Sunday, February 1, 2009

EMTV Interview with Brian Gerrish about Common Purpose

Here's what looks to be like a good video interview of Brian Gerrish, my dialup is so slow I can never watch these. :( How Common Purpose in the UK is connected to the Communitarian Network in the USA at GWU has yet to be directly substantiated with documents or interviews with the members of these organizations. The only way I can see the connection, thus far, is because they share the same philosophy, and the guys at Stop Common Purpose apparently agree with me on this. For many people CP is the "smoking gun" in the UK. From Robert Coones:


Bobby Garner said...

I watched the video, and as much as I would like to support this "Stop Common Purpose" initiative, I see problems. The bottom line at the end is the recommendation to get involved by joining the "Business Consortium Group"

Even assuming that could be effective, Gerrish talks only about whats happening in Britain. He wouldn't talk about a larger picture, and when asked about Freemasonry involvement, he would say only that some of his associate researchers were saying there were links. He refused to "get into a broader discussion" on it.

I believe Brian Gerrish is intelligent enough to know that if he never discusses Common Purpose in any context outside of the internal interests of Britain, no one will be able to see it in its true global context.

The very existence of Common Purpose enables this form of opposition. So, this is looking remarkably like a dialectical game strategy with Common Purpose and Stop Common Purpose being the major contestants, and all opponents are registered with the BC Group for "Mass recognition throughout the industries entering Government & large Corporations". Isn't that where Common Purpose operates? Is this an "if you can't beat em, join em" play? Or, is it a rabble ID database building scheme?

Would it be a good idea for all anti-Communitarians to register in a national database for easy "Mass recognition"?

Can this do anything but protect the really dark subversive satanic forces at the core of the problem?

The Angry Cheese. said...

Bobby Garner has made a big but perfectly understandable mistake here, and it must be put right. Bobby has mistakenly Googled the WRONG BC GROUP! And has formed a hugely incorrect and misleading impression of Brian Gerrish and his work.
The BC Group Brian Gerrish is involved with is this one:-

The British Constitution Group.

I attended the recent Stoke conference that this group organised, it was a great success, plus I know Brian - he's totally genuine, and has absolutely nothing to do with the business organisation Bobby has unfortunately referred to.
We have a huge problem in the UK, and you really need to understand what's going on. Unlike Americans, we are, and have never been, taught anything in school or college about our Constitution, how the money system really works, how government works etc. in any depth. So we have a massive, ignorant population - who think they are clever and well-informed, being massively mislead into the dangerous EU by the wickedest people imaginable. It is getting urgent. Brian and his colleagues are working purely from the British perspective, from the grass roots up, using nothing but proof - hard evidence. Local people, like him, are finding Common Purpose and its clones in their neighbourhood, at work etc. all over the place. As they learn about Brian's group and he gathers this info. on his cpexposed site it is documented evidence of fraud, theft and conspiracy. He intends to go after these evil people, Brian is ex-military, he's a fighter! He and his colleages mean business, believe me. I could tell you more but I cannot here.
Brian is a spiritual man too but he needs to focus on this task - he's taking them on - in a fight!
The larger picture? He is setting an example of how to root out this Communitarianism on a local level- physically not in theory, how to expose it and how to fight it and stamp it out. People in other countries need to form groups like his, follow his example and fight it in their locality. Niki has done this too, what is the problem, taking action should be commended.
Brian Gerrish and his colleages are concentrating their efforts on trying to save the British but they do talk of the implications for other countries and are well aware that Common Purpose is spreading to other European countries and to South Africa, India, Australia and New Zealand. We know that the equivalent kind of set-up is happening in America, and badly needs investigating. Brian does not want anyone to register with him, he is very discreet and absolutely respects privacy - especially given the highly sensitive and incredibly personal nature of the material he has to get involved with - mental illness, paedophilia and other child abuses, financial shenanigans etc.
The title of the Stoke on Trent Conference was "Lawful Rebellion, Action Not Words." We need action badly here in the UK, and we are planning to take it! Soon! Brian is inspiring many here, his archive is:

His newspaper is here and may be read online:

Bobby Garner said...

Thanks Angry Cheese for the correction. I didn't Google it. He said on the video, go to "thebcgroup" which to the human ear sounds remarkably like go to the "bcgroup".

The other problems I mentioned are no less troubling. If Gerrish believes in teaming up, why does he limit it to Britain?

Further, It has by no means been established that supporting any development in Britain is in the best interest of constitutional Americans. Especially a group who points out our similar problems, and advocates unity, but refuses to discuss or help identify how our problems grew from a common root. Americans don't understand a "duty of allegiance to the Crown". But we do see that those who do take the oath of allegiance to the Crown have sold out their countrymen just as our representatives have done here. Brian Gerrish knows what they did, but is willing to ignore the cause of their treason. WHY?

I see that The British Constitution Group invited John Harris from The Peoples United Community, who emphatically declares that he is not a member of The British Constitution Group, to be one of its guest speakers at the conference?

Will John Harris also advocate joining thebcgroup?

Will he explain why he doesn't join himself?

Will he expound on the philosophy of Communitarian Law? Or, explain where it came from?

What is the organizational structure of thebcgroup? Is it regulated by the British government like similar organizations are regulated here? However that may be, there is no evidence that group organization ever achieves its original goals. They are invariably taken over and redirected, usually without notice from the membership. The Civil Rights Movement in the US is a prime example. Martin Luther King's successors worked with our congress to give us affirmative action whereas King steadfastly argued for equal opportunity, and refused to settle for less. The issue was so confused that most Americans still today cannot explain the difference.

Affimrative action is forced equality where no one who subscribes to it is allowed to succeed on his own merits.

Equal opportunity in contrast, rewards self initiative and individual achievement.

The former is collective slavery, while the latter is American free enterprise, a thing which has been lost in this country. The murder of Dr. Martin Luther King and others who shared his American dream is a large factor contributing to the loss.

The Angry Cheese. said...

The BC Group is very new so it is early days to say anything hard and fast about it except that it currently runs quite efficiently on the philosophy of "organised chaos."
Brian is probably concentrating on Britain simply because the info. is coming to him from British people. If and when people from other countries discover his site and unearth their own evidence of CP type organisations and send it to him, he and his team will do their best to help and appropriately deal with it, I am sure.
Because of abuse by monarchs and bankers centuries ago, the people of America broke away from Britain and went their own way - with a fresh start and a written constitution. You are trying to hold onto that, to preserve it from Obama's Communitarianism.
We here however, have the much older archaic laws some pre-Magna Carta, etc. which we have to brush up on and use to fight this new, awful EU Communitarian Law. This does involve re-considering the role of our monarch, and the issue of the Crown, and of Treason. I cannot really go into details here but I can assure you that Brian Gerrish is most definitely not ignoring the issue of Treason, I believe it is foremost in his mind. This subject was discussed at the Conference, more work and thought has and will go into this area as it is a very serious, fundamental issue. Here is a short piece by John Bingley who spoke on the British Constitution at the conference

and here is John Bingley on video, giving a talk very similar to the one at the conference.

I don't think it is a case of expecting anyone in the USA to support groups in Britain, it is more a case of presenting and sharing info. and experiences, so that we can all learn how people have and are being mislead. And what we can do to try and put things right. I do know what you mean, Americans are probably thinking that our current system in the UK, that is being destroyed by CP, is so flawed it's not worth saving.
The British Constitution Group is about a new beginning not just a return to the old, dodgy system. So that should encourage you a little.
John Harris is a greatly respected man who is on his own self educating voyage of discovery which he is generously sharing and which is fascinating many. His studies are an inspiration. John is trying very hard to not belong to anything at all, he really is a rebel!
You are right, groups and organisations can be taken over but at the moment Brian's group, and his work, is all we have and I am grateful for it and happy to contribute to it.
Another conference is being held in the Spring - who knows perhaps a speaker will grasp the nettle and talk straight about Communitarianism.
I remember that when I first came across that word I thought it was a proof reader's error, I could not believe such a silly word existed. And then, when I learned more I was shocked I'd never heard of it before!