David Icke: The Real Story?

[Eyeron]

Here is what I consider an interesting video on David Icke:

http://video.google.com/videosearch?...en&emb=0&aq=f#

It is about how some people claim that David Icke made the claims that the Jews are the Reptilians who control the world.

There are two points about it. It really wasn't him that said that. It was the Neo-Nazis who made that claim. Now, those who hate Neo-Nazis and other anti-Semitic groups believe that it was Icke who said it, and absolutely refuse to understand that it was Neo-Nazis who made the claim.

And it's weird, at least to me. In one segment you can see a group of people protesting the book and want to have it banned on the grounds that it promotes racism against Jews. There are two things that stick out to my mind, one is that none of them have even read the book, they are upset over it because of the claims of the Neo-Nazis who made the claims that David Icke is saying that the Jews are the Reptilian overlords. And the other thing is that generally people like this are highly skeptical about the claims of Neo-Nazis and find their credibility highly questionable. But yet, they're very upset with Icke over the book, a book they haven't even read in the first place.

This seems to be a common thing among protesters who get upset at a movie or a book. Most people who protest a movie or a book, such as Mel Gibson's "The Passion", are upset over something they have never seen (or read) themselves. Wouldn't it stem to reason that in order to make your own opinion you should watch the video or read the book before coming to a conclusion about it? After all, a person really can't know what's in a book or movie unless they've read it, they are going only on the word of somebody else. And it's problematic because many people will take things out of context to support their views.

But the biggest thing that sticks out in my mind is that it probably inadvertently gives the reason on how Icke became a believer in his conspiracies. He was a commentator and he said something very unpopular to the culture and he was highly ridiculed. I've come to believe that even is what caused him to snap and start believing in his views. After seeing this, I wonder if that kind of an event is common to conspiracy theorists such as Alex Jones, or even all other posters you see on the Internet forums.

So the two points I wanted to make are:

People protest without really knowing what they're protesting, and David Icke may have had some kind of psychological breakdown when he was highly ridiculed for unpopular comments, and this video provides some remarkable insight to Icke.

The video is 48 minutes long.

[Liszt]

Icke DEFINATELY means lizards. He has pictures of them in his Biggest Secret book. Drawings though, sadly no photos. They look exactly like the ones from the V TV series.

He doesn't talk about them very much these days. A pathetic 2 paragraphs in his last book, and his talks skip the lizards because of "time constraints". Yeah Dave.

[Nogbad]

David Icke was a nice bloke - he probably still is. He just needs to unwind get a beer and stop worrying about weird stuff.

[Trojan_Jockey]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

Here is what I consider an interesting video on David Icke:

http://video.google.com/videosearch?...en&emb=0&aq=f#

It is about how some people claim that David Icke made the claims that the Jews are the Reptilians who control the world.

There are two points about it. It really wasn't him that said that. It was the Neo-Nazis who made that claim. Now, those who hate Neo-Nazis and other anti-Semitic groups believe that it was Icke who said it, and absolutely refuse to understand that it was Neo-Nazis who made the claim.

And it's weird, at least to me. In one segment you can see a group of people protesting the book and want to have it banned on the grounds that it promotes racism against Jews. There are two things that stick out to my mind, one is that none of them have even read the book, they are upset over it because of the claims of the Neo-Nazis who made the claims that David Icke is saying that the Jews are the Reptilian overlords. And the other thing is that generally people like this are highly skeptical about the claims of Neo-Nazis and find their credibility highly questionable. But yet, they're very upset with Icke over the book, a book they haven't even read in the first place.

This seems to be a common thing among protesters who get upset at a movie or a book. Most people who protest a movie or a book, such as Mel Gibson's "The Passion", are upset over something they have never seen (or read) themselves. Wouldn't it stem to reason that in order to make your own opinion you should watch the video or read the book before coming to a conclusion about it? After all, a person really can't know what's in a book or movie unless they've read it, they are going only on the word of somebody else. And it's problematic because many people will take things out of context to support their views.

But the biggest thing that sticks out in my mind is that it probably inadvertently gives the reason on how Icke became a believer in his conspiracies. He was a commentator and he said something very unpopular to the culture and he was highly ridiculed. I've come to believe that even is what caused him to snap and start believing in his views. After seeing this, I wonder if that kind of an event is common to conspiracy theorists such as Alex Jones, or even all other posters you see on the Internet forums.

So the two points I wanted to make are:

People protest without really knowing what they're protesting, and David Icke may have had some kind of psychological breakdown when he was highly ridiculed for unpopular comments, and this video provides some remarkable insight to Icke.

The video is 48 minutes long.

I think its obvious that Icke had the psychological breakdown BEFORE he was ridiculed for unpopular comments. When he announced he was the sun of God I think it was a clue that he has lost his marbles. The fact that people laughed at him for saying this was not the course of his psychosis.

Indeed, the voice of post-breakdown Icke has gained him more attention that he could have imagined. Bear in mind that incidences of schizophrenia run at 0.5% of the population, which gives him a fairly large audience!

Icke borrows stuff from all over the place, its a kind of mish-mash of conspiracy theories all cobbled together. The Lizard stuff is relatively new, but seen as though Icke thinks 'the Protocols' are true I wouldn't doubt that a lot of his ideas are inspired by antisemitic history.

[Kookwatcher]

When I first saw this outline of the protocols on wikipedia my jaw dropped, because it's so obviously the root stock of 99% of wacko conspiracy theories, from LaRouche to Jones and Icke.

oh damn, can't post links yet - copy and paste: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion#Structure_and_ themes

When some wacko starts grinding on about the new world order, the Bilderbergs, bankers, Jews, lizards or any variation thereof, it ultimately descends from the protocols even if the wacko doesn't realize it.

[LibraryLady]

You do realize that there are no reptilian overlords, right?

[AJM8125]

Originally Posted by LibraryLady

You do realize that there are no reptilian overlords, right?

icksnay on the asphemyblay.

[Kookwatcher]

Originally Posted by LibraryLady

You do realize that there are no reptilian overlords, right?

Hiss!

[Brainster]

That documentary is by Jon Ronson, who posts here occasionally. I agree that Icke is not talking about Jews, but real lizards. So if your complaint is that he shouldn't be considered an anti-semite, I'm with you.

But... as Trojan Jockey pointed out, Icke had his breakdown before he was humiliated. His claims to be the Son of God were what got him laughed at.

[Eyeron]

Quote:

You do realize that there are no reptilian overlords, right?

Shamefully, when I was first introduced to conspiracy theories I believed them, but that was before I was introduced to logic. However, I prefer to use the term highly improbable instead of impossible. Saying something is impossible is just as bad, at least to me, as those who say that it can only be this (insert conclusion here). I still want to see hard empirical evidence before coming to any conclusion. For UFOs and the like i want to see a body and right now we don't have it. For conspiracies I want to see something like tapes of the people involved saying this stuff rather than making a broad leap to the conclusion of conspiracies.

[Eyeron]

Quote:

That documentary is by Jon Ronson, who posts here occasionally. I agree that Icke is not talking about Jews, but real lizards. So if your complaint is that he shouldn't be considered an anti-semite, I'm with you.

Wow, well if he sees this thread I really enjoyed the documentary and found it quite insightful. And I wasn't trying to step on any toes here.

I just wanted to point out that people will often protest something without knowing what it is they're protesting and that at least to me it inadvertently revealed the reason for Icke's beliefs. Sometimes I wish I were a psychologist and would be able to better describe what I saw in the video.

[joe911]

Ive sat through 4 of his all 8 hour presentations,and he definitly does mean reptillians.

[ohp]

Originally Posted by joe911

Ive sat through 4 of his all 8 hour presentations,and he definitly does mean reptillians.

8 hours?

I hope you had a break for sandwiches and coffee.

Were you strapped to the chair? :-)

[Biscuit]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

Shamefully, when I was first introduced to conspiracy theories I believed them, but that was before I was introduced to logic. However, I prefer to use the term highly improbable instead of impossible. Saying something is impossible is just as bad, at least to me, as those who say that it can only be this (insert conclusion here). I still want to see hard empirical evidence before coming to any conclusion. For UFOs and the like i want to see a body and right now we don't have it. For conspiracies I want to see something like tapes of the people involved saying this stuff rather than making a broad leap to the conclusion of conspiracies.

Are you saying that you need hard empirical evidence that there are no reptilian overlords before you will say it is impossible? Is the fact that there are no walking talking lizards not enough? Do you also need hard empirical evidence that there are no giant butterfly overlords secretly controlling the world?

Seeing as how there is no hard empirical evidence for the existence of giant lizard people or aliens I would amend your statement like this.

Quote:

However, I prefer to use the term highly improbable instead of impossible. So improbable that I don't even consider the idea possible.

[joe911]

Originally Posted by ohp

8 hours?

I hope you had a break for sandwiches and coffee.

Were you strapped to the chair? :-)

Lol,i really enjoyed it actually. I stopped for food about 4 hours in

[Eyeron]

Lack of evidence is not necessarily evidence of lack. But that should also not be interpreted as an endorsement of the other claims either so please don't do so. And I'd appreciate it if you'd return to the original topic please.

[T.A.M.]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

Shamefully, when I was first introduced to conspiracy theories I believed them, but that was before I was introduced to logic. However, I prefer to use the term highly improbable instead of impossible. Saying something is impossible is just as bad, at least to me, as those who say that it can only be this (insert conclusion here). I still want to see hard empirical evidence before coming to any conclusion. For UFOs and the like i want to see a body and right now we don't have it. For conspiracies I want to see something like tapes of the people involved saying this stuff rather than making a broad leap to the conclusion of conspiracies.

SO I am guessing Leprachauns, Unicorns, Santa Claus, all "Highly Improbable" as well?

TAM

[T.A.M.]

Originally Posted by Brainster

That documentary is by Jon Ronson, who posts here occasionally. I agree that Icke is not talking about Jews, but real lizards. So if your complaint is that he shouldn't be considered an anti-semite, I'm with you.

But... as Trojan Jockey pointed out, Icke had his breakdown before he was humiliated. His claims to be the Son of God were what got him laughed at.

So he and Shayler both think they are the messiah?

TAM

[Eyeron]

Quote:

SO I am guessing Leprachauns, Unicorns, Santa Claus, all "Highly Improbable" as well?

Those are mythological creatures and not really the same thing. And even at that there is some truth to them, Santa Claus is based on Saint Nick, for example. However, I don't know how I can explain it to you how they are different. With UFOs there are unexplained film and photographs, and within Project blue book there are around 700 cases that have no explanations to them. Does that mean alien space craft? No, it does not. However, I do not operate from the standpoint that it is entirely impossible for these things to exist and it's all just hallucinations or swamp gas.

All I'm trying to say is that for me there is no default position to fall back on. That for me, just saying they don't exist even with logical explanation is just not enough, and that I don't know for certain that they can not exist. Is that all right with you? I guess a good word would be inconclusive.

[T.A.M.]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

Those are mythological creatures and not really the same thing. And even at that there is some truth to them, Santa Claus is based on Saint Nick, for example. However, I don't know how I can explain it to you how they are different. With UFOs there are unexplained film and photographs, and within Project blue book there are around 700 cases that have no explanations to them. Does that mean alien space craft? No, it does not. However, I do not operate from the standpoint that it is entirely impossible for these things to exist and it's all just hallucinations or swamp gas.

All I'm trying to say is that for me there is no default position to fall back on. That for me, just saying they don't exist even with logical explanation is just not enough, and that I don't know for certain that they can not exist. Is that all right with you? I guess a good word would be inconclusive.

And what I am saying, is that most rational people decide that if there is no evidence to prove something exists, then IT DOESN'T until proven otherwise (with evidence).

Icke has presented no evidence that there is a powerful group of Reptilian aliens running things, so by default, most rational people would say that these Reptilian Overlords DON'T EXIST.

Inconclusive is not proper, because it suggests enough evidence on both sides for a rational decision not to be made in favor or against.

Entirely impossible...no, of course not. Just the same as it is not ENTIRELY impossible that Unicorns, at some point, existed. Show me one piece of POSITIVE evidence indicating that we have been visited by aliens, or Unicorns. blurry photos and "unexplained" cases are not positive evidence...they are unexplained or illegible items/issues, but they are not EVIDENCE. Similarly, myths and legends that talk of horses with horns are not EVIDENCE.

TAM

[Eyeron]

Quote:

And what I am saying, is that most rational people decide that if there is no evidence to prove something exists, then IT DOESN'T until proven otherwise (with evidence).

Then you'll just have to consider me irrational because I'm not an either or guy. I'm a maybe the glass is too big or maybe there's just not enough water kind of guy. Or at least i try to be.To me it's either or is very limiting and I try to avoid it. Now since you probably consider me irrational you won't want to talk to me anymore since for I'll probably no longer have any credibility in your eyes. Thank you (no sarcasm intended) for talking with me.

Quote:

Show me one piece of POSITIVE evidence indicating that we have been visited by aliens, or Unicorns. blurry photos and "unexplained" cases are not positive evidence...they are unexplained or illegible items/issues, but they are not EVIDENCE. Similarly, myths and legends that talk of horses with horns are not EVIDENCE.

I agree.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by LibraryLady

You do realize that there are no reptilian overlords, right?

Not to mention, we actually do live in the REAL world. The Matrix crap a la Icke is the fiction.

[MikeSun5]

David Icke is a good example of someone who shouldn't be allowed to watch TV. He saw that show V and freaked out. It changed his whole life. Then he saw the Matrix and freaked out again. Wait until he sees District 9.

Originally Posted by Eyeron

People protest without really knowing what they're protesting...

All the time! Remember when the protests against Kevin Smith's movie Dogma began months before the movie even was even shown? It just sucks that people protested Icke's book. Not because he apparently never said the lizard overlords were Jewish, but it sucks people would actually give that loon so much exposure. Who cares whether or not he's an anti-semite? He's : crazy!!!

[T.A.M.]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

Then you'll just have to consider me irrational because I'm not an either or guy. I'm a maybe the glass is too big or maybe there's just not enough water kind of guy. Or at least i try to be.To me it's either or is very limiting and I try to avoid it. Now since you probably consider me irrational you won't want to talk to me anymore since for I'll probably no longer have any credibility in your eyes. Thank you (no sarcasm intended) for talking with me.



I agree.

There is always hope, my friend. I have relatives who approach things like you, and I still talk to them...lol

What it does do, however, is make it kind of pointless to try and convince you of anything, because you have given yourself a cheat...an ultimate disclaimer, which goes like this...

"When there is overwhelming evidence proving my assertion is incorrect, or when I am left with no evidence of my own assertion but my opinion, I will back out of the argument or debate, by saying...well it maybe highly improbable, but it is not impossible."

TAM

[Subliminal]

Originally Posted by Nogbad

David Icke was a nice bloke - he probably still is. He just needs to unwind get a beer and stop worrying about weird stuff.

If he did, he wouldn't make a ton of money.

[Horza]

Is he though?

From what I know about Icke it sounded like he had a fairly comfortable, middle class life, he was a respected sports commentator, wife, kids etc,. and then he went off the deep end. I stand to be corrected if he is raking in the dough but even then, I find it really hard to believe that someone would totally destroy their career, become an international laughingstock and pariah in order to turn a few quid flogging 'The Coming Carrot-Person Empire: Exposing Our Vitamin A-Rich Overlords' DVDs and books.

[8den]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

Here is what I consider an interesting video on David Icke:

http://video.google.com/videosearch?...en&emb=0&aq=f#

It is about how some people claim that David Icke made the claims that the Jews are the Reptilians who control the world.

There are two points about it. It really wasn't him that said that. It was the Neo-Nazis who made that claim. Now, those who hate Neo-Nazis and other anti-Semitic groups believe that it was Icke who said it, and absolutely refuse to understand that it was Neo-Nazis who made the claim.

And it's weird, at least to me. In one segment you can see a group of people protesting the book and want to have it banned on the grounds that it promotes racism against Jews. There are two things that stick out to my mind, one is that none of them have even read the book, they are upset over it because of the claims of the Neo-Nazis who made the claims that David Icke is saying that the Jews are the Reptilian overlords. And the other thing is that generally people like this are highly skeptical about the claims of Neo-Nazis and find their credibility highly questionable. But yet, they're very upset with Icke over the book, a book they haven't even read in the first place.

This seems to be a common thing among protesters who get upset at a movie or a book. Most people who protest a movie or a book, such as Mel Gibson's "The Passion", are upset over something they have never seen (or read) themselves. Wouldn't it stem to reason that in order to make your own opinion you should watch the video or read the book before coming to a conclusion about it? After all, a person really can't know what's in a book or movie unless they've read it, they are going only on the word of somebody else. And it's problematic because many people will take things out of context to support their views.

But the biggest thing that sticks out in my mind is that it probably inadvertently gives the reason on how Icke became a believer in his conspiracies. He was a commentator and he said something very unpopular to the culture and he was highly ridiculed. I've come to believe that even is what caused him to snap and start believing in his views. After seeing this, I wonder if that kind of an event is common to conspiracy theorists such as Alex Jones, or even all other posters you see on the Internet forums.

So the two points I wanted to make are:

People protest without really knowing what they're protesting, and David Icke may have had some kind of psychological breakdown when he was highly ridiculed for unpopular comments, and this video provides some remarkable insight to Icke.

The video is 48 minutes long.

Yeah and here's a few choice quotes

Quote:

"I strongly believe that a small Jewish clique which has contempt for the mass of Jewish people worked with non-Jews to create the First World War, the Russian Revolution, and the Second World War. This Jewish/non-Jewish Elite used the First World War to secure the Balfour Declaration and the principle of the Jewish State of Israel (for which, given the genetic history of most Jewish people, there is absolutely no justification on historical grounds or any other). They then dominated the Versailles Peace Conference and created the circumstances which made the Second World War inevitable. They financed Hitler to power in 1933 and made the funds available for his rearmament."

Quote:

"The same attitude that suppressed the challenge to the manipulation of World War Two, today sees people vilified and jailed for questioning some of the official versions of the Holocaust in Nazi Germany. If you do that, no one listens to the evidence because this is lost in the tidal wave of vilification and condemnation. If people want to believe that all those who question the official line are Nazis and apologists for the Hitler regime, or anti-Jewish, then they must go ahead and do so. But I'll tell them this. They are kidding themselves, because that isn't true. It simply isn't."

The man uses lizards as a euphemism for Jews. He's a racist holocaust denying scumbag.

[Red3]

Originally Posted by 8den

Yeah and here's a few choice quotes





The man uses lizards as a euphemism for Jews. He's a racist holocaust denying scumbag.

He does actually mean lizards when he says lizards. It's not just the jews he says are reptilians.

There's a lot of people who get into all the holocaust denail stuff, for the same reasons people get into 9/11, fed res, nwo stuff. It's not because they're anti semitic, it's because they're idiots. They believe everything they read. And this - I think - includes Mr Icke. Considering most of his work is not his own, he's more than likely been suckered into it along with thousands of others.

[cornsail]

Quote:

"I strongly believe that a small Jewish clique which has contempt for the mass of Jewish people worked with non-Jews to create the First World War, the Russian Revolution, and the Second World War. This Jewish/non-Jewish Elite used the First World War to secure the Balfour Declaration and the principle of the Jewish State of Israel (for which, given the genetic history of most Jewish people, there is absolutely no justification on historical grounds or any other). They then dominated the Versailles Peace Conference and created the circumstances which made the Second World War inevitable. They financed Hitler to power in 1933 and made the funds available for his rearmament."

Quote:

The man uses lizards as a euphemism for Jews. He's a racist holocaust denying scumbag.

Let's hear it for logical leaps!

Sweet movie, by the way. I did find him quite likable. He obviously started having some paranoid delusions when he felt he was being watched and started believing he was the son of God. Those symptoms are actually pretty common for BPD or schizophrenia.

[dudalb]

David Icke is nuttier then an Almond Joy bar. End of story.

[dafydd]

Originally Posted by dudalb

David Icke is nuttier then an Almond Joy bar. End of story.

No more to be said.

[Eddie Dane]

Are our overlords similar to reptiles in the way that the only start moving about when they are hungry and just sit still all day when they're not?

I am really not that impressed with the mental capacities of reptiles.

[Caustic Logic]

Originally Posted by Eddie Dane

Are our overlords similar to reptiles in the way that the only start moving about when they are hungry and just sit still all day when they're not?

I am really not that impressed with the mental capacities of reptiles.

No, they're humanoid and from another planet so they aren't like earth reptiles. They're warm-blooded and function just like Humans, except with a reptiilian outer appearance so they don't LOOK like humans. Then they decide they need to look like humans so have to put on rubbery masks and gloves and wear red Star-Trek type uniforms. That's true. Unless David Icke says somethingelse, then that's ture.

Seriously, all the CT people that I know who appreciate Icke, it's more as entertainment. They debate which of the many things he ties together might be the true ones and what besides the lizard people is part of the loony bin camouflage. "It's so he doesn't get killed, since he also exposes "_pet theory x_""

[SpitfireIX]

Originally Posted by LibraryLady

You do realize that there are no reptilian overlords, right?

I, for one, welcome our new reptilian overlords.

[MikeSun5]

Originally Posted by 8den

He's a racist holocaust denying scumbag.

Interestingly enough, he actually gets a free pass on that. Reason being....

Originally Posted by dudalb

David Icke is nuttier then an Almond Joy bar.