'Conspiracy Author' David Icke Banned From EU, Labeled A "Terrorist"

a reply to: Asmodeus3

The only person who's desperate here is you my friend. You keep posting the same thing over and over and have never even commented on the facts from Ickes own books or his use of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" or comments on WW2 I posted way back in the thread..

Denial is a common tactic that substitutes deliberate ignorance for thoughtful planning.
CHARLES TREMPER

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

The only person who's desperate here is you my friend. You keep posting the same thing over and over and have never even commented on the facts from Ickes own books or his use of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" or comments on WW2 I posted way back on thread..

Denial is a common tactic that substitutes deliberate ignorance for thoughtful planning.
CHARLES TREMPER

No I don't think so.
I haven't made any claims against Icke being an antisemite or a holocaust denier.

You think that what you have posted sometime ago and keep posting constitutes proof of your claims?? It's more likely that it constitutes proof for the existence of pink unicorns...

Not only you are in a denial but you don't seem to understand where the burden of proof is and what proof is.

So should we summon Icke to these threads so you can debate him with your 'proof'?!
It would be a spectacle to watch after all as you can bring up all these ludicrous and unsubstantiated claims and argue directly that he isn't allowed in the Netherlands because he is an antisemite and a holocaust denier...

a reply to: Asmodeus3

If you want to believe in pink unicorns, then you go for it...

You haven't made any claims what so ever except incorrect flip flopping over laws. You just keep screaming "refuted" like some mad person, if anyone posts anything you disagree with...

You know denail is the worst lie because it's a lie you keep telling yourself over and over.....

Denial is a common tactic that substitutes deliberate ignorance for thoughtful planning.
CHARLES TREMPER

a reply to: Kurokage

I am wondering if you want to have this debate and with Icke.

Then you can use your opinions which you have promoted to facts and proofs to convince the audience why he is not allowed anymore in the Be to Netherlands.

May I also remind you again about what English Law says and have posted it several times here.

I see you keep speaking of denial. What an irony!

Prove your claims if you can.
Let's call Icke in these threads or you afraid you will get your arguments dismantled? And perhaps more...

a reply to: Asmodeus3

I am wondering if you want to have this debate and with Icke.

I'm not sure of Ickes opinions on Pink Unicorns and don't really think thats worth the discussion but if you want to ask him about them, then knock yourself out!?!?!?

You're only going on about Icke coming onto the thread now because you have no other comeback or can't disprove what I've posted. It's very predicable.

to convince the audience why he is not allowed anymore in the Be to Netherlands.

The fact that I disagreed with the ban shows your cognative bias has blinded you to anything that doesn't back up your denial here.

I've only posted Ickes own quotes and words on this thread as proof, not opinions. You've just refused to talk about those and keep posting your silly flip flopping arguments and screaming "refuted".

Denial is a common tactic that substitutes deliberate ignorance for thoughtful planning.
CHARLES TREMPER

22 pages of this?!!!!

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
The US democratic party isn't just left leaning but it has been hijacked by the woke ideology.

To me, looking from the other side of the Atlantic, that "woke ideology" is just the evolution of the "political correct ideology" that, in my opinion, is mostly a consequence of how the English language is, ending many words in "man", like spokesman, for example.
That didn't created any problems when most people in those positions were man, but when you have a woman in a position like that it's natural that she doesn't like to be called a man.
In other languages, like Portuguese, those words are neutral, so the political correct ideology doesn't apply in most cases.

You know probably what I mean. A man is man on Tuesday and a woman on Thursday and a bit of both on the weekend.

That's the problem with things like gender, for which there isn't a clear physical definition. As sex as a clearer definition, they started using "gender" to allow for more freedom of choice.

This transgender ideology is so bizarre that not even classical left wingers want to entertain. There is a subset of left wing people including left wing activists and the radical left that promote these ideas.

Another difference between countries: in Portugal it's more the less radical, closer to the centre, left that are more accepting of those ideas.

Indeed and just having a look at these threads it's unlikely that you will see anyone from the right part of the political spectrum to defend the transgender ideology or to make claims against David Icke for being anti-semitic and a holocaust denier.

Which, in itself, means nothing about David Icke, only about the perception people have of him.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

You've got a lot of "refuted" to read up on!!

a reply to: Kurokage

I don't think I'll bother, thanks!

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

I am wondering if you want to have this debate and with Icke.

I'm not sure of Ickes opinions on Pink Unicorns and don't really think thats worth the discussion but if you want to ask him about them, then knock yourself out!?!?!?

You're only going on about Icke coming onto the thread now because you have no other comeback or can't disprove what I've posted. It's very predicable.

to convince the audience why he is not allowed anymore in the Be to Netherlands.

The fact that I disagreed with the ban shows your cognative bias has blinded you to anything that doesn't back up your denial here.

I've only posted Ickes own quotes and words on this thread as proof, not opinions. You've just refused to talk about those and keep posting your silly flip flopping arguments and screaming "refuted".

Denial is a common tactic that substitutes deliberate ignorance for thoughtful planning.
CHARLES TREMPER

Are you having a laugh?!
Did you just day that nobody can disprove what you have posted?!

But you haven't proven anything.
You only made a range of unsubstantiated claims that some could argue are of a defamatory nature.

Yes I want to summon David Icke so we have have a good show.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
22 pages of this?!!!!

Many posts as you can see.

Many of these posts claim that Icke is a holocaust denier and an antisemite. But still there isn't much evidence on them... I am trying to get the member to tell the audience where is the evidence for these claims.

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

You've got a lot of "refuted" to read up on!!

Speaking of refutations.

Your claims have been refuted in regards to Icke being an antisemite and/or a holocaust denier.

Everything you write is just waste of your time and more of a word salad 🥗

a reply to: Asmodeus3

You only made a range of unsubstantiated claims that some could argue are of a defamatory nature.

Thats hilarious considering I've only posted Ickes comments from his books and so fourth, so you are saying Ickes comments are of a defamatory nature!?!?! Thats very honest of you!!

Your claims have been refuted in regards to Icke being an antisemite and/or a holocaust denier.

Everything you write is just waste of your time and more of a word salad 🥗

Haw can you have refuted anything, when you havent commented on a single quote of Ickes or his use of "The protoccols of the Elders of Zion" because of you being in denial????
I think you post "word salad" and "refuted" when you've been proven to have lied or shown you're wrong....

Denial is a common tactic that substitutes deliberate ignorance for thoughtful planning.
CHARLES TREMPER

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Kurokage

I don't think I'll bother, thanks!

I wouldn't blame you, it's just a lot of flip flopping from Asmodeus on whos taking who to court!!

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
I haven't made any claims against Icke being an antisemite or a holocaust denier.

What about this?

David Icke is by no means a holocaust denier or a far right extremist or anti-semitic.

From this post.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
I haven't made any claims against Icke being an antisemite or a holocaust denier.

What about this?

David Icke is by no means a holocaust denier or a far right extremist or anti-semitic.

From this post.

This is taken out of context I am afraid.
I have already stated that there is no evidence that Icke is an antisemite or a holocaust denier. Hence the default position is to assume that he isn't an antisemite or a holocaust denier.

I am not the one who came to these threads to accuse Icke or make make claims.

You better direct your concerns to the other member who made a series of accusations. You guys trying hard here...

I am referring you to the statement made above by Kurokage

You haven't made any claims what so ever except incorrect flip flopping over laws

Even he does recognise that I haven't made claims about Icke.

In addition the flip-flopping he is discussing is just a desperate attempt in order to avoid answering where the burden of proof is.

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

You only made a range of unsubstantiated claims that some could argue are of a defamatory nature.

Thats hilarious considering I've only posted Ickes comments from his books and so fourth, so you are saying Ickes comments are of a defamatory nature!?!?! Thats very honest of you!!

Your claims have been refuted in regards to Icke being an antisemite and/or a holocaust denier.

Everything you write is just waste of your time and more of a word salad 🥗

Haw can you have refuted anything, when you havent commented on a single quote of Ickes or his use of "The protoccols of the Elders of Zion" because of you being in denial????
I think you post "word salad" and "refuted" when you've been proven to have lied or shown you're wrong....

Denial is a common tactic that substitutes deliberate ignorance for thoughtful planning.
CHARLES TREMPER

First of all, the burden of proof is on you and not one. You have given no evidence that Icke is an antisemite and/or a holocaust denier. I don't need to comment on the ridiculous example you have given me about the protocols of the elders of zion. That's not proof of anything.

I think you should be able to read better what I am saying and don't make one strawman after the other. I have never said that Icke's comments are defamatory. Can you not read??

I said that your comments about Icke could be considered by some others to be defamatory. Especially when you accuse him of antisemitism and holocaust denialism.

originally posted by: Kurokage

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Kurokage

I don't think I'll bother, thanks!

I wouldn't blame you, it's just a lot of flip flopping from Asmodeus on whos taking who to court!!

Covering both scenarios isn't flip-flopping

If Icke takes you to court on defamatory charges it is you who has to prove that you claims are true. The burden of proof is reversed.

If you were to take him to court and accuse him for hate crimes or whether else then again the burden of proof is on you.

On both cases the burden of proof is on you and not on Icke.

a reply to: ArMaP

Kurokage has made some claims about Icke and he has not provided any evidence for them.

He believes that the use of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion or some comments Icke has made constitutes proof of anti-semitism and/or holocaust denialism.

I am very confident that if someone was to make these claims and then accused of defamation then it will find it very difficult to prove these claims in a court of law in the UK. English Law puts the burden of proof on those who have made the defamatory claims. It's one of few of not the only case where the burden of proof is reversed. And there is a reason a reason for this: The default position is innocent until proven guilty.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
This is taken out of context I am afraid.

OK, here's the context.

Yep! The common denominator is sensationalism, false accusations, and libel & defamation. They always need to be called out and refuted.

David Icke is by no means a holocaust denier or a far right extremist or anti-semitic. Anyone who makes such claims must prove them.

They are lucky that Icke among others aren't using the laws of libel & defamation to their benefit. They would have had a great success after the first few successful cases and anyone else would have thought several times before repeating them.

Icke isn't allowed in the country as the Dutch country wanted to please some deranged left wing activists instead of allowing free speech to go ahead.

I have already stated that there is no evidence that Icke is an antisemite or a holocaust denier. Hence the default position is to assume that he isn't an antisemite or a holocaust denier.

The default position is that we haven't see any evidence that he is anti-Semitic or an holocaust denier.

I am not the one who came to these threads to accuse Icke or make make claims.

That quote is a claim.

You better direct your concerns to the other member who made a series of accusations.

If I see the other member saying something that I think is wrong I will correct it, like I have done before.

You guys trying hard here...

There is no "you guys" and I'm not trying any thing, except keep things as close to the facts as I can.

You haven't made any claims what so ever except incorrect flip flopping over laws

Even he does recognise that I haven't made claims about Icke.

He is wrong, you have made at least the claim I quoted in my previous post.