David Icke…..Ufology’s Worst Ambassador

Originally posted by cripmeister




Are you referring to Eugenics? Maybe some MKULTRA as well? And perhaps the NWO ?

[edit on 26-6-2010 by KIZZZY]

I'm talking about the complex, random and often chaotic reality we live in. I left the cave a long time ago.

Um...I thought frogs lived on lily pads in the pond

So...erm...was that a yes?

[edit on 26-6-2010 by KIZZZY]

Originally posted by Kandinsky

I'm appalled that some members support his claims and go so far as to accept the notion of satanism and child rape amongst the powerful. Apart from the nastiness of the idea, it implies a choice. They've chosen to suspend their disbelief, switch off their critical thinking and live in a world where they imagine powerful people indulge in ritual and child abuse. What a choice to make....

[edit on 26-6-2010 by Kandinsky]

The problem with this view is that it seems to suggest that powerful people are incapable of indulging in child abuse or weird rituals and that anyone who believes they do are somehow credulous.

Ask yourself these questions:

Have people ever taken part in satanic rituals?

Have people ever abused children?

If the answer to both the above is 'Yes' then what is it about powerful people that makes them immune to these activities?

Why is it such a stretch of the imagination to believe that people who have those predilections and who also happen to have reached a high state in society would not use their wealth and power to indulge themselves?

Or is it only the poor who are capable of such perversions?

ok....I gleaned over some of Icke's stuff and I have to say I am in
pretty much agreement with his findings of Eugenics, MKultra and
the NWO..............we part company on the Lizard theory!

Now what do you suppose Jews

This is a blog from a Jewish woman born in New York now residing in Tzfat, Israel for 25 years.

A CRITIQUE OF "DIRTY, FILTHY, STINKING TZFAT LAUNDRY" by: Doreen Ellen Bell-Dotan

I received the following criticism for publishing "Dirty, Stinking Tzfat Laundry". I'd like to share it because it seems to me a critique that any number of well-intentioned, but misguided, Jews are likely to level.

The critique:

"I question the sincerity of this person. who makes her politics (anarchy) public knowledge.

Although the corruption is certainly wrong and needs to be corrected, I also question someone's motives who wants to make this "known to the world." The UN would absolutely devour this information. The UN ignores the atrocities in Darfur, Tibet, and elsewhere and concentrates solely on anything negative about Israel. Why give Israel-haters even more ammunition?"

My response:

Leaving people to die, most particularly the feeble and infirm, including sick and handicapped children, during a war while one parties with the vouchers in hotels intended for them, is an atrocity. An atrocity was committed by Jews against Jews in Tzfat. That's the word for it. Wrap you mind around that.

Neither is it the first atrocity committed by Jews against Jews in this country and around the world.

The majority of Jews are, in part, hated because of the acts of the rich and powerful Jews who not only send the children of their own People to die in fabricated wars to make them richer, but yet hide behind Jewish solidarity.

I am not hesitant to say to the world that the Jews who care not a whit for their People, but only about their power and money are a pox on the body of the Jewish People and a plague on the House of Yisra'el.

It is high time we sent a clear message of total rejection and disavowal of that scum to the world. We, as a People in toto, are paying for the sins of the Jewish rich.


I am not doing this because I am an Anarchist. It just so happens that an Anarchist is the person with the courage and dedication to justice to do this.

I wrote more to this person after thinking the matter over for awhile. This is the continuation:

There are, and always have been the privileged and the disenfranchised among us Jews.

Although it is true that during the powerful and massive waves of anti-Semitic activity some, I repeat some, a small number, of rich Jews were divested of their holdings and hauled off to their deaths together with their unwashed brethren, with whom they would not have otherwise associated; those are unusual cases.

In most cases the wealthy were not only able to bribe their way out of trouble with the Gentiles, or flee; they often collaborated with them against the poor Jews.

Protected behind their sundry security systems, the rich Jews left the poor Jews at the "mercy" of the Gentiles whose anti-Semitism was aroused by the nefarious activities of the wealthy Jews.

Though the rich Jews were the one who aroused the most hatred, the hatred was taken out on the poor and defenseless Jews always - always, today as well.

Who were the victims of the pogroms? The rich Jews? And in our times, who are blown up on buses by terrorists? The rich who drive around, or are chauffeured around, in limousines? Or those who cannot afford private transportation?

You are protecting those who send us to our deaths at the hands of anti-Semites whose hatred has been aroused because of the socio-economic havoc that they wreak.

Of course there were the truly humanitarian fabulously wealthy philanthropists and benefactors Montifiore, Dona Gracia and her family. And have I already mentioned Montifiore, Dona Gracia and her family?

Were Baron Rothschild's intentions pure in establishing the settlements in Israel? None of his efforts in Europe were aimed at eradicating Jewish poverty. He *caused* Jewish poverty in Europe, as well as Gentile poverty, and the Gentiles took their justified hatred of him and his ilk out on the Jewish peasants and small artisans. He was doing business in Palestine. Period.

It's high time we roused ourselves from the mythology about the Jews that we are taught.

Ordinary Jews, like everyone else, are seen by rich Jews as nothing but servomechanisms and soldiers for the defense of their power and privilege. To Hell with them

Doreen Ellen Bell-Dotan, Tzfat, Israel

The thing about Icke is that he mixes 80 percent truth with 20 percent falsehood. Many people cannot distinguish the difference. It's like most people are with the scripture, one either takes all of it to be truth or none of it.

This type of mentality causes all sorts of problems for people. If you cannot pick the chaff from wheat in any text that you read, then you will fall for any and everything.

He started out with an interesting theory but, as you correctly point out... has moved into a money making garbage pile of fantacy.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
The thing about Icke is that he mixes 80 percent truth with 20 percent falsehood. Many people cannot distinguish the difference. It's like most people are with the scripture, one either takes all of it to be truth or none of it.

This type of mentality causes all sorts of problems for people. If you cannot pick the chaff from wheat in any text that you read, then you will fall for any and everything.

I agree with you, but I have done 'my own' research on the matter and am

able to discern. But yes, he should have left Sitchin out of his findings. I only

gleaned so, I don't really know all of his stuff.

reply to post by KIZZZY


To me, Sitchin is a much more reliable source than Icke is, but that's just my opinion.

reply to post by SpeakerofTruth


I agree with you there also...Sitchin has done a fine job indeed but I still feel

his work needs a good going over with other scholars. Yes? We agree?

ICKE'S reptilian thing with shape shifters is just way over the top! IMO




[edit on 26-6-2010 by KIZZZY]

Icke's Owl that he had drawn for Washington was not as telling as the broken

pentagram.

"While the pentagram is used by occultists for protection, an open or broken

pentagram is supposedly used as a snare or to entrap. The argument is

presented that open or broken magical symbols or devices don't work, but

those who present this are ignorant of the facts. "

The broken pentagram is a well know symbol in the occult.

reply to post by Point of No Return


Point of No Return…..

The fact that you didn't like my response doesn't make it unintelligent or lame.

It’s not about what I ”like”. I am trying to steer your commentary more towards being polite & on-topic.

I'm just making an observation, based on previous threads of yours.

Please explain the relevance to my subject material of ”making an observation, based on previous threads of” mine.

First of all, there is loads of David Icke content available on the internet for free.

That has already been addressed in this thread & I have already responded in detail.

Therefore you should read the information & discussion herein.

He is a writer

”He is a writer” who is now heading in some very nasty directions that will damage people, as per my extensive commentary in this thread.

Therefore you should read the information & discussion herein.

writers sell books. Noone is forced to buy the books.

"Noone is forced to buy the books”. However, many are coerced into buying the books by the manner in which Icke preys upon their fears & delusions & fantasies.

As I stated previously

Icke has extended his alien reptilian fantasies & undertaken a revolting & damaging campaign based on fantasies about paedophilia & satanism, in order to rip money off gullible people by developing & preying upon their paranoid concerns.

This is as per my extensive commentary in the thread. Therefore you should read the information & discussion herein.

Your OP is nothing more than a lazy smear campaign, probably with the intent to get some easy stars and flags.

Your comment does not develop the discussion in this thread.

Therefore, it may be more constructive if you try to involve yourself properly in the discussion.

You just say his claims are crazy and ridiculous

My thread is not about the fact that ”his claims are crazy & ridiculous”.

My thread is about the damaging nature of Icke’s increasingly opportune & disingenuous focus on these nasty areas of paedophilia & Satanism, with the sole objective of deriving attention, fame & income.

You would know that if you had reviewed the topic of this thread, the material presented & the subsequent discussion & then became engaged properly in this discussion.

but offer no argumentation as to why his claims are crazy, they just are, because you say so, and it's not up for debate.

I don’t understand what you are trying to achieve by making such comments, other than to show you have have not adequately reviewed this thread.

Therefore you should read the information & discussion herein.

And now you expect intelligent response from me.

I no longer ”expect intelligent response from” you.

Please don't portray yourself as the savior of "gullible people with paranoid concerns"

ATS is about “Denying Ignorance”.

This thread is about “Denying” Icke’s very significant contributions to “Ignorance”.

because it is clearly not what you are about.

It will be easier for all concerned if you ”clearly” state ”what” I am ”about”, rather than continue with your innuendo about me in this & other threads.

If you do that, it might help us to put your commentary in clearer context.

I think David Icke is very interesting to listen to if it were only for his perspectives.

As I have stated previously, that is 1 of the problems with Icke. He becomes ”very interesting” to gullible people, thereby causing the many problems that are the subject of this thread.

Therefore you should read the information & discussion herein.

Do I believe everything he says, no.

Nor should you……the problem is, many do, as per the subject of this thread & the info & discussion herein.

Do I want to listen to him without people like you constantly pointing out he's crazy, and I am too for even listening to him? Yes.

I did not state that you are ”crazy”….. “for even listening to him”.

Therefore you should read the information & discussion herein.

If you don't like it, let it be.

Please revert to my commentary pertaining to “Denying Ignorance”.

You don't have to save anybody

Please revert to my commentary pertaining to “Denying Ignorance”.

you certainly don't have to decide what free minds listen to.

You have closed your response by clearly demonstrating you have not properly reviewed my opening post & the info & discussion in this thread.

Please read your final comment again (above).

Can you now see how you’ve so completely missed the point of this thread?

Kind regards
Maybe…maybe not


[edit on 26-6-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

reply to post by Kandinsky


Kandinsky.....

ETA: @ Point of No Return & Maybe Maybe Not. Seriously funny sparring.

Using some lighthearted humour & some friendly banter, I made a number of attempts to "de fuse" the aggression & rudeness that Point of No Return has directed at me in this & other threads.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by wake up world
Feel free to outline all the "evidence" legend

How ever did you know my nickname is "Legend"? I digress.

The sum total of evidence you have that MMN is a "CIA disinfo-agent" is that he does not agree with you. That's it. I would say it shows a shallow, closed-minded, ignorant and childish thinking on your part; however, it better shows a complete lack of thinking.

Effective disinfo-agents do not make a practice of being skeptical or disagreeing with people. The purpose is twofold. First, no one likes being told they are wrong. They want to be told they are right. It is much easier to set someone away from the truth by promoting and encouraging false beliefs already held. Second, effective disinfo-agents try to insinuate themselves into the community they wish to feed disinformation to. Skepticism and disagreement sets one apart way from a community; it makes one different and therefore suspicious. Agreement with mainstream thinking of a community makes you "one of them", so they are more willing to trust you; therefore they are much more willing to accept untruths supplied to them by the disinfo-agent.

But by far the most effective tool of the disinformation agent is deflection. The disinfo-agent will falsely accuse others of being disinfo-agents. They will target the skeptical, the disagreeable, the "others" in the community. More often, the target will be someone who is speaking the truth. The disinfo-agent will accuse the truth-speaker of being a disinfo-agent. At least, the community will be momentarily distracted, the message lost in the accusation. At best, the community will be suspicious of the truth-speaker, no longer trusting anything said.

You fit all the above criteria. So, either you are so arrogant, immature, delusional-paranoid and shallow-thinking that you do not believe it is possible for someone to have a genuine disagreement with you without being a "disinfo-agent". Or you are indeed a CIA disinfo-agent. Which is it?

reply to post by MarrsAttax


Mate, very well put. I'm astounded that most people dismiss this as reality because of the status of these sickos

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


No my dis-info comment was due to the observations of another member who says this --
"I don't even partially agree with the OP. If Icke has made a career of conspiracy, the OP here is quickly making a career on this site of attempted character assassinations of just about every conspiracy author I've seen discussed on this site. That in itself should be food for thought to the would be reader of this thread as to the motives involved with his/her latest attack. Icke in this case"--

Let me guess, your a sceptic who is disgruntled with your lot in life so you go on conspiracy sites & try to pick arguments. I admire your intellectual ability (but probably not as much as you do yourself) & you should give yourself a good pat on the back, to further boost your obvious over-inflated opinion of your own self-importance.
Why are you wasting your time on here when you could be watching MSM news?

Originally posted by wake up world
No my dis-info comment was due to the observations of another member who says this

And that is supposed to tell us what? That your comment was justified? But why?

Notice Wake Up World has yet to answer the charge and continues to behave as a disinfo agent would.

Originally posted by wake up world
Let me guess, your a sceptic who is disgruntled with your lot in life so you go on conspiracy sites & try to pick arguments. I admire your intellectual ability (but probably not as much as you do yourself) & you should give yourself a good pat on the back, to further boost your obvious over-inflated opinion of your own self-importance. Why are you wasting your time on here when you could be watching MSM news?

You are engaging in my deflection, a typical trait of the disinfo-agent. Instead of discussing the topic, you are attempting to bog it down in accusations of "disinfo-agents" and discussion of personalities so as to drown the message.

So are you or are you not a disinformation agent, Wake Up World? Answer the charge.

Originally posted by MarrsAttax
The problem with this view is that it seems to suggest that powerful people are incapable of indulging in child abuse or weird rituals and that anyone who believes they do are somehow credulous.

I do not think there is any disagreement that there are some very sick people in every strata of society, from the worst disenfranchised to the halls of power. The disagreement is in Icke's accusation that everyone who may hold some modicum of power is connected to this blood-drinking, baby-eating reptilian cult. Icke makes this charge not on any evidence but based on who has more money than him.

Originally posted by MarrsAttax
Have people ever taken part in satanic rituals?

What constitutes a Satanic ritual? I'm not trying to be flippant here, it's a serious question. Moral panics and the fantasies of conspiracy-mongers aside, you would be hard-pressed to find anyone who partakes in "satanic rituals" (in the classical horror-movie sense) aside from angry teenagers trying to stick it to society. Often in conspiracy-mongering, anything that the observer does not like or understand is labeled as "satanic." So, what constitutes a satanic ritual?

Originally posted by MarrsAttax
Have people ever abused children?

Being rational, reasonable adults, we should all know what constitutes child-abuse. Or do we? The reason I ask is because some among the conspiracy-mongers want to blur the lines. They claim that gay-rights is a cover for child sexual abuse. Therefore, any politician who promotes equal rights as promoting "child sexual abuse."

Originally posted by MarrsAttax
Why is it such a stretch of the imagination to believe that people who have those predilections and who also happen to have reached a high state in society would not use their wealth and power to indulge themselves?

Not in the least. But the rate of such perversions is probably no less or more than in the general population. What is the stretch is Icke's claim that everyone is power is a perverse abomination against god and nature.

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


DoomsdayRex.....

As per a number of my posts in this thread, many of these members.....

- Haven't read the information & commentary within the thread

.....or

- Do not have the comprehension skills to understand what they are reading

That is why we just go "around & around", repeating ourselves.

Now I can understand why NightVision said that "members who do not read threads properly should be banned!"

He's a HARD MAN is the ol' NightVision!

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
DoomsdayRex.....

As per a number of my posts in this thread, many of these members.....

- Haven't read the information & commentary within the thread

.....or

- Do not have the comprehension skills to understand what they are reading

I do not think that is the case with Wake Up World at all. Being a disinfo-agent, he knows exactly what he is doing.

EDIT:

I was just joking with Wake Up World to illustrate a point. However, another member found something interesting. Wake Up World posts only in David Icke-centric threads. It seems his sole purpose he is to promote David Icke.

[edit on 27-6-2010 by DoomsdayRex]