[common purpose] meanwhile, in america

Head honcho UK - "leading" without our authority


Here we go again [Hat Tip Cassandra]:

The latest in a series of new, low-profile efforts to coordinate the unusually focused progressive coalition backing the White House’s goals is a quiet weekly meeting run by a new group called the Common Purpose Project.

The Common Purpose meeting every Tuesday afternoon at the Capitol Hilton brings together the top officials from a range of left-leaning organizations, from labor groups like Change to Win to activists like MoveOn.org, all in support of the White House’s agenda. The group has an overlapping membership with a daily 8:45 a.m. call run by the Center for American Progress’ and Media Matters’ political arms; with the new field-oriented coalition Unity ‘09; and with the groups that allied to back the budget as the Campaign to Rebuild and Renew America Now.

Unlike those other groups, however, the Common Purpose meeting has involved a White House official, communications director Ellen Moran, two sources familiar with the meeting said. It’s aimed, said one, at “providing a way for the White House to manage its relationships with some of these independent groups.”

The group’s founder, political consultant and former Gephardt aide Erik Smith, described it in general terms after others had confirmed its existence. (Emphasis added.)

However, Jane Hamsher let slip who is really behind Common Purpose, calling it “one of the many groups Rahm Emanuel has set up to coordinate messaging among liberal interest groups”:

There are a variety of vehicles through which this is done — the 8:45 am call, Unity 09, Campaign to Rebuild and Renew America — and they’ve been extremely successful. When the banks told the White House they wouldn’t cooperate with the PPIP plan unless they got their bonuses, and the administration made the decision to “ratchet down their rhetoric,” the call went out to the liberal interest groups to stay silent too…and silent they remain.

***

There’s a big problem right now with the traditional liberal interest groups sitting on the sidelines around major issues because they don’t want to buck the White House for fear of getting cut out of the dialogue, or having their funding slashed. Someone picks up a phone, calls a big donor, and the next thing you know…the money is gone. It’s already happened. Because that’s the way Rahm plays.

Of course, the names are different, the backers different but the purpose "common".

[Addition at 20:22: Please do follow the links because below the links are the comments and in many of the comments is a wealth of added information ... plus you can see the concern of so many people ...]

Here is the European model explained:

1. From Ian Parker-Joseph - so many articles here [click this line]

2. Tavistock and Common Purpose

With its purposes now subsumed into Common Purpose, the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London was funded into existence in 1946 with a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation.

One of the Tavistock founders, Dr. John Rawlings Rees, who also became co-founder of the World Federation for Mental Health, talked of infiltrating all professions and areas of society:

‘Public life, politics and industry should all ... be within our sphere of influence ... If we are to infiltrate the professional and social activities of other people I think we must imitate the Totalitarians and organize some kind of fifth column activity!

We must aim to make it permeate every educational activity in our national life ... We have made a useful attack upon a number of professions. The two easiest of them naturally are the teaching profession and the Church: the two most difficult are law and medicine.’

Common Purpose comes into its own in the post-democracy phase of the EU from 2012.

3. Common Purpose first noted and wondered about - read the comments section

4. Common Purpose training methods [also - Groupthink]

5. Service transformation and Common Purpose

6. Psychological profile of a Common Purpose graduate and Julia Middleton's famous Jerk comment

7. From Sonus, on who Common Purpose actually are:

One

Two

Three

[Note: it is Higham's red highlighting below]

So what organisation, among many, works according to Chatham House rules, has advised the UK Government, well nulab, since they were elected, and which is openly working towards a “post democratic” organised society?

Common Purpose!, and who was involved with Common Purpose at its inception? Geoff Mulgan. And which organisation did he represent at that point? Demos!

Who, or what was/is Demos? Demos is a creation of the Fabian Society, and Mulgan, via Demos was special advisor to T Blair. Yes him again, he who currently is employed by J P Morgan! (CFR represented)

And who is Mulgan? Ex LSE lecturer. And who were the original founders of LSE? The Fabian Society.

Who funded Demos, and Common Purpose? The Office of Deputy Prime Minister, ODPM, bruiser, and secretary shagger, Prescott. The ODPM also set up Regional Assemblies in line with EU prescribed geographical organisation structures, their links with local business that reek of moral hazard, and the local slush funds ermm, Regional Development Agencies, to guide finance into local projects, which once again reek of moral hazard. (Split 'em up in separate hierarchies so they can't organise resistance, then bribe 'em so they won't. Classic moves! Tried and tested.)

And all to comply with the EU, and the greater plan for the world and the new self anointed leaders.

And remember the link given previously.

It all becomes one great global organisation, consolidating power on its own terms.

And so we go full circle. Demos is now quietly advising Labour, Conservatives, and LibDems, - there is no difference between them, and no point in voting for them, and that is why they hate the BNP and the Libertarian party.

Mulgan wrote a book “The Invisible Hand Remaking Charities in the 21st Century”, and recently Miliband introduced legislation into the house that would allow charities to become politically active. There are 170,000 charities in the UK, turning over £44B pa. Clearly a problem. Thankfully the attempt failed, but you can see the direction of pressure! .......

[Higham interrupts to insert these on fake charities [read to get a feel for our situation]:

Mark Wadsworth 1
Mark Wadsworth 2]

... Sonus continues ...The Media Standards Trust adjudicates on reports and complaints about media bias.

Look at the list of trustees. Sir David Bell (Chairman, Financial Times Group) is also Common Purpose, -( link below). Robert Peston is also Common Purpose, but he wouldn't want you to know;) The best part is that they share premises with Common Purpose, same rooms, and Common Purpose provides their IT functions.

Represented are, Anthony Salz (Executive Vice Chairman, NM Rothschild) , and Charles Manby (Goldman Sachs) , and best of all, Deputy Chair Julia Middleton (CEO, Common Purpose) .

Common Purpose have clearly got the Media Standards Trust sown up! So when you make a complaint about the BBC bias, who do you think gets to know? They compile lists. Common Purpose graduates in local authorities and other state bodies are also building lists of enquirers under the Freedom of Information Act! What an excellent way to acquire schedules of dissenters!

And Given the CP overwhelming representation, will the adjudication be impartial? Think of the banal justifications presented by the BBC in their answers!

Then look at Common Purpose details.

Common Purpose have progressed since I last looked. Notice the international banks there, Stock Exchanges, Bundesbank, Goldman Sachs, Irish Banks, Dutch Bank, AIG, National Treasury South Africa,

So we go full circle again. Goldman Sachs, (on both), AIG, Anthony Salz (Executive Vice Chairman, NM Rothschild)

This is really interesting.

There are a smattering of CFR names there too, and Bilderberg names too.

The net closes. - - - On us.

This blogsite is a mine of information.

8. Origins and connections of Common Purpose

9. Common Purpose operations in Britain:

Common Purpose’s failure to explain “what common purpose?”, only to say it is “beyond authority” and when pressed as to what that means, answers that it’s to open up leadership opportunities to those not actually in positions of authority. Again, for what common purpose? They are silent.

The new DTI website now has Regulation in the title and deals with regional administration. CP lists these, concerning all their programmes:

• develop outward-facing leadership, as people who can lead beyond their authority can produce change beyond their direct circle of control
• are highly interactive and experiential, through their real-life settings
• are committed to diversity as working with new and different groups of people delivers greater insight, problem-solving and creativity
• operate under a set of international conventions that create an environment in which real challenge can thrive
• are demanding and fun.

Set of international conventions? In an English region? Change beyond their direct circle of control?

So the investigator either becomes a conspiracy theorist and joins the dots himself or else he is left with a fragmented database, no one snippet actually proving anything but tantalizing nonetheless.

Such as Ben Shepherd’s CP recruiting drive page [read the article] showing a young man in isolation and a blurb inviting young people to join. Notice it's supported by supported by Deutsche Bank and you can check out their history. H/T Cassandra

Again, not particularly nefarious although I thought it was British money supporting CP, not Euro.

And check the Julia Middleton video op. cit.: How To Lead When you haven't any authority and her explanation of recruiting procedure [read the article]:

Participants are selected by a local Common Purpose advisory group, consisting of senior leaders in the area covered by the programme.

But leadership for what? Well, clearly for local and regional CP graduates to occupy top places in government, semi-governmental and industry instrumentalities.

But for what and with what common purpose?

That question has been much on MPs’ minds too as they’ve asked many questions in parliament [read the article].

John Trenchard mentions [read the article], for example, Phil Woolas, Minister of State, Department for Communities and Local Government replied to one question about the PEU or riot police:

Since the formation of the Preventing Extremism Unit in October 2006, the unit has made grants of less than £100,000 to: Common Purpose - Muslim Leadership Development Project.

Pardon?

Or what of the 4.8 MB pdf on CP in Bradford, whose Page 1 Google fragment says:

THIS WILL TRANSFORM THE TOWN OVER THE NEXT 20 YEARS. THE FACILITY WILL ... YORKSHIRE FORWARD EXISTS TO CREATE A POWERFUL AND POSITIVE EFFECT ON THE ...... Leeds Common Purpose. Board member. January 2002. Leeds Initiative ...

You can find a partial list of CP controlled organizations here [read the article] .

Indimedia says the organisation now has training programmes in every major town and city in Britain and since 1989 more than 60,000 people have been involved with 20,000 'leaders' completing one or more programmes. These are:

Leaders: Matrix and Focus
Emerging leaders: Navigator
Very young leaders: Your Turn
Leaders who need a local briefing: Profile
National leaders: 20:20

Matrix?

They themselves seem quite proud of it [read the article]:

We run a Common Purpose programme in every major city and town in the UK and in an increasing number of European cities. 12,000 leaders from all sectors and backgrounds have become Common Purpose 'graduates'.

As CP aren’t making their methods available or filing their curricula online, Indimedia believes it is to do with NLP:

NLP is a technique of using words to re-programme the body computer to accept another perception of reality - in this case the consensus agreed by the manipulators before their victims even register for the 'course'. Apparently the CIA refers to these pre-agreed 'opinions' as 'slides'.

Anyone who resists the programming is isolated and the group turned against them until they either conform or lose credibility to be a 'leader'.

Well there’s not a lot new in that – it was the basis of much of our military leadership training – the need to have all think as one.

Winston Leonard got down to it on 15 October 2007, at my site, when he cited Derek Twigg, [Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Veterans), Ministry of Defence) Hansard source] in answer to parliamentary questions:

Sums paid to Common Purpose UK in each of the last complete five financial years, inclusive of VAT, are as follows:

Amount (£)
2002-03 56,576.25
2003-04 66,716.50
2004-05 42,958.00
2005-06 58,456.27
2006-07 83,817.89

"These payments covered the cost of participation by MOD staff in Common Purpose UK's training and education programmes. Programmes of this nature help to develop leadership skills, to gain understanding about broader aspects of government and to share experience with and learn from participants from both the private and public sectors."

One moment please. CP are connected with MOD training? Winston Leonard adds that, with that in mind, consider these two links:

SWRDA who bought delisted MOD territory [read the article]:

The site is being redeveloped by the South West Regional Development Agency and English Partnerships, who purchased it for £10m. Some form of mixed commercial, retail and housing development is planned, but no details are yet concrete.

Norfolk Action Plan [read the article]:

6.2 It was noted that the Unit would be using the services of a Graduate Placement to help drive the Action Plan forward. Members welcomed the report and emphasised the need for a sound regeneration policy and for this to be high priority particularly in the light of recent closures e.g. Crane Fruehauf, Heinz Foods, RAF Coltishall and RAF Neatishead.

It was also highlighted that regeneration could not take place without partnership working across the county including District Councils. Furthermore it was important to remember that the county contained many areas of hidden deprivation.

As to what action plan, read the article. And as for English Partnerships, Wiki is sketchy:

English Partnerships (EP) is the national regeneration agency for England, performing a similar role on a national level to that fulfilled by Regional Development Agencies on a regional level. It is responsible for land acquisition and assembly and major development projects, alone or in joint partnership with private sector developers.

Do you know anything about them? I didn’t before this week.

It’s often difficult to see the forest for the trees. What we have so far is a lot of acitivity on leadership training programmes for vaguely stated purposes, the buying up of property and some connection with the security forces [along with similar moves to EU militias in Europe].

10. Common Purpose disguising themselves behind Citizen's Juries

Hat Tip: James Barlow.

These people are bad news and now they are in America. Founder? Hardly, unless you consider Weishaupt a "founder". It's Twilight's Last Gleaming, America, unless you can unblinker your eyes and make grassroots moves to keep America constitutional.



Good material on Common Purpose

UK Column
CP Exposed
Stop CP
Ken Craggs
BetweenMyths

Some of my own, based on material supplied

Common Purpose - more evidence
Common Purpose dishonesty
An oppressor by any other name
CP - the cancer spreads
OFSTED - the fish rots at the head

Common Purpose at work and play
More than corrupt
Groupthink spreads like a cancer through the UK
Is this how to run a country?
One ring to rule them all
Paradiso and the future of the internet
Demos, Common Purpose, Labour, Tories, security companies
Common Purpose - the disease spreads to the Netherlands
Common Purpose - meanwhile, in America
Groupthink - gentle art of persuasion
Common Purpose - initially to have a coffee
Common Purpose - just the facts, ma'am
Common Purpose - rhetoric of the quisling

References to Common Purpose appear in many other posts.

[common purpose] rhetoric of the quisling

 
You are the Chosen, the voice of the New Age, the Leader of the Future. The Rules are not for such as you...

Though not directly concerning our North American and Antipodaean friends, this actually does concern them very much because they are very much part of the thrust for:

Common Purpose

And what exactly is this common purpose? They state it themselves:

Leading beyond Authority

As Ian Parker-Joseph says:

It began in the UK in 1988, where it has some 45 offices, but has now taken its sun symbol logo into many countries as Common Purpose International.

The real issue is the craziness coming out of Bavaria, Zurich, Paris and New York, not to mention London.

Very easy to spot - diffuse light blues blending into diffuse yellows in their headers, sun symbols, meaningless drivel as taglines, e.g. securing the future today and other balderdash like that. Their pages are slick and businesslike and they use feelgood terminology about "bringing people together" and so on. Second Life, the U.N. and Common Purpose are examples.

On the surface, it's all about management, leadership and the new technological revolution but the rhetoric behind it is exactly the same which Agatha Christie wrote of in N or M [Dodd, Mead & Co., 1941]. It's the same old story - pinpointing likely people in positions of authority or who are likely to be, tweaking their egos by associating them with snippets of the elite which controls the government of the nations, how they'll be part of the crack leadership group sweeping away mismanagement and inefficiency and so on and so on.

An example of one of these Brave New Worlders:

Common Purpose graduate Cressida Dick issued the 'shoot-to-kill' order to police officers that led to an innocent Brazilian electrician, Jean Charles de Menezes [being shot].

It is eugenics and Nietzsche and Zarathustra and things the average pub drinker knows next to nothing of. But I know of it because I was once a possible bright light in the firmament until I showed myself to be "unfit" for purpose and I'm proud of it. But my ego's still there for all to see.

Do read the whole post and follow the links if you were still in any doubt of the common purpose for which this group is simply one small tentacle.

That's the end of this post but there is the text from N or M, by Agatha Christie, Chapter 14:

Do believe me when I say I really admire both you and your husband immensely. You've got grit and pluck. It's people like you who will be needed in the new State — the State that will arise in this country when your present imbecile Government is vanquished. We want to turn some of our enemies into friends — those that are worth while.

Let me impress upon you what so few people in this country seem to understand. Our Leader does not intend to conquer this country in the sense that you all think. He aims at creating a new Britain — a Britain strong in its own power — ruled over, not by Germans, but by Englishmen. And the best type of Englishmen — Englishmen with brains and breeding and courage. A brave new world, as Shakespeare puts it.

We want to do away with muddle and inefficiency. With bribery and corruption. With self-seeking and money-grubbing — and in this new state we want people like you and your husband — brave and resourceful — enemies that that have been, friends to be. You would be surprised if you knew how many there are in this country, as in others, who have sympathy with and belief in our aims.

Among us all we will create a new Europe — a Europe of peace and progress. Try and see it that way — because, I assure you — it is that way...

His voice was compelling, magnetic.

Later, in Chapter 15, the investigating officer concludes:

Amongst them were two chief Constables, an Air Vice-Marshal, two Generals, the Head of an Armaments Works, a Cabinet Minister, many Police Superintendents, Commanders of Local Volunteer Defense Organizations, and various military and naval lesser fry, as well as members of our own Intelligence Force."

Tommy and Tuppence stared. "Incredible!" said the former.

Grant shook his head. "You do not know the force of the ... propaganda. It appeals to something in man, some desire or lust for power. These people were ready to betray their country not for money, but in a kind of megalomaniacal pride in what they, they themselves, were going to achieve for that country. In every land it has been the same. It is the Cult of Lucifer — Lucifer, Son of the Morning. Pride and a desire for personal glory!"

Anyone with any knowledge of the 5th Column in WWII would understand that the leopard might have changed its spots but the snarl is still the same.

Good material on Common Purpose

UK Column
CP Exposed
Stop CP
Ken Craggs
BetweenMyths

Some of my own, based on material supplied

Common Purpose - more evidence
Common Purpose dishonesty
An oppressor by any other name
CP - the cancer spreads
OFSTED - the fish rots at the head
Common Purpose at work and play
More than corrupt
Groupthink spreads like a cancer through the UK
Is this how to run a country?
One ring to rule them all
Paradiso and the future of the internet
Demos, Common Purpose, Labour, Tories, security companies
Common Purpose - the disease spreads to the Netherlands
Common Purpose - meanwhile, in America
Groupthink - gentle art of persuasion
Citizens' juries and Common Purpose
Common Purpose - initially to have a coffee
Common Purpose - just the facts, ma'am
Common Purpose - rhetoric of the quisling

References to Common Purpose appear in many other posts.

[common purpose] just the facts, ma'am

The sleeper issue of the moment is Common Purpose and good to see bloggers beginning to pick up a whiff of this one, via Parker Joseph, Battle for Britain and Postman Patel.

What we can't seem to get is hard data on who is driving it from Europe or if it is stemming from Britain itself.

Good material on Common Purpose

UK Column
CP Exposed
Stop CP
Ken Craggs
BetweenMyths

Some of my own, based on material supplied

Common Purpose - more evidence
Common Purpose dishonesty
An oppressor by any other name
CP - the cancer spreads
OFSTED - the fish rots at the head

Common Purpose at work and play
More than corrupt
Groupthink spreads like a cancer through the UK
Is this how to run a country?
One ring to rule them all
Paradiso and the future of the internet
Demos, Common Purpose, Labour, Tories, security companies
Common Purpose - the disease spreads to the Netherlands
Common Purpose - meanwhile, in America
Groupthink - gentle art of persuasion
Common Purpose - initially to have a coffee
Common Purpose - just the facts, ma'am
Common Purpose - rhetoric of the quisling

References to Common Purpose appear in many other posts.

[common purpose] initially to have a coffee

At 5 hours 48 minutes even listing the links The Anonymii kindly bestowed on me, with one or two explanatory lines each, the laptop is doing weird things and methinks a break for a coffee is in order.

An initial reading says we're in a bit of trouble, people. I hadn't realized how far it had gone and how open they were being about it all or "clumsily secretive", if you like. Can't make promises - I'll post the first when I can - think I need to run some lighter posts too, just to clear the brain but first a little space to unwind.

Suppose you're down the pub right now - careful you don't smoke. :)

Good material on Common Purpose

UK Column
CP Exposed
Stop CP
Ken Craggs
BetweenMyths

Some of my own, based on material supplied

Common Purpose - more evidence
Common Purpose dishonesty
An oppressor by any other name
CP - the cancer spreads
OFSTED - the fish rots at the head

Common Purpose at work and play
More than corrupt
Groupthink spreads like a cancer through the UK
Is this how to run a country?
One ring to rule them all
Paradiso and the future of the internet
Demos, Common Purpose, Labour, Tories, security companies
Common Purpose - the disease spreads to the Netherlands
Common Purpose - meanwhile, in America
Groupthink - gentle art of persuasion
Common Purpose - initially to have a coffee
Common Purpose - just the facts, ma'am
Common Purpose - rhetoric of the quisling

References to Common Purpose appear in many other posts.

[groupthink] the gentle art of persuasion

Before the stick always comes the carrot. Every parent is an amateur psychologist. Every political thinker and writer is also and the techniques are many and varied. Here are some of them:

Speaking in bureau-gobbledegook

Creating an esoteric language which both persuades anyone who doesn't understand your termnology that he is ignorant and at the same time bolsters your intellectual self-esteem:

multi-organisational working, cross-boundary working and the global-national-local interface each raise their own set of organisational dynamics which must be surfaced and worked with if collaboration is to be effective.

Cultivating an aura of exclusivity

Creating an aura of a vibrant, free-thinking contributor to change, dynamically going places at a high level beyond the common mortal, beyond the goyim, e.g. Middleton:

I believe passionately in the definition of civil society of Mr Mandela, who says that civil society is anyone who stands up.

Or in a group context:

[We] are looking for candidates who are:

*senior decision-makers within the area covered by the programme
*interested in contributing to the future of their area.

Applicants will be considered according to their:

*current responsibility as a leader through work or community activity
*involvement within the area covered by the programme
*likely contribution to the perspectives and dynamics of the group
*ability to participate fully in the Common Purpose programme.

Identification with a common goal

Aligning your goals and techniques with those of business and sharing their joint concerns, e.g. industrial and corporate espionage:

InfraGard is an information sharing and analysis association of businesses, academic institutions, state and local law enforcement agencies, and other participants dedicated to sharing information and intelligence to prevent hostile acts against the United States.

This is nicely illustrated in a speech not that long ago by Robert S. Mueller, III, Director Federal Bureau of Investigation:

I want to turn for a moment to counterintelligence intrusions and economic espionage. There is no shortage of countries that seek our information technology, our innovation, and our intelligence—information we have spent years and billions of dollars developing.

The simple truth is we do not protect cyber space to the same degree we protect our physical space. We have in large part left the doors open to our business practices, our sensitive data, and our intellectual property.

We understand that we must continue to work closely with all of you—members of the private sector and the academic community.

Think of the fusion center as a hub, with spokes that range from federal agencies, software companies, and ISPs, to merchants and members of the financial sector.

Industry experts from companies such as Cisco, Bank of America, and Target sit side-by-side with the FBI, postal inspectors, the Federal Trade Commission, and many others, sharing information and ideas. Together, we have created a neutral space where cyber experts and competitors, who might not otherwise collaborate, can talk about cyber threats and security breaches.

Members from a host of industries, from computer security to the chemical sector, share information about threats to their own companies, in their own communities, through a secure computer server.

We are also reaching out to academia. In 2005, we created the National Security Higher Education Advisory Board. We asked your president, Graham Spanier, to lead the group. We knew it wouldn't be an easy sell, because of the perceived tension between law enforcement and academia.

Collective mental position

The next stage on from identification of a common goal is the "slide":

‘A “slide” is a prefabricated, politically correct, blanket pop opinion, “view” or “take” upon a particular issue of general interest which is designed to preclude further consideration, analysis or investigation of the issue in question. [Soviet Analyst]

Beyond Bullets, in addressing corporate techniques in groupthink, wrote:

It's fine to assume these things, as long as we're aware that our default mode of presenting and informing also means that there is little room for thinking, challenging, dialogue and debate -- a fertile breeding ground for groupthink. The way we use PowerPoint only adds fertilizer to this stagnant pool, because a slide filled with bulleted text only increases the illusion of certainty for presenters and the feeling of passivity for audiences.

The bulleted, pre-packaged concept is used by the Chinese and others to great effect:

Three evils – terrorism, extremism and separatism – are main threat to peace and security of Central Asia, Secretary-General of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Zhang Deguang said o­n the eve of the SCO heads of states summit in Astana.

In the English language, the addition of the definite article "the" transforms the package to gospel - "the three evils of ...", as in "we're all agreed this is what they are".

Polarizing diverse opinion

One of the oldest techniques is to rearrange diverse opinion into two antagonistic party lines, e.g. Swift's High Heels and Low Heels and then everything can be argued along such convenient and easily controlled party lines.

So, in a non-partisan debate about wiretapping, one person's incarceration for refusal to divulge information casts her in the role of martyr [she's of our political persuasion] but when it's someone of the opposite persuasion, her incarceration hardly matters:

Lest anyone be confused, this is quite the opposite situation from when former NYT pseudo-reporter/White House shill, Judy Miller, was subpoenaed and went to jail for failing to reveal her sources in the CIA leak case. In her case she was refusing to name White House officials who were involved in government wrongdoing in which she had a role.

Marginalizing dissent

Persuaders are ever ready to learn new techniques in assuring your opinion prevails and all other dissenting opinion is marginalized, from the horrendous to the banal:

This paper seeks to fill this gap, by drawing both upon theoretical literature and experience with successful change facilitation practices from Europe and the US. Its focus is on the cognitive aspects of strategic orientation and provides a practical guide to those who use this process.

It doesn't matter if the technique is proven or not - it's new and it sounds great:

The NLP Milton model uses non-specific and metaphoric language allowing the listener to fill in the gaps, making their own meaning from what is being said, finding their own solutions and inner resources, challenging and reframing irrational beliefs.

For example, Grinder and Bandler stated that there were a few common traits expert communicators – whether top therapists, top executives or top salespeople – all seemed to share:

1. Everything they did in their work, was pro-active (rather than reactive), directed moment to moment by well-formed outcomes rather than formalized fixed beliefs.

WF Outcomes as the goal, rather than acting from belief in something?

A Well-formed outcome is a term originating in neuro-linguistic programming for an outcome one wishes to achieve, that meets certain conditions designed to avoid (1) unintended costs or consequences and (2) resistance to achieving the goal resulting from internal conflicting feelings or thoughts about the outcome.

There is no shortage of detractors as to the efficacy of the techniques though:

Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) is one of many New Age Large Group Awareness Training programs. NLP is a competitor with Landmark Forum, Tony Robbins, and legions of other enterprises which, like the Sophists of ancient Greece, travel from town to town to teach their wisdom for a fee.

The Persuaders require young[ish] people, susceptible to flattery and elitist inclusion, of mediocre intellect, of a conformist bent and likely to rise high. Fortunately for the Persuaders, there are many such goyim out there who want "up".

Free thinkers need not apply.

Good material on Common Purpose

UK Column
CP Exposed
Stop CP
Ken Craggs
BetweenMyths

Some of my own, based on material supplied

Common Purpose - more evidence
Common Purpose dishonesty
An oppressor by any other name
CP - the cancer spreads
OFSTED - the fish rots at the head

Common Purpose at work and play
More than corrupt
Groupthink spreads like a cancer through the UK
Is this how to run a country?
One ring to rule them all
Paradiso and the future of the internet
Demos, Common Purpose, Labour, Tories, security companies
Common Purpose - the disease spreads to the Netherlands
Common Purpose - meanwhile, in America
Groupthink - gentle art of persuasion
Common Purpose - initially to have a coffee
Common Purpose - just the facts, ma'am
Common Purpose - rhetoric of the quisling

References to Common Purpose appear in many other posts.

[micro-control 3] pinning the bstds down

Étienne Davignon

This follows the second article in the series here. It needs to be read in conjunction with its links - at times the short quotes themselves don't give the required continuity.

By virtue of their only partial-transparency, organizations like the CFR, SPPNA, TLC and the European Round Table groups are only going to allow sanitized snippets to become available.

So when Viscount Étienne Davignon [read the article] gives an interview [read the article] to the press and says that conspiracies will always exist, that the Bilderbergers are just multinational business people chatting about the future of the world and that there is no global elite, that things are far more fragmented than that, he speaks no more than the truth, as far as it goes.

And it doesn't go far. There may be no unity to them but there is definitely a common mindset and purpose. It's just the details they get bogged down in.

Pascal Lamy discovered, with DOHA, how difficult it was to find common ground and I myself can attest to that in my proximity to the trade world. The desire to find common ground and to reconcile the localized resistance to common policy is one of the greatest tasks of global trade.

When a journalist notes, to Davignon, "all the recent presidents of the European Commission attended Bilderberg meetings before they were appointed." Davignon's response [is that] he and his colleagues are "excellent talent spotters."

So the anti-globalists are left clutching at straws and the thing is, there is an innocent construction which can be placed on all of it.

When Ian Parker produces a map of the sub-regions Common Purpose will administer in the South-West, post 2009, CP can say “and what?” When he says that CP is no more than an offshoot of the ODPM, they can ask “yes and what?”

What’s nefarious in this?

It’s so non-nefarious that Asha [read the article] can run a piece on Julia Middleton [view the video] which heads up the Google page under her name and is full of her achievements. She’s a leadership developer at low management level, a talent spotter, looking to place the best people in the best positions.

Young hopefuls see that this is a semi-governmental offshoot and a one way ticket to prosperity and security in the next few years so why not?

End of story so let’s all go home.

Except for pesky snippets and little errors they sometimes make, such as Blair’s outright lies when questioned over attending the Bilderberg Conference here and here, which don’t accord with Davignon’s transparency over the group’s above board status.

Or Common Purpose’s failure to explain “what common purpose?”, only to say it is “beyond authority” and when pressed as to what that means, answers that it’s to open up leadership opportunities to those not actually in positions of authority. Again, for what common purpose? They are silent.

The new DTI website now has Regulation in the title and deals with regional administration. CP lists these, concerning all their programmes:

• develop outward-facing leadership, as people who can lead beyond their authority can produce change beyond their direct circle of control
• are highly interactive and experiential, through their real-life settings
• are committed to diversity as working with new and different groups of people delivers greater insight, problem-solving and creativity
• operate under a set of international conventions that create an environment in which real challenge can thrive
• are demanding and fun.

Set of international conventions? In an English region? Change beyond their direct circle of control?

So the investigator either becomes a conspiracy theorist and joins the dots himself or else he is left with a fragmented database, no one snippet actually proving anything but tantalizing nonetheless.

Such as Ben Shepherd’s CP recruiting drive page [read the article] showing a young man in isolation and a blurb inviting young people to join. Notice it's supported by supported by Deutsche Bank and you can check out their history. H/T Cassandra

Again, not particularly nefarious although I thought it was British money supporting CP, not Euro.

And check the Julia Middleton video op. cit.: How To Lead When you haven't any authority and her explanation of recruiting procedure [read the article]:

Participants are selected by a local Common Purpose advisory group, consisting of senior leaders in the area covered by the programme.

But leadership for what? Well, clearly for local and regional CP graduates to occupy top places in government, semi-governmental and industry instrumentalities.

But for what and with what common purpose?

That question has been much on MPs’ minds too as they’ve asked many questions in parliament [read the article].

John Trenchard mentions [read the article], for example, Phil Woolas, Minister of State, Department for Communities and Local Government replied to one question about the PEU or riot police:

Since the formation of the Preventing Extremism Unit in October 2006, the unit has made grants of less than £100,000 to: Common Purpose - Muslim Leadership Development Project.

Pardon?

Or what of the 4.8 MB pdf on CP in Bradford, whose Page 1 Google fragment says:

THIS WILL TRANSFORM THE TOWN OVER THE NEXT 20 YEARS. THE FACILITY WILL ... YORKSHIRE FORWARD EXISTS TO CREATE A POWERFUL AND POSITIVE EFFECT ON THE ...... Leeds Common Purpose. Board member. January 2002. Leeds Initiative ...

You can find a partial list of CP controlled organizations here [read the article] .

Indimedia says the organisation now has training programmes in every major town and city in Britain and since 1989 more than 60,000 people have been involved with 20,000 'leaders' completing one or more programmes. These are:

Leaders: Matrix and Focus
Emerging leaders: Navigator
Very young leaders: Your Turn
Leaders who need a local briefing: Profile
National leaders: 20:20

Matrix?

They themselves seem quite proud of it [read the article]:

We run a Common Purpose programme in every major city and town in the UK and in an increasing number of European cities. 12,000 leaders from all sectors and backgrounds have become Common Purpose 'graduates'.

As CP aren’t making their methods available or filing their curricula online, Indimedia believes it is to do with NLP:

NLP is a technique of using words to re-programme the body computer to accept another perception of reality - in this case the consensus agreed by the manipulators before their victims even register for the 'course'. Apparently the CIA refers to these pre-agreed 'opinions' as 'slides'.

Anyone who resists the programming is isolated and the group turned against them until they either conform or lose credibility to be a 'leader'.

Well there’s not a lot new in that – it was the basis of much of our military leadership training – the need to have all think as one.

Winston Leonard got down to it on 15 October 2007, at my site, when he cited Derek Twigg, [Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Veterans), Ministry of Defence) Hansard source] in answer to parliamentary questions:

Sums paid to Common Purpose UK in each of the last complete five financial years, inclusive of VAT, are as follows:

Amount (£)
2002-03 56,576.25
2003-04 66,716.50
2004-05 42,958.00
2005-06 58,456.27
2006-07 83,817.89

"These payments covered the cost of participation by MOD staff in Common Purpose UK's training and education programmes. Programmes of this nature help to develop leadership skills, to gain understanding about broader aspects of government and to share experience with and learn from participants from both the private and public sectors."

One moment please. CP are connected with MOD training? Winston Leonard adds that, with that in mind, consider these two links:

SWRDA who bought delisted MOD territory [read the article]:

The site is being redeveloped by the South West Regional Development Agency and English Partnerships, who purchased it for £10m. Some form of mixed commercial, retail and housing development is planned, but no details are yet concrete.

Norfolk Action Plan [read the article]:

6.2 It was noted that the Unit would be using the services of a Graduate Placement to help drive the Action Plan forward. Members welcomed the report and emphasised the need for a sound regeneration policy and for this to be high priority particularly in the light of recent closures e.g. Crane Fruehauf, Heinz Foods, RAF Coltishall and RAF Neatishead.

It was also highlighted that regeneration could not take place without partnership working across the county including District Councils. Furthermore it was important to remember that the county contained many areas of hidden deprivation.

As to what action plan, read the article. And as for English Partnerships, Wiki is sketchy:

English Partnerships (EP) is the national regeneration agency for England, performing a similar role on a national level to that fulfilled by Regional Development Agencies on a regional level. It is responsible for land acquisition and assembly and major development projects, alone or in joint partnership with private sector developers.

Do you know anything about them? I didn’t before this week.

It’s often difficult to see the forest for the trees. What we have so far is a lot of acitivity on leadership training programmes for vaguely stated purposes, the buying up of property and some connection with the security forces [along with similar moves to EU militias in Europe].

Meanwhile, headquartered in London, a similar organization to CP in its modus operandi is the Tavistock Institute which is now registered as a charity [read a hostile article here and a a negative overview here]:

… the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London which was funded into existence in 1946 with a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation.

One of the Tavistock founders, Dr. John Rawlings Rees, who also became co-founder of the World Federation for Mental Health, talked of infiltrating all professions and areas of society - 'Public life, politics and industry should all ... be within our sphere of influence ... If we are to infiltrate the professional and social activities of other people I think we must imitate the Totalitarians and organize some kind of fifth column activity!'

'We must aim to make it permeate every educational activity in our national life ... We have made a useful attack upon a number of professions. The two easiest of them naturally are the teaching profession and the Church: the two most difficult are law and medicine.'

In the end, it is the militaristic organizational structure, the dealings with the military itself at semi-governmental level, the vacuum sealed non-statements of their purpose, the spin-off authorities and other qangos such as English Partnerships, the presence of groups like Tavistock who are clearly more than think tanks, the rhetoric used and the degree of funding available to these organizations which do sound alarm bells.

All of this can’t be seen in isolation. Accompanying the rise of CP and the like, in Part 4 we look at the plethora of legislation which has hit us in the last twelve years or so.

Late note - have just had a visit from Common-purpose-net IP 217.150.113.250

Notes

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7

[service transformation] initial ferreting on this and other matters

Service Transformation

HM Treasury states the rationale behind the Service Transformation in the UK. Excerpts:

2.10 The first progress measure will track how much contact between government and citizens is "avoidable".

3.3.4 The types of transformation covered by this Agreement will simply not be possible unless the public sector can establish the identity of the customer it is dealing with simply and with certainty, and be able to pass relevant information between different parts of government.

DSTP-A.39 The virtual court prototype is very exciting in terms of its potential to deliver speedy justice by shortening the process from arrest to charge to sentence.

Common Purpose's common purpose

Common Purpose programmes produce people who lead beyond their authority and can produce change beyond their direct circle of control.

Hansard Written answers re Common Purpose

Thursday, 26 July 2007: Work and Pensions: Departments: Common Purpose

Philip Davies (Shipley, Conservative) | Hansard source

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much his Department paid to Common Purpose in each of the last five years; for what purpose; and what the outcome of the expenditure was.

Anne McGuire (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Work and Pensions) | Hansard source

A number of DWP senior managers have attended leadership courses run by Common Purpose in the last five years. The total expenditure for each of the last five years is listed in the following table. The courses have helped improve leadership skills. Given the nature of these courses, they have also helped foster valuable partnerships in the local community which can be used to improve the service offered to our customers.

Total Spend
2002-03	43,452
2003-04	72,691
2004-05	48,980
2005-06	43,111
2006-07	31,161

Did Anne McGuire satisfactorily answer the question?

[defamation] grovelling apology to the eu monster

Andrew Alison is a good man, with the interests of his country at heart:

Another issue close to my heart is defence. In the USA, members of the military are regarded as heroes. Here in the UK they seem to be regarded by a large sector of society as no better then a street beggar.

This government talks the talk very nicely on how it values our armed forces, but in reality it cuts defence spending so much that our armed forces do not have the vital equipment they need to do their jobs.

With our armed forces stretched around the world you would think the government would be significantly increasing spending on defence, instead of making the token gestures they do at the moment.

I have joined the UK National Defence Association that is campaigning for 'SUFFICIENT, APPROPRIATE and FULLY FUNDED ARMED FORCES that the Nation needs to defend effectively our Country, its people, their security and vital interests at home and worldwide.'

There is only one problem – which Country?

At this time there are fine bloggers like Devil's Kitchen, Iain Dale and Andrew here who are tenaciously clinging to local party politics, believing it to be the battleground. It's understandable.

Andrew [and I imagine bloggers like James Cleverly too], are inside the party political system and so they see only those issues which they can sink their teeth into or if they do see glimpses of the real battle, it's in passing. They're perfectly correct in saying that the treatment, equipping and repatriation by Brown and Blair of the armed forces is a disgrace – it is disgusting in fact.

Where these boys don't look far enough afield is in their faith that lobbying pressure or even blogging will alter Brown's stance – that if the “British” people perceive that he is doing less than adequately in this area, the old cynic will throw a bit more money the way of the forces.

Brown can do no more than window dress because he knows full well that there are to be no UK armed forces post-2012, for the simple reason that there is to be no UK in any real and meaningful sense [as distinct from the remaining title]. As for England - whe did you last hear Brown speak this word in supportive terms?

There is a pan-EU army and Milliband in fact spoke on this in the past few days. There is no UK in Brown's eyes. There are the 12 EU regions under MEPs. Why would he commit funds to a moribund organization – the former British Navy, Army and Air Force?

Why should he care?

Bloggers are so focussed on the inner dastardliness of Brown and his lack of moral fibre, in terms of treason to the UK, whilst the reality is that he is being quite loyal – loyal to the former-UK based EU regions which are almost in place, using Common Purpose leadership in all key positions.

This is one reason Common Purpose are now hitting back at the sphere.

Here are some links on who Common Purpose are and what they're doing. More importantly, where they fit into the EU jigsaw: one, two, three, four, five, six.

Here are some other things on them: seven, eight [on the connection with Camelot] and nine [on the CP info-packs]. Enough to be going on with.

Further comments by others:

Nov 11

On the defence connections with CP [already mentioned in the links above]:

You should ask why Assistant Chief Constable Irwin Turbitt, is lecturing RAF seniors about 3 years handling of protestant and catholic crowd control in Drumcree. (page 64)

Look in the index, then tab down to the page,

But you should read the chapter before that, written by Prof Benington, titled Public Value and Adaptive Leadership.

November 10

On the new regionalism:

Who defines a region? Well it isn’t us. HMG in its White Paper ‘Your Region Your Choice’ says ‘that it is not necessary for a region to have a strong historic identity to create a modern one,’ adding boundaries will ‘generate a good deal of fervour’ but no one will be able to come up with better ones so the ‘standard regional boundaries are right.’ That begs the question of whose ‘standard’ boundaries.

The answer is Eurostat, the EU’s statistical service in Luxembourg. These boundaries have been used since at least 1961 in Community legislation. And it’s all done by population.

Last year this system was enforced throughout EU by regulation - every local authority has to use it. The excuse was the enlargement of EU. Her are the populations for the regions:

Region 3 million 7 million
Sub region 800,000 3 million
Sub sub region 150,000 800,000

In the UK we already have regions but now here are sub regions and sub sub regions.

The division of this country has still further to go right down to the parish councils.

In the Brussels' plan London is region number UKI with 2 sub regions: an outer and an inner. And London will have five sub sub regions.

Ken Livingstone says he will abolish the 32 London boroughs in favour of 5 super boroughs.

Now please do read Bukovsky's take on the new face of the EU and where it is currently headed. This man has his detractors and he is a little too self-enamoured for my liking but he does have the background to make the statements he does. He was a bit wonky on some of the fine detail, e.g. Belgian law but his major points are correct.

There are two observations about all this EU/CP stuff:

1. The EU and by association, Brown's government, want us to concentrate on the smaller issues - on Cameron and Polly Toynbee and Clegg and the NHS - the blogosphere, in duly obliging, are virtually left alone to mutter in the corner about it like an Anglican Archbishop on why we should be Christian.

They want us to concentrate on how many percentage points the Conservatives are up today - it's nice accessible information. Open your Telegraph or if you're bold, go further into other publications and see the latest dastardly thing Brown's done and then swearblog at it. The smart bloggers are welcome to follow the price of gold.

Everyone's happy and the EU can proceed unencumbered.

2. There are certain minor investigators, on the oter hand, who are rabbiting on about something far bigger but of course the real story is not transparent, is it? It requires a great deal of ferreting, hours of mind-numbing reading of Eurospeak booklets and there, embedded somewhere in paragraph 23.14.07 on some grandiose sounding example of EU paper warfare, is the eminently reasonably sounding but actually quite worrying statement of intention.

The bstds don't exactly go out of their way to help us. The real info is fragmented, embedded, hidden and in its place is a wall of Euroassurance for the punters. But some of it does get out and some dots do get connected - not many but enough for a group like Common Purpose, whom there is irrefutable evidence are monitoring blogs, to decide it's time to counter these Gross Libels.

However they don't actually sue the libellers; they post statements of innocence on their own site:

A letter from the trustees

Common Purpose receives a broad spectrum of media coverage that highlights the positive impact of our leadership development programmes and award schemes. Examples of the many positive changes in society that have occurred as a result of the programme participants’ actions are available on our website.

A tiny fraction of media coverage, mostly postings on online discussion boards, blogs and websites, is making highly offensive and untrue claims about Common Purpose. Our reputation is very important to us – we have been advised that whilst the content is undoubtedly offensive to those who are named or implicated in the articles, it is also defamatory.

Common Purpose is founded on the principles of independence and non-alignment. All of our work remains true to these principles. More detail on how we work is available in our Charter.

A reading of the letter and the site itself shows a rational, even-handed, official, government backed qango charged with the simple purpose of carrying out leadership training. No mention at all of buying up MOD sites, no mention of the money poured in not only in Britain but on the continent and no mention of what this Common Purpose is in the first place.

Mention of a Charter but when you go in there, it is so broad and Eurospeakish that it virtually means what you care to consider it to mean.

No mention of the media monitoring, using dummy sites which disappear after each evening and which fellow bloggers have some of the web addresses of.

On the other hand, the "highly offensive' blogosphere is charged with defamation, which is defamatory to us in itself. Well this blogger charges Common Purpose with finding any statement about them factually incorrect - there are enough links given to form an opinion on this matter.

If Common Purpose would care to inform me which statements are factually incorrect, due apology will be immediately forthcoming and that false information will be summarily withdrawn.

Meanwhile, as Vladimir Bukovsky said:

We are losing time. We have to defeat them. We have to sit and think, work out a strategy in the shortest possible way to achieve maximum effect. Otherwise it will be too late. So what should I say? My conclusion is not optimistic. So far, despite the fact that we do have some anti-EU forces in almost every country, it is not enough. We are losing and we are wasting time.