Comments on: Common Purpose admit to illegal disclosures

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 11:59:35 +0000

These common Purpose graduates are so negative. They desperately need help with their mental conditioning before they try to take the rest of us with them. That is if we are stupid enough to believe them and take on their conditioning like a computer virus.
By knowing how the mind works one is totally immune to mind viruses and mind control.

By: Lickyalips

Lickyalips — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 16:39:08 +0000

Andy, if Common Purpose is as benign as you suggest, why all the secrecy surrounding the organisation and its members?

By: wonkotsane

wonkotsane — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:15:21 +0000

Andy, their website and Julia Middleton’s book talk about their new world order where their people will lead us serfs.

By: axel

axel — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:19:19 +0000

Andy, you are educated and forward thinking, that makes you a pariah here

But seriously, your ways are not the same as ours, so we will argue with you and call you rude names but that is not to say you should not join in, I’m sure you have lots of good valid ideas, that we will be happy to assimilate.

I think the fear and hatred of your gang is because we dont know what you actually do, is it true you sniff each others bums, like dogs do? Or is that an unfounded rumour?

You should evangelise about CP and try and convert us

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:47:01 +0000

I’m really sorry, and I feel that perhaps I’m talking to a very biased audience here, but Common Purpose are not a bunch of communist or marxists or whatever. It is simply an organisation that facilitates people’s learning about the society around them. Perhaps if you actually spoke to any of the delegates or staff and not listened to your own bullshit you might learn a thing or two and realise that these are all normal people, not some conspirators of some ‘new world order’.

By: axel

axel — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 07:27:24 +0000

Stan

I think big companies are bad, or rather badly run and inefficient, so that does include the utilities or the old nationalised industriies as was. They are too big to react to real life situations and modify successfully

By: Stan

Stan — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:05:18 +0000

“Marxist things have the unfortunate tag of being regarded as monolithic, large, inefficient and lowest common denominator crap service”

That could be any of the Utilities

By: axel

axel — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:06:02 +0000

Charlie

Marxist things have the unfortunate tag of being regarded as monolithic, large, inefficient and lowest common denominator crap service

By: axel

axel — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:03:27 +0000

I think a question we should ask ourselves is, ‘Who “runs” our country, parliment or the civil service’?

There is a conspiracy theory that it is the Civil Service mandarins and if they dont like a policy, they let the MPs formulate and legislate on their own but if it is something they do care about, they do it properly. Hence the clusterfuck that tried to ban fox hunting, which had minimal suport from them

By: Charlie Marks

Charlie Marks — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:06:00 +0000

You don’t think there’s anything a bit Marxist about the country being run by unelected committees made up of “business leaders” and “community leaders”?

Erm, no. There’s nothing marxist about this. Middleton was in the Communist Party, which was against the EU and against big business control of the country – it still is actually. They’ve even come round to supporting an English parliament.

By: axel

axel — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 14:04:12 +0000

i wonder…..

…is common purpose a real threat or is it just a target set up by the NWO people to keep all you conspiracy junkies happy, entertained and away from the real business?

I always thought that about fox hunting and nuclear weapons, they did not do much, affect many people but got a lot of peoples attention and that seemed to be the only purpose they served, to give people something to whine about.

Are Common Purpose the same? They seem to espouse a set of theories that are quite distant from the grubby political miasma that is Westminster, is that such a bad thing? Would you nrather have a powerful civil servant doing things based on Gordo Browns beleifs or on a set of beleifs that are not tarnished with the carnival style performances that seem to be the mark of our current party parly?

Who does more damage to us? A civil servant indoctrinated by Labour, Conservatives or common purpose? Or are they all a bunch of useless cheesy cocks?

By: Stop Common Purpose

Stop Common Purpose — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 10:06:29 +0000

If Common Purpose has nothing to hide, if Common Purpose is not sinister, then why do organisations keep from the public the names of persons who have attended Common Purpose courses? What have they to hide?

http://www.stopcp.com

By: Lickyalips

Lickyalips — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 09:05:28 +0000

The reason the Charity Commission takes its time in responding to requests about Common Purpose is because the head of the Commission is a Common Purpose graduate, as are most Quango executives and public authority leaders.

By: wonkotsane

wonkotsane — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 05:49:19 +0000

Charlie, Julia Middleton used to be a Marxist activist. You don’t think there’s anything a bit Marxist about the country being run by unelected committees made up of “business leaders” and “community leaders”?

Henry, I don’t have the list because it’s not something you can get by FOI as it’s personal details of other people. The only way to find out if your name is on it is to do a Subject Access Request under the DPA to Common Purpose themselves.

By: Sir Henry Morgan

Sir Henry Morgan — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 22:00:45 +0000

Do me (and maybe you too in the longer term, re Common Purpose)a favour – root through the list you have and check if the name Henry (or H) Morgan is on it.

I ask because if it is then there\’s a CPer in my council. Yet in response to FoI requests from at least two different people (I\’m one), my council has stated that not one penny has been paid to CP for courses for staff or councillors).

Where I live, CP has the option of using an org. called Renew Northwest as a cutout – but the accounts dept (files requested under the Audit Commission Act 1998) has denied any payments made to CP or Renew Northwest.

Am I one of the 130? They might have me on two counts – 1/ The FoI request and 2/ I\’m a locally known BNP party official.

By: Charlie Marks

Charlie Marks — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 01:23:09 +0000

Wonko – They’re anti-democratic, yes. But marxist? Well, ex-marxist. Reminds me of that joke Brown kept telling last year: Reagan is told new Swedish PM Olof Palme is an anti-communist and Reagan says, “I don’t care what kind of communist he is!”

I think we can safely assume that the following high-ranking members of Common Purpose are not marxists:

Mark Adams, Chief Executive, Netcare Healthcare UK
Sir David Bell, Chairman, Financial Times Group and Director for People, Pearson plc
Dr. Christoph Brand, Managing Director, Goldman Sachs, Germany
John Inge, Bishop of Worcester, Diocese of Worcester
Deepak Kapoor, Executive Director, PricewaterhouseCoopers
James Ramsbotham, Chief Executive, North East Chamber of Commerce
Philip Wright, Partner, Pricewaterhouse Coopers

These folks listed at the .org common purpose site, which gives you a rather scary insight into how international the whole thing is…

As for Cameron’s New Tories doing anything, Man in a Shed – please, my sides are aching, they’d be more likely to join Common Purpose than ban it!

By: Man in a Shed

Man in a Shed — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 17:27:44 +0000

As a result of some posts on the internet I’ve started to take a concerned look at Common Purpose.

I asked my sister in law who has public sector contacts and one of her friends has been on their course. She refused to speak to me about it, but admitted to my sister-in-law that she could see where the concern came from.

What’s key here is to make sure the next next Conservative administration does something about them.

If only we could get Guido involved, he needs a charity to get his teeth into after dispathing the Smith Inst.

By: revinkevin

revinkevin — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 12:22:49 +0000

There are lots of FOI request about common purpose on the What do they know site:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/search/%22common%20purpose%22

By: Letters From A Tory

Letters From A Tory — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 08:23:15 +0000

The charity commission are so bloody spineless. It takes them months to look into the most simple cases.

By: wonkotsane

wonkotsane — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 06:21:02 +0000

Jules, they’re an anti-democratic marxist training “charity” that trains “leaders” to “lead beyond their authority” and work towards Common Purpose’s “new world order” where Common Purpose trained people run the country via unelected quangos.

Charlie, I’ll let you know what the score is with the Information Commissioner.

The full article, just in case it’s taken down, is as follows:

Leadership training charity Common Purpose is taking legal advice about what it claims is a concerted, defamatory attack by right-wing political groups.

Several websites claim that the charity is dedicated to promoting the power of the EU, and the British National Party describes the organisation’s employees as “traitors”.

A statement on the BNP site reads: “The day will come when these people will have to answer for their crimes to this country.”

Earlier this year, Eurosceptic Conservative MP Philip Davies wrote to the Charity Commission to question Common Purpose’s charitable status (4 June, p4).

David Bell, a Common Purpose trustee, denied that it had a pro-EU agenda. “I have been closely involved with Common Purpose for more than 10 years and this is simply not the case,” he said.

Another website, Stop CP, encourages readers to submit Freedom of Information requests to their local authorities to find out who has attended the charity’s training courses.

A spokeswoman for Common Purpose said that the charity was concerned at the volume of FOI requests being made about it. “These appear to have the aim of causing disruption and harassment to Common Purpose as a third party, and, consequently, to the public authority itself,” she said.

Common Purpose now forwards its list of 130 previous FOI requests, including names of applicants, to help local authorities decide whether new requests about the charity are vexatious.