Bias can take many forms. One the most basic is the use of language; consistently misrepresenting a subject can render coverage totally one-sided. In the case of the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, which is taking place today, the BBC decided some time ago that the treaty itself was about “simplifying the EU”. Liz McKean on Newsnight last night deployed the phrase at the beginning of her report; and it’s also here, on the BBC website. I’ve heard it used in almost every report about the topic, to the point of it being a mantra. Somebody, somewhere in the ranks of two thousand BBC journalists decided it was the correct description.

But I despise the EU, hate the whole exercise and want out. And to me – and those like me on sites like the excellent EU Referendum – the treaty is anything but “simplification”. That’s what Brussels itself calls it, the propaganda it has rammed it through by using. The reality is that every aspect of Lisbon is a stupifyingly complex, labyrinthine, anything-but-simple, slow motion coup d’etat through which the unelected and undemocratic ruling elite at the Barlaymont is creating further integration in the moves towards a Stalinist superstate. If you doubt me, you can read the document here.

The BBC loves the concept of “simple” because it wants with every sinew to allow the EU to ram through more measures on climate change, and because it will make the sainted Tony Blair the first EU president. What can be more “simplifying” than that?

Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to "SIMPLIFYING THE EU"

  1. cassandra king says:

    They claim that the constitution will ‘streamline’ the institutions and decision making process.
    Hmmmm, what does that realy mean? Stalins USSR was streamlined, you did what what the boss wanted or his chum Beria payed you a visit and you were either ‘retired’ after a lengthy ‘chat’ with a rubber hose/pliers/hammer or sent to a workers ‘rest home’ in Siberia.

    Very streamlined eh?

    Dictatorships are very fond of ‘streamlining’ the role of government, they decide and the population obeys(or else), democracy is messy and time consuming, people differ and the majority rules the day via a one person one vote system and the government has to represent the voters or they get booted out of office.
    All very irritating for the polititians, the career polititians are at the mercy of the voter, its not much of a career if the voter hands you a P45 after a couple of years is it?
    How much better for the political classes if they can remove the ‘sword of Damocles’ that is the voter from over their heads and position that implement over the heads of the voter instead!#

    As with all things in life the following is true: WHO BENEFITS?

    Streamlining is just a nice word for ever closer dictatorship, the political ruling class want it, they also want the constitution to enable a system that hands them not only perpetual power but perpetual power over a whole continent, they are rigging the system to suit themselves.
    The whole EU system is being built to disenfranchise the ordinary voter and create a system where the elite enjoy more and more power with less and less acountability, its an ever tightening noose and the consitution is the rope!
    The end result of the streamlining process using the constitution is going to to be a streamlined dictatorship, its the only logical conclusion when you consider the players involved.their motives and the potential rewards for those pushing it.

    Freedoms are never stolen, they are given away and once they are given away they are very difficult to get back.


    • cassandra king says:

      What has the BBC got to do with the above post?

      It comes back to the golden rule of ‘who benefits’, the BBC is in a prime position to become the sole voice of the new EUSSR, do you wonder why the BBC has never critisised the consitution, why they are so keen to hide the consequences and dangers from us?
      The BBC employs the tactics of ‘hide and misdirect’ where the EU is concerned, they are experts at the art of media manipulation and they are using these tactics in support of the coming EUSSR dictatorship.
      The BBC is a multi billion pound media empire, they do not have to worry about where the income comes from because its an enforced taxation, people are made to pay or the thugs pay you a visit and make you pay, a perfect system for a dictatorship isnt it? The ordinary citizen is forced to finance the media empire which promotes the political empire, notice how the citizen is being forced and coerced more and more with ever more petty rules and regulations, notice how a whole new layer of petty laws,enforcement and regulation is coming into being, slowly but surely the new dictaorship is taking shape.
      On the spot fines, petty regulations regarding rubbish and recycling was never about recycling, its all about conditioning the population, its all about control and power, you do what they tell you when they tell you to do it(its for your own good!?) they are training the population to follow orders and it always starts with small things, we are being trained like beasts of burdon, trained for the halter and once in that halter thats where we stay!
      Everything about the BBC smacks of an elitist monolith, their whole corporate ethos, their outlook and their evolution as a dominant media empire. Its very easy to see them in the role as the voice of a dictatorship isnt it? A new voice for a new dictatorship, the BBC and the EUSSR suit each other perfectly.


  2. Bob says:

    all your post proves is you have an opinion, when it comes to an impartial view who would I rather believe here?

    note: I’m anti-lisbon


    • Guest says:

      I agree and often disagree with the main authors and many posters here. 

      It’s a blog, so there is bound to be opinion. The thing is that I do come closer to being better informed by well put viewpoints (especially when well referenced and put).

      Having read all so far posted above I tend to believe those who say something worthwhile and explain why, as opposed to caring less about those who seem to think they can persuade by irony-free one liners about their own beliefs and why they are just ‘right’. 

      Something the BBC, and its acolytes, might try and grasp.

      note: I am pro objective, balanced reporting, especially by a national broadcaster who I am required to fund. Not ‘streamlining’, which seems yet another less than credible attempt at dumbing things down and selectively editing to enhance narratives, interpret events, etc.

      It is to be hoped that the notion of a process that results in ‘President Blair’ might give Irish voters at least some pause to ponder.


    • cassandra king says:


      The key is always do not believe anyone! Find out the facts for yourself.

      Nobody is impartial, everyone has their own interpretation of events and reality, the question is of course who sounds more plausible to your ear.
      Everything in the political world is opinion based, there are no imparial observers and those who claim it are either lying or blind to it.
      I have an opinion based on my interpretation of reality, it may be wrong, it may be right or somewhere in between, you and others may read my post and think ‘what utter tripe’ BUT it does make you think doesnt it?
      This site makes you think, this site provides a multitude of opinions and the reader has to sift and sort the data through the unique filter that is the human mind.
      The difference between the BBC and the B-BBC is that this site offers a full spectrum of views and its upto the reader to digest and filter the evidence and then come to their own conclusions, the BBC however delivers a predigested one sided easy to understand ready made package, its much easier than the former because all the work has been done already, its almost like a human being fed all their food via an intravenus drip in order to save the effort of choosing/eating/digesting, yes its easier and is more efficient but is that good?

      You ask ‘who should I believe?’ Believe yourself, gather all the information availible listen to opinions and then make your own choice.
      Anyone who tells you they are impartial is almost certainly lying whether they know it or not.


    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      Actually, it seems like the BBC is reporting on the Irish vote from the Brussels perespective.  They act as if it’s a given that the treaty is a good thing, that Ireland cannot afford to vote no.  And the reporting assumes that viewpoint.


  3. Grant says:

    I seem to remember there were quite a few quotes from EU “leaders”  that the Treaty had been made deliberately complex and obscure so that people could not understand it.  Don’t actually have any to hand , but I am sure they are out there.


  4. Grant says:


    You have really surpassed yourself with your posts above and saved me the time and effort  !
    My late father was an expert on the Soviet Union in his profession and warned me over 30 years ago about the objectives of the “European Project” and the role the BBC would play.  Pretty much as you outlined above.


    • cassandra king says:

      Cheers Grant!

      It means a lot coming from a top poster like you. I watch,listen learn and try to put it all together as best I can.
      The nature of dictatorships, their lifecycle has a pretty much set DNA/roadmap, after all when you consider its all been done before and the grotesque dance is just one of many, its quite easy to see whats going on isnt it?


  5. George R says:

    A small  explanatory addition is needed to following BBC headline(and provided by me, in brackets) – and there is space:

    BBC report:

    “Shoe thrown at IMF chief”  (in Islamic Turkey).


    The BBC’s political reflexive response in omitting the words ‘Islamic’ and ‘Turkey’ from its headline can have nothing to do with any possible  BBC predilection to play the dhimmi  in this? That the BBC never wants to do anything which may be perceived as an insult by Muslims? And the BBC, like Labour/ Lib Dems(and Tories?) wants Turkey in EU?

     (I will be told by pro-BBC activists that any link between shoe throwing-Islam-Turkey is preposterous, and was rightly excluded by the BBC from its headline.)

     Incidentally, talking of the IMF:

    “Self-confident IMF reads Britain the riot act”



  6. Martin says:

    Bob, you really don’t get it do you? Why come to a free blog and not expect opinion? The BBC is a state funded broadcaster and has a duty to provide balance.

    All of the beeboid reporting starts with the premise that the EU is good and that any opposition to change is somehow bad.

    The BBC of course takes EU money on a regular basis and THIS should be highlighted in every BBC report about the EU. How can the beeboids be impartial when they have a financial interest in the EU?


    • Bob says:

      I don’t mind opinion – but you cannot identify bias with opinions, that is what many do not realise on here – hate the bbc all you want, but to show bias you need neutral evidence

      the allegations of bias about this topic in particular seem to be that the bbc aren’t sufficiently negative enough


      • cassandra king says:


        I see your point, opinion isnt poof of bias on its own but please read the many examples of actual bias and tune out the opinion contained within.
        Its quite possible to filter out and select the information you require without scrapping the whole example because it shows opinion, the BBC is no stranger to opinion, they engage in opinion forming,opinion shaping,opinion manipulating all the time, are their opinions more valid than yours or mine?
        Just because they peddle their opinions dressed up as news doesnt make it right.

        Heres an example for you:

        The BBC stated often that the Irish vote ‘is NOT going to be a judgement on a hated national government and that it will be decided on the basis of Irelands economic situation only’ how do the BBC know that this is the case? When you examine that statement isnt it obvious that they are trying to shape opinion?
        Stranger still, this ‘opinion’ is the exact same stance of the national goverment/yes campaign.

        Both the BBC and the yes camp are of the same opinion, does it not set off an alarm bell in your mind, all you have to do is watch the BBC political output and make the effort to look for the BBC narrative and it becomes clear.

        Many of us do not wish for a negative BBC, we wish for a BBC that states no opinion whatsover, I want information only and enough of it to be able to make my own mind up.


      • Guest says:


        You post politely, and articulately and are hence worth according time, but when you write such as ‘…what many do not realise on here…’ don’t you feel that a teensie bit of the mindset ‘many on here’ find more than presumptuous and patronising from too many in the ‘let us tell you how you think ‘cos we’re either ‘righter’ or smarter’ national broadcaster might be creeping in?


  7. Gosh says:

      Oops I think I should have posted this here, this is biased bbc on the bbc. 


  8. George R says:

     The ‘Daily Mail’s Stephen Glover makes a point about the EU which the BBC doesn’t:

    “How grotesque that, denied a vote of our own on EU superstate, the Irish verdict will dictate Britain’s fate, too”

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1217529/STEPHEN-GLOVER-How-grotesque-denied-vote-EU-superstate-Irish-verdict-dictate-Britains-fate-too.html#ixzz0So7bSuRG


  9. Mailman says:

    You know what I havent heard today on al beeb? That the Irish have already voted no before.

    Wonder why no context is being given around the number of times the Irish have had to vote…why its almost like the poor Irish will have to vote until they get the right decision!



  10. Gosh says:

    It looks like yes.