It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Annee
As I always say: The only person I believe is Me.
It does not matter who is putting forth info - - - it is my right and responsibility to discern what "I" believe.
Feel what ever you want - - but don't dictate to me who and what to believe.
As I always say: The only person I believe is Me.
It does not matter who is putting forth info
it is my right and responsibility to discern what "I" believe.
Feel what ever you want
but don't dictate to me who and what to believe.
In The Biggest Secret (1999), Icke introduced the idea of the "Reptoid Hypothesis." He identifies the Brotherhood as originating from reptilians from the constellation Draco, who walk on two legs and appear human, and who live in tunnels and caverns inside the earth. They are the same race of gods known as the Anunnaki in the Babylonian creation myth, Enûma Eliš. - en.wikipedia.org...-shifting
I partially agree with your thread title
and completely disagree with your OP's content.
Ritualistic pedophilia and child abuse for occult practices is a reality of our modern world.
It's probably one of the biggest scandals in history.
If you've read Cathy O'Brien's Trance-Formation of America you would never be able to look at politicians the same way.
There are many examples where obscure people she wrote about in her book, later became convicted for partaking in crimes identical to what she described them doing in her book, years before these people were even suspected of foul play. There are lots of details that she could not have known about, which later turned out to be completely true.
Look up William Colby as well. Former CIA director who talked about exactly this sort of thing.
What makes you think this whole issue is not true? Just curious, I didn't see any reasoning for such a stance in your OP.
Just Icke bashing.
David Icke may be crazy, but material does not become nutty by association.
Also, every one of David Icke's works (that can be digitized) is on the Internet for free.
You can call him a nutjob
seeing the same "money" argument getting made for him, David Wilcock, Alex Jones, Jordan Maxwell, etc., is getting boring and repetitive.
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.
Icke was instrumental in bringing many of us into the know of how the world political structure works and who chairs those various special interests such as the Council on Foreign Relations, Royal Institute of International Affairs, Trilateral Commision, etc.
He was also instrumental in exposing (for me at the very least) illuminati symbols and logos to the multinational corporations that currently run this planet.
I call horse manure on this post.
Originally posted by cripmeister
I understand that many people have a drive to believe in something. Some even say that it's hard wired into our brains to believe and to search for meaning. Can someone please tell me how they can find meaning in the fear/hate mongering and utter filth that David Icke spreads?
Originally posted by Faiol
this guy is crazy
come on ... look at the title of that article ....
David Icke is not a Ufologist so it's wrong to paint him as an ambassador for Ufology. I really don't recall him ever discussing UFOs (I could be wrong).
So what? Every single conspiracy theorist going charges for their books and live appearances, what makes Icke so different?
These people need to make money somehow, they need food on the table and gas in their cars, so this is how they make their money.
I think it's a really weak arguement whenever someone mentions the financial side of conspiracy theorists - as if it's unbelievable that they should dare to charge a fee for their goods and services. And then use that as a slight against them.
If people want to pay to see Icke, they can. On the other hand they can choose not to.
If people want to pay for Ickes books, they can. On the other hand they can choose not to.
It is Ickes choice to charge and it is their choice to pay.
This is a non-issue.
Originally posted by Son of Will
There are many examples where obscure people she wrote about in her book, later became convicted for partaking in crimes identical to what she described them doing in her book, years before these people were even suspected of foul play. There are lots of details that she could not have known about, which later turned out to be completely true.
Originally posted by Son of Will
Look up William Colby as well. Former CIA director who talked about exactly this sort of thing.