BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 11:03 AM

Are they actually lizards in sheeps clothing?

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: CarolC
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 11:14 AM

Are you sure, Carol? He has a go for Wogan's treatment of him last time, but goes on to spout paranoid conspiracy theories that make the da Vinci Code look plausable.

Yes, I'm sure. If you watch and listen to the video you can hear the audience laughing at Wogan (and clapping for Icke). I'm not referring to whether or not what Icke has to say has any legitimacy. I'm only referring to who is being laughed at in that video.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 12:54 PM

I think you can only condem this man as a nutcase if you honestly believe the media tells the unquestionable truth.

Sal

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:11 PM

Oh, I find what he says about media control of perception quite on the button. It's the lizards and the multiple dimensions and the God-bothering that I find a little deranged.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:12 PM

I think he is wrong about the lizards, that is nutty.

Do I honestly believe the media tells the unquestionable truth?

No

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:35 PM

none of his theories about the media or politics are particularly original - there are plenty of sane people saying similar things that you could listen to instead. I'm a big fan of Al Franken personally, who will tell you all kinds of stuff about the Bush family, for example, and how they came to power. Or about how a woman who had an oil tanker named after her became responsible for environmental policy, FFS.

Taken in the context of the lizards and the dimensions and the God-bothering, as Richard has so succinctly put it, Icke's political and media theorising becomes part of a much bigger paranoid delusion. I used to know someone, a diagnosed psychotic, who did similar things - he took the stories in the news as a jumping-off point, so it all started out perfectly sane, but then his theories spiralled off into fantasy and delusion - at one point, he told me he'd been locked in a cupboard for days with Patty Hearst. I asked him how that could be, as her kidnapping had taken place before he was born. He just laughed knowingly.

Mad paople can be very plausable. That doean't make them any less mad. The thing that concerned me most when watching the Jon Ronson programme is the idea of Icke being parentally responsible for two young children.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:37 PM

I think y'all worry more about him than he does about you. He's written lots of books, though. Seems to be doing well at it. IMHO.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 01:58 PM

Ruth, I have no idea if they are lizards in sheep's clothing. No idea whatsoever. Got that? No opinion. I have nothing to go on to have any opinion about that, and neither does anyone else here. ;-)

But I do know that 99% of people are sheep. They imitate. They parrot others. They repeat what they have heard from others all their lives. They follow the herd. They ridicule anyone who doesn't. Try being "different" (in any way at all) and you will see.

I have no idea if David Icke is right or not about the lizard thing. Not a frikkin' clue! How could I have any idea if he is, when I have had no experience to either confirm or deny anything he is saying?

What I do know is that a great deal of what he says makes very good sense indeed and is right on the mark. I also know that he presents himself very well, and speaks very well, and seems also to be a nice man and a smart man. On a personal level, he impresses me well. That's all I have to go on. That means I respect him as another human being, and I will listen to him calmy, and consider what he says...not form a snap judgement about it based on prior habits and prejudices of a lifetime. I will listen just as calmly and fairly to him as I would to any other human being who speaks decently and politely to me about something. A pity I couldn't say that about a lot of other people!

That doesn't either confirm or deny for me anything that he says about lizards....but I do find much of what he says very interesting and persuasive. To simply reject some other things he says out of hand...just because they are very unusual...is not an indication of anything except mindless habit on the part of people who think, "I already know what's real and what isn't in this world, and no one can tell me otherwise. Anyone who does tell me otherwise is nuts!"

Sheep, in other words. Sheep are unwilling to deal with anything that isn't already familiar to them, and if they encounter the unfamiliar in somone they all go, "BAAAAAAA! Look at the nutter! BAAAAAAAAA!"

Their reaction is not based on knowledge, or rationality, or fairness, or objectivity, or curiosity, or anything reasonable whatsoever. It's based entirely on their own ignorance and their totally smug satisfaction in remaining just that ignorant and prejudiced for the rest of their stupid lives, and automatically laughing at anyone they find "unusual", despite having no actual evidence or experience of their own on which to base their laughter.

Again, I say, I have NO IDEA whether he's right or not about the "lizards". None. Not a clue. Zip. Nada. I admit that I know absolutely nothing about it, and I have no personal experience to go on concerning it, therefore I have no business having any definite opinion about it. It's a damned shame most people won't admit likewise that they know bloody well nothing about half of the things in this world that they will so readily voice an instantaneous and strong opinion on.

I do know this. He's not an anti-semite, and allegations that he is are utterly ridiculous. I've read enough of what he's written and heard enough of what he's said live to know with certainty that he is most definitely not an anti-semite. What he clearly believes in is freedom and equality for all human beings. The man is simply tremendously idealistic about humanity and the positive potentials of human beings. As such, he is quite a rarity in the present day and age.....and quite a juicy target for anyone of a fearful or cynical nature.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 02:07 PM

I watched enough footage of him today to make up my own mind - so take your baa-ing and shove it up your arse.

You DON'T KNOW if he's right about the lizards? So what, you think it's just possible that the royal family and everyone in a position of power in the world might JUST BE a shape-shifting lizard who drinks blood, so you don't want to make a frigging judgement?

The bloke's a loon. I'm not. Therefore, I can categorically state that the world is NOT dominated by shape-shifting lizards, and to say so does not make me a sheep - it simply makes me not a nutter.

End of.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Gene Burton
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 02:47 PM

Little Hawk, that was a great post. Said most of the things I've been trying to say far better than I ever could. Pay no attention to the scoffers- they know not what they do (often very literally!)

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Gene Burton
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 02:49 PM

BTW, I'd imagine with Icke's considerable wealth his children are provided for pretty well.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 02:52 PM

Christ, Gene - I didn't think it was possible for you to make a bigger twat of yourself, but with every post you exceed my expectations. Well done.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:26 PM

Go to hell, Ruth.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:32 PM

Ah, if only it existed, Little Hawk. It'd probably be filled with baby-eating lizards, dontcha know.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:22 PM

Ruth, your problem is? Icke's house speaks very loudly of wealth, did you not see the pictures.

So is he now one of the illuminati, possibly their Lucifer?

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:34 PM

does wealth automatically make for an appropriate and safe environment for children? Michael Jackson is very wealthy too.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 07:07 PM

So's Fort Knox, wealthy that is. Be a great place for a community daycare, dontcha think?

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 07:15 PM

Checked out the rooms. They are SMALL! Bad idea 'bout the daycare.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 07:23 PM

Looks pretty child-safe, though. No drawers or doors for them to catch their little fingers in. Maybe wealth is the key to effective childcare after all.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: GUEST,Jim Martin
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 08:28 PM

For lizards/sheep - read lemmings in this unsustainable world of ours?

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: GUEST,Jack The Sailor
Date: 01 Apr 08 - 04:07 PM

I just watched a bit of one of Icke lectures. He reminds me of the people that they have on public TV during pledge drives. Kind of a Suze Orman for the neo-futurist set.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: irishenglish
Date: 01 Apr 08 - 04:10 PM

Oh God! not Suze Orman!

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Apr 08 - 04:10 PM

Easy for you to say, JtS, but you're one of the paleo-post modern set.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: GUEST,Jim Martin
Date: 01 Apr 08 - 11:39 PM

This is all relevant:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/player/nol/newsid_7320000/newsid_7324700?redirect=7324700.stm&news=1&nbram=1&bbwm=1&bb

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Apr 08 - 11:40 PM

I enjoyed this talk of his, even despite the whole lizard/illuminati thing (it's in 42 parts)...

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=david+icke+freedom+or+fascism&search_type=

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: GUEST,Jim Martin
Date: 02 Apr 08 - 08:36 AM

See this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2008/03/we_lose_in_greed_game.html

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Donuel
Date: 02 Apr 08 - 01:13 PM

The Reptilian brain is a valid psyhological and evolutionary concept, but the transdimensional lizard story does not fly.
He knows it. We know it. But it is a radical schtick in which people can easily remember and identify the man and the ideas.

Its a marketing tool really.

As a hypnotist myself and a keen observer of the repeating media suggestions being propogandized every day, I would say he has his finger on the pulse of reality.

In my own way I painted by had the great sunami before it happened,. I painted the twin towers on fire with an airplane above before it happened etc and I too do not consider myself a prophet but rather free enogugh in my thinking to see the likelyhood of certain events and why they occur.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: Wolfgang
Date: 02 Apr 08 - 02:12 PM

On April 19th, 1995, I believe that the Global Elite, via elements within the U.S. government, the CIA and Mossad, murdered some 168 men, women and children in the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. (Icke)

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Donuel
Date: 02 Apr 08 - 02:20 PM

I invented and made by hand the Power of Greed Game. It has a 3D game board, 40 careers choices and 400 event cards.

The newspaper in the game is called the Daily Leak.

It made the papers when I lived in Boston.
I think they liked my newspaper name.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Apr 08 - 10:13 PM

That's surprisingly radical for Robert Peston. Normally he's very pro-capital. Maybe his problem with the activity described is that it's capitalists who lose out this time.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 07:32 AM

But how do we cease their power?

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: GUEST,Jim Martin
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 07:58 AM

Exactly!

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 11:01 AM

Jim, please go on.........

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 11:24 AM

After listening to several hours of David Icke's talks, I have to say that what he is saying is no weirder or more crazy than what is said by any of the world's religions. In fact, in many respects, it's quite similar. Especially the reptiles part. What he is talking about could very easily come from a Christian if the terminology was changed a bit, and "Satan" and "demons" were substituted for "reptilians" and "illuminati".

He is also not a cultist. He doesn't want or expect anyone to believe anything he says. He isn't trying to sever anyone's existing relationships or isolate anyone from their existing relationships. He's not trying to start a church with followers. He's just going around the world talking to people about what he believes.

He isn't telling anyone to do anything other than to act on what their consciences tell them and telling them that love is the most powerful force in the universe. Not only is he harmless to himself and others (including his own children), I would say that he is very much a force for good in the world, regardless of whether or not what he says is true.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 12:02 PM

"I have to say that what he is saying is no weirder or more crazy than what is said by any of the world's religions.In fact, in many respects, it's quite similar"

I couldn't agree more Carol but I don't see that as any reason for taking him seriously.

From an atheistic perspective all religions are just a collection of stories and ideas, nothing wrong with that, in the Library it's called fiction. But behind most of them are a collection of ideas and stories for which their is no evidence and many are completely at odds with the rest of human experience.

But lizards, thats just daft.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 12:08 PM

I haven't suggested that there is any reason to take him seriously. What I have suggested is that there isn't any more reason to attack him or to suggest such extreme measures as taking his children away from him (as some on this thread are doing) than there is anyone else who talks to others about his or her religious or spiritual beliefs .

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 12:11 PM

But lizards, thats just daft.

No more daft than the serpent the Old Testament tells us about in the Garden of Eden.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 01:06 PM

Here is an excellent and very lucid talk by David Icke, well worth watching. It helps explain exactly how the sheep keep all the other sheep in line:

See if you have had some of these thoughts cross your mind from time to time..I bet you have. If so, you may be growing restless with the ways of the flock. You may even spend less time watching television and eating chips than the rest of the flock.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 01:41 PM

Oh, Little Hawk, get over yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 01:46 PM

"But lizards, thats just daft.

No more daft than the serpent the Old Testament tells us about in the Garden of Eden."



Your point being?

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 01:49 PM

Your point being?

My point being that he is fairly normal by the standards we use to define normal in our society at this point in time.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Donuel
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 01:56 PM

The Book
I was an Econonomic Hitman

gives several tactics to defeat the: empire/status quo/power elite/corporatism... by changing it from the top down and bottom up.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 02:00 PM

As I've said, I have no opinion about the "lizard" thing...and nothing to base such an opinion on.

I've never yet met ANYONE who was right about everything. Why should I expect David Icke to be? He may well be wrong about the lizards. Who knows? I certainly don't. I don't have a shred of information to enable me to judge him on that, one way or another.

I do, however, find much of what he says to be extremely intelligent, very lucid, and I agree with much of what he says. That's why it's worth some of my time to listen to what the man has to say.

Would you drop all respect for any human being you know on the basis that they were wrong about one specific thing they said? If so, you would have to drop all respect for every other human being on the face of this Earth! Because everyone gets something wrong now and then.

As for those who would like to take his children away...oh, you must really miss the dear old days of the Spanish Inquisition. Just think, YOU could have been one of the inquisitors, and you could not only take away the children of nonconformists like David Icke, you could also take David Icke and other troublesome types like that, rip out their fingernails, gouge out their eyes, cut out their tongues, and burn them at the stake.

Wouldn't that be just ducky? Then you could take their kids and raise them up to be "decent" people....like you.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Peace
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 02:02 PM

Some folks have scratch pads that are 1/4" wide.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: GUEST,Jim Martin
Date: 04 Apr 08 - 05:07 AM

Thanks for that Donuel.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Gene Burton
Date: 04 Apr 08 - 02:07 PM

Looks like this one's going to get to 100, now...it IS a testimony to Icke's magnetism that even many who ostensibly scorn him are sufficiently drawn to his teachings to keep discussing them. Remind us of anyone else?

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: irishenglish
Date: 04 Apr 08 - 02:34 PM

What does 100 posts have to do with it Gene? I have looked at his theories, I don't believe in them. So I think what you are saying is, the reason I am typing this message right now is, he's got so much magnetism even though I disagree with him, that I am somehow still interested in him? No I am not. This is a forum. This is what we do. We agree, we disagree, we argue, we calm each other down, we rationalize, we persuade. Am I supposed to be drawn to John McCain just because he has a couple of threads discussing him? Or Obama, or Clinton? Am I supposed to like a certain artist discussed on here just because of the number of postings to the thread? No...of course not. It's just another thread. Your What is acoustic rock thread had a lot of replies to it, so was that because of your magnetism, or was it just something we like to talk about?

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Gene Burton
Date: 04 Apr 08 - 02:53 PM

Well, I think people chipped in because they had strong views either in favour of, against, or doubting the very existence of, acoustic rock (the latter coming closest to my own view). And, for me, because I saw an opportunity to put in a couple of links like this ("Judge For Yourselves") and garner a few CD sales on the side...:))   

Seriously, though, all I can say is, I generally don't chip into discussions (either here or in real life) unless I have at least some degree of interest in them...I have very little interest in US domestic politics, for example, thus you won't find my name on any of those threads. I don't understand why people would want to pass comment on a matter of complete indifference to themselves; and I suspect (as Little Hawk suggests) that some of the scoffers on here are, privately, really grappling with some of the issues Icke raises. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that! In my experience, particularly where spiritual matters are concerned, it really is better to have an open mind than a closed one...

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: irishenglish
Date: 04 Apr 08 - 03:19 PM

Fair enough-I won't chime in on UK politics either for the same reason, or things I don't feel qualified to discuss. I disagree though about what Little Hawk and you suggest is the reason for the scoffers on here. As I said, I have read some of Icke's stuff, I read Jon Ronson's "Them", I get what he is talking about, and I disagree with it. Me sharing that information is NOT grappling with some of the issues Icke raises. That's putting words in my mouth (or thoughts in my head. And if you think that's a closed mind saying that, then you don't know me, and what my thoughts and beliefs are.

Subject: RE: BS: So he may have been right after all(David Icke
From: Gene Burton
Date: 04 Apr 08 - 03:31 PM

Did I say YOU had a closed mind? Emphatically not. Please, don't put words in my mouth, either.

Oh, and 100.