates You wouldn’t have been here today & talking ■■■■■ on this thread, So why don’t you just ■■■■ off to Germany & bore them with all the crap that you put on here. You ■■■■■■, Regards Larry.
Lets all club together and buy him a soapbox, so that he can stand in Hyde Park and spout on speakers corner. 
Dave the Renegade:
Lets all club together and buy him a soapbox, so that he can stand in Hyde Park and spout on speakers corner.
Dave I don’t think that even the Cockneys would listen to him, They might even chuck him in the Thames, I wish Ha Ha, Regards Larry.
Carryfast:
I think you selectively missed the bit that Germany’s payments are higher because its economy is stronger in the form of a trade surplus with the EU.
Would this be because its manufacturing industry does a better than average job, so earns a greater reward?
Lawrence Dunbar:
C/F, May I remind you that if old Churchill hadn’t been around to stop your German Mates You wouldn’t have been here today & talking [zb] on this thread, So why don’t you just [zb] off to Germany & bore them with all the crap that you put on here. You ■■■■■■, Regards Larry.
You do know that ‘stop them’ in this case meant supporting France and Russia in an act of aggression against Germany’s borders in support of Serb Nationalism.Bearing in mind what happened in Ireland during the period in question.The result being a catastrophic war which wrecked both economies.Eventually leading to Heath’s economic appeasement idea to stop Germany kicking off again.
[zb]
anorak:
Carryfast:
I think you selectively missed the bit that Germany’s payments are higher because its economy is stronger in the form of a trade surplus with the EU.
Would this be because its manufacturing industry does a better than average job, so earns a greater reward?
No.As I said economic appeasement based of Heath’s perceived fears of Germany kicking off again.Bearing in mind that both World Wars were a result of the Brit government stupidity in 1914.
TUBBYS BOY THAT WOULD NOT BE MR SMIT and his powder tankers would it■■?
as for the EEC the quicker we are out ,trouble is we will have the mrs hitler from the S.N.P to contend with no BERLIN WALL ,ANOTHER hadrian’s will be needed ,to keep us non E.E.EC MERCHANTS NICE AND COSY…
Lawrence Dunbar:
Dave the Renegade:
Lets all club together and buy him a soapbox, so that he can stand in Hyde Park and spout on speakers corner.
Dave I don’t think that even the Cockneys would listen to him, They might even chuck him in the Thames, I wish Ha Ha, Regards Larry.
Couldn’t do that Larry because the verbal diarrea would pollute it from where he was slung in as far as the English channel then the slick of ■■■■■ would pollute the channel to the Atlantic,good job it would flow that way otherwise it might end up on the Northumbrian coastline 
Cheers Dennis.
deckboypeggy:
TUBBYS BOY THAT WOULD NOT BE MR SMIT and his powder tankers would it■■?
as for the EEC the quicker we are out ,trouble is we will have the mrs hitler from the S.N.P to contend with no BERLIN WALL ,ANOTHER hadrian’s will be needed ,to keep us non E.E.EC MERCHANTS NICE AND COSY…
Well it would keep the brick and block carriers busy if we need to build anew Hadrians wall !! Cheers Bewick.
Carryfast:
[zb]
anorak:
Carryfast:
I think you selectively missed the bit that Germany’s payments are higher because its economy is stronger in the form of a trade surplus with the EU.
Would this be because its manufacturing industry does a better than average job, so earns a greater reward?
No.As I said economic appeasement based of Heath’s perceived fears of Germany kicking off again.Bearing in mind that both World Wars were a result of the Brit government stupidity in 1914.
C/F, You are still spouting ■■■■■■ & I think you first name is Stupidity, Regards Larry.
Bewick:
Lawrence Dunbar:
Dave the Renegade:
Lets all club together and buy him a soapbox, so that he can stand in Hyde Park and spout on speakers corner.
Dave I don’t think that even the Cockneys would listen to him, They might even chuck him in the Thames, I wish Ha Ha, Regards Larry.
Couldn’t do that Larry because the verbal diarrea would pollute it from where he was slung in as far as the English channel then the slick of [zb] would pollute the channel to the Atlantic,good job it would flow that way otherwise it might end up on the Northumbrian coastline Cheers Dennis.
On the subject of verbal zb.So far we’ve got you who reportedly voted for Heath’s lot saying that we should never have joined the EEC/EU.When as we all know Heath wanted in because he was zb scared of the Germans.We’ve got LD saying that we should have gone to war with Germany in 1914.We’ve got Anorak saying that we lost both wars because our kit wasn’t good enough because our engineers etc were useless zb’s who didn’t know how to make stuff. 
And then you’ve got the nerve to say that I’m talking zb because I’m saying that Churchill was a warmongering Conservative idiot who picked a fight with ze Germans when even by his own standards logic would say support them.While Heath was just a typical Federalist Con who like Churchill wasn’t bright enough to know that we’d now be a lot richer ‘if’ we’d have told the Frogs to get stuffed in 1914 and stayed out of the EEC in 1973.
Some really bad history memory here.
-
In 1914 we only got involved because we were supporting Belgium who were invaded. France had an arrangement with Russia which is why they started.
-
We were never asked to vote on an EEC - it was only a Common Market. Yes we were lied to by Heath, Wilson et. all. It was deGaul who kept on our side with his “NON”
It seems to me CF is a bit left of left.
Bewick:
To sum up then ! When the UK was eventually allowed to join the “Common Market” membership was “sold” to us as just being part of a European trading group ! However it has turned, or is steadily turning, into both a Political and Monetary Superstate,I wonder if the devious [zb] had spelled out the true aims of the “EU” at the time of the first referendum in '75 they would have got a YES vote,doubtful I would say ! Cheers Bewick.
I couldn’t have put it better myself. We were asked to vote on whether we wanted to be trading partners within a European organisation. There was no mention of any political agendas whatsoever, so, like the poor simple people that we are, we said, “Yes, please”!
Turned out to be yet another “con” by our political betters, yet another fait accompli (sorry, Saviem!). When will we ever learn? Never, I suspect. We still seem to think that others know best.
Having had my customary rant, I have to say that, in my opinion, it would cost far too much to come out of the union now. And of course, this is what Honest Dave is relying on- he will get his “stay in” vote, but not for the reasons he would like. But in politics, any victory is still a victory.
Politicians all lier’s cheats and most of all legal thieves all this pollitical bs from mention no names . they were all in together all leg work promoting and pushing was done by labour and yes the unions to much time and moneywas pumped into to fail . f!!!ng helmet every decent thread gets ■■■■■■ up by one mans wrapped disturbed views if you were educated enough you would have done the job as you drove a bin waggon for a living says it all . all the proppergander you swollow and still f!!!k it up
Walton man:
Some really bad history memory here.
-
In 1914 we only got involved because we were supporting Belgium who were invaded. France had an arrangement with Russia which is why they started.
-
We were never asked to vote on an EEC - it was only a Common Market. Yes we were lied to by Heath, Wilson et. all. It was deGaul who kept on our side with his “NON”
It seems to me CF is a bit left of left.
(1) You’ve obviously forgotten to include the lead up to Belgium.Including the point that without France declaring neutrality then Germany really had no choice than to use Belgium as a route through on the ( correct ) basis of attack being its only realistic option of defence on the western front.Or the fact that Germany actually ‘reversed’ its ‘original’ western advance when the Kaiser thought that Gray had provided a guarantee of French and Brit neutrality.Or the fact that Churchill had already decided to go to war on the side of France before that point.Partly as a result of Russian threats to Brit interests on India’s north west frontier if we didn’t support its aggressive moves against Germany.
(2) The vote in 1975 was clearly all about honouring the conditions of the treaty of Rome which Heath had signed up to and which the out campaign had made clear involved the issue of loss of sovereignty.As for me being so called left of left.That would depend on wether you view support of a nationalist agenda along the lines of Fordist Capitalist economic policy as ‘left’.On that note I’d suggest that Shore,who I supported,was sidelined having ( arguably rightly ) been seen by the Socialists like Wilson as a Nationalist Labour infiltrator and as such obviously not acceptable to Socialist ideology.On that basis I obviously don’t really recognise the so called defintions of ‘left’ v ‘right’.In just the same way that I view Hitler as much a Socialist as Stalin.In which case it would be interesting to find out where you view those examples on a scale of so called ‘left’ v so called ‘right’.
IF, (and it’s a big IF) the UK can negotiate different conditions I’ll vote to stay in, when/if the referendum does come and the same conditions as there are now are in place, then I’ll vote OUT.
I voted YES for the EEC, I’ve never voted for the EU, none of us have, it has been forced on us and I take a dim view on being dictated to by Europe. Eastern Europe is milking us dry. 
Nobody is telling us what the positive benefits are/would be if we stay in.
And the € is a disaster, thank god we didn’t join that.