David Icke

Post Reply New Topic

It's no more insane to believe in the reptiles than it is to believe in any of the organised religions.

If you think about it dispassionately, they are all equally improbable.

The problem is with the act of "belief", even in the face of all evidence to the contrary.

Icke says that "he goes where the evidence takes him", however outlandish or improbable it may at first appear.

This approach is exactly what makes him so vulnerable to disinformation.

That is why I prefer to remain open-minded. On the balance of probabilities, some of what he says will be true, & some will not. He even advises his readers to "take what makes sense to you & leave the rest" - that his role is simply to put all the information "out there" for the readers to make a judgement on.

Actually, I find it really really hard to believe that the governments of the world could all be so inept as to create this sick society "by accident", and then fail to do what needs to be done to put it right, when the answers are so blindingly obvious and have been told to them many many times by various writers, commentators etc.

This only leaves the possibility that it is like this because they want it to be like this - which is fundamentally what Icke is saying, reptiles or no reptiles.

And it is undeniably true that "they" regard the common masses as expendable pawns in their games - that does make them "cold-blooded", whether figuratively or literally. How else could they do what they have done in Iraq, Vietnam etc etc?

As for being expensive - obviously he couldn't do it himself, he is not a scientist anyway. But I shouldn't think building a variable frequency "sonic laser" type device would be that hard for someone who did have the technical knowledge.

The hard part would be obtaining a suspected "reptilian" to test it on......

shopaholic brings up a few good points there. i suppose if you reversed the situation, and that if most of society had been worshiping 8 foot interdimensional reptiles throughout history, and icke came with the religion myth out of the blue, again most would consider him crazy.

i am not sure if i worded that last post very well, but hiefully you will understand the general point that i am trying to make.

Understood loud & clear, no probs!

The same guy propagates notions such as satanic ritual abuse( there are references to it in many, many of his videos/books) and other conspiracy theories. If you ask me he's another dellusional guy who just read some psycho-spiritual knowledge and sells it along with his paranoid dellusions.

The skull-and-bones society is real.

The freemasons' initiation ceremony is real.

Both of these seem pretty "satanic" to me - and they are just the tip of the iceberg.

I don't know, masons are pretty christian if you ask me


And I don't think neither of those two organizations ritualistically kills babies or any other such thing, as was frequently reported in acounts of "satanic ritual abuse".


Plus, this guy stinks of conspiracy theory.


Charles Manson believed that the end of the world was near and that the will be a racial war in which part of the human race will die, which was the reason he collected dune-buggies and hid in the desert.

Both believes were dellusional, and even manson now denies his belief in "helter skelter" (as he called it), and said that it was a idea of one of his followers. (Yet evidence hints that he really at time did believe it)

Shopaholic, I agree with you, some of us actually care about facts and want to know the truth. Others (the majority) don't care what the facts are, don't care about the truth. They are what the conspirators call the "profane", those in the dark because they choose to be in the dark (the mindless minions of mind controlled zombies).
No amount of proof will ever mean s**t to the zombies, they've already made up their minds before looking at evidence or facts. These will be the idiots lining up for RFID chips, begging their government to take over once the depression runs it's coarse, snitching on free thinkers like us as "thought criminals"..... They will clearly forsake common since and individual identity in the name of group think and group identity. They are human cattle, bred to be this way, domesticated beyond repair.
They will live in squander, eating bugs to live, while their media tells them they are living like kings, and of coarse they'll believe it because mother media/government tells them so. These people are beyond ever being reached. They can't even figure out how to co-exist and compromise on thier own, and they don't even care to.
But what pisses me off about sheep is this; they don't even want to know the truth, they don't care about any transcendental facts, but they love to bump their gums reguardless.... So, if they don't care about the real, non-biased facts, they all must cling to **something** then how do they percieve themselves as having any ground to stand on in an intellectual debate?

It's best to just ignore the sheeple. They've lost what made them human in the first place, through domestication, and talking with sheep is like talking with betsy the dairy cow.

Just the fact alone that many "anti-conspiracy theorists" seem to totally reject the idea that history can repeat itself, that a brutal dictatorship could just as easily befall them as it has others in history (who probably also thought they were "above senseless conspiracy theories" until Hitler/Stalin/Castro/Ho Chi Minh, etc came to power), as if they are some cosmic teachers pet or something... Arrogance in the name of blind conformity. It's repulsive.

For those who don't know, I am a proud thought criminal. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

I believe in many aspects of the so-called "ancient astronaught theory" but i have a hard time believing in many of Icke's claims.

Same here pretty much. Besides David Icke, like all popular conspiracy theorist seem to love making a profit from their statements and thus further discredit the entire movement in reputation. One would think that if you want to warn the world about something, at least you'd donate any excess money (left over money from sales that don't cover expenses) to a charity to prove that you're legitimate, and not just in it for the money. I mean wouldn't you want to try your best to distribute your truth as far and as wide as possible generously, if you're legit about saving people?

I'm open minded on the matter, but I doubt most of his claims because it reeks too much of the typical new age content really. Not to mention I think most conspiracy people give the government too much credit when it comes to weaponry and power. How does one know those rumors of super-advanced technology and mind control came from the very people who are alleged to use it? Just to scare the conspiracy people into believing these intriguing lies, and distract them from the reality of things?

I mean if I was a global super-secret government, I would be playing both sides intentionally to distract everyone from the truth and honey pot the alternative crowd away (who cannot be swayed by mainstream propaganda) from the truth, and get them to believe some intentional lies by faking leaks of 'documents', 'personal testimonies' and 'information' from apparent sources. The goal would be to encourage the mainstream to alienate the alternative and vice versa to a point no-one listens, and then re-enforce it by over-fictionalizing and mocking the phenomenon, theories, etc in the media and entertainment industries on both side. Basically you generate an illusion of choice between two ideological constructs of various degrees, so no-one thinks for themselves and adapt to whatever is preached by certain groups. This in turn destroys true individual thinking at it's core, while maintaining the illusion that it still exists, and have everyone in your pocket. But of course, when the time comes that something undesired needs to be disclosed, I'd be willful to do so, and then have the alternative group act as the group who supports my interest, by having them mock the actual truth. Then rinse and repeat the entire cycle.

Damn I'd be good at messing with people's minds and ruling the world.

But then with saying all that, the best policy is to trust no-one except yourself, pursuit knowledge on matters for yourself and find empirical means to prove that knowledge to yourself. Don't just blindly listen to what anyone else has to say, really think about what anyone says; be open and willing to sometimes go 'well, maybe I could be wrong, but who knows, I might have to think about this' if something prompts you to think hard about something that defies your beliefs.

The overall point is to just simply think for yourself.

Yeah, and your not the only one thinking this way. Really, go to this site, listen to what he has to say:

http://cuttingthroughthematrix.com/