David Icke

[archonemis]

He's typically prtrayed as "a nutter" for now obvious reasons. I actually agree with everything he talks about up to the lizard people. Barring that one point I think his interpretation of world events and societal controls is right on the money.

He came to L.A. and I saw him last night. It was very strange to see a sold out theater given that (from anyone I've asked) no one knows about David Icke. But still I got one of the last tickets (if I had shown up a few minutes later I would have been holding a cup to the door). It was a great . . . lecture, I suppose is the right word. He divided it up into tow larger points and several sub points. He talked about how we see the world (mass / popular reality) and then how how it really exists (states of being before they're interpreted through the mind). It sounds very esoteric and I guess it is. But dang, it's really neat to hear someone talk about these things in a coherent manner. I get a little worked up so it's hard for me to express these ideas - I jump around a lot in my own head forgetting that if I'm communicating the other person doesn't know where I'm jumping or why (my information set isn't identical to everyone else's). All in all I feel like I learned something. Maybe it'll be on youtube somewhere in the future.

I kinda wish I'd shouted, "Goldstein!"

[ocd]

Haha, yeah. He does raise some interesting points, but the whole "Lizard People" thing really does cloud any relevance he could have to a real argument. I've watched a ton of youtube vids of his speeches (I love hearing about crazy conspiracy theories).

I'm just wondering how he got so hooked on that.


Edit: Jesus, it's been a long day. I'm not sure if this post made sense.

[CaptainPajamaShark]

Originally posted by ocd
Haha, yeah. He does raise some interesting points, but the whole "Lizard People" thing really does cloud any relevance he could have to a real argument.

I'm just wondering how he got so hooked on that.

too many episodes of V

[archonemis]

Originally posted by ocd
I'm just wondering how he got so hooked on that.

If you look into Sumeria, Babylon and ancient Iraq you start hearing about these guys called "the Anunaki" and I think this is where Icke gets a lot of his ideas. Interestingly you can see something like an "echo" of this flying reptile form in Native American cultures too. The Mayans, for example. I can't say that I agree with the literal interpretation of this information, however, the information itself is well documented and readily available.

I think that his idea of the lizard people does discredit him to those who are less inclined to think outside of commonly accepted thought (but I an see where he's coming from). It's too bad because a lot of people can't see past certain ideas. The inability to understand what he's saying is unfortunate in that (I feel) that he has a lot of very interesting, informative and positive things to say.

I will site this exerpt.

^That resonates with truth to me.

[ja.net]

The thing is, Bobby, when you start thinking to yourself that "This guy is really onto something, let's just set aside that lizard stuff" then it's not very far from there to "let's just side aside that stuff about the Jews" or whatever other group the nutter in question has it in for. It's bad practice, and Icke is not the first or last nutter who's going to figure out that if he puts the conspiracy theories in front and keeps the lizards in the back, he'll get a lot more people to listen to him. See also Scientology.

[premium]

lots of talk and theories from this guy, but no proof.

[Iago]

[premium]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKxLmdBzS10

['jim]

If you ignore everything he says, he seems like an ok guy to hang with.

[archonemis]

It's too bad that he has good things to say and he's ignored. I will certainly agree that some of his ideas are "out there" to say the least. However, let's also remember that when we think about American politics. Keating Five? Bush and his CIA drug running? Iran Contra? Al-Queda being CIA funded? Obama's advisor Brzezinski having helped aid Al-Queda? Clinton giving the "okay" to bomb an asprine factory? It's not like we can point to Icke and say he's crazy when we're being lead by people who are willing to murder other people. Let's remember that Icke talks. The people about whom he's talking murder. We're going to vote for these guys. Let's remember that we're voting for murderers when we vote.

Ignore everything he says based on a single point? No, I'd rather not. He talks about connecting dots in such a way that the world becomes more coherent. I think I'd rather not ignore him altogether; given that he does back up most of what he says with sources. Any ability to comprehend the idiocy that is our society is amazing to me - regardless of the source. Let's remember that we're living in an economic situation that impoverishes us and instead of talking about how to not get exploited we talk about bailing out the exploiters so that they can do it some more. Icke crazy? What about everyone else? Anyone here that has filled out a W2 form is going to work for the government for a little over two months out of the year without question. No one talks about this. We all accept it as though subjegation by a private corporation is "A-okay." We live in a serfdom and we don't talk about it.

Crazy? Let's, as a society and individually, look in the mirror once in a while.

[archonemis]

Originally posted by ja.net
The thing is, Bobby, when you start thinking to yourself that "This guy is really onto something, let's just set aside that lizard stuff" then it's not very far from there to "let's just side aside that stuff about the Jews" or whatever other group the nutter in question has it in for. It's bad practice, and Icke is not the first or last nutter who's going to figure out that if he puts the conspiracy theories in front and keeps the lizards in the back, he'll get a lot more people to listen to him. See also Scientology.

I do side step certain things. I think Neitzsche's idea of morality makes much more sense to me than conventional morality. I do not, however, think his "eternal recurrence" makes sense now that we know about red shift (Nietzsche pre-dates the knowledge of red shift). So, in this sense I think that side-stepping an idea is alright since no one is omniscient and has literally everything right. If that was the case then we would have a tome that we could refer to at any time about any thing.

As for likening the lizard people to jews I disagree in that the lizard people would be anyone in power (according to Icke's view which I do not hold) as opposed to jews who are a very specific group of people who have been recently the subject of a state mandated murder program. I also disagree with comparing him to Scientology in that the point of Scientology (to my knowledge) is to exploit people and get their money with a (in my opinion) ridiculous alien concept. I would like to point out (I feel the need to point it out explicitly rather than implicitly) that Icke does not exploit people and does not endorse racism of any sort. If you don't believe me a lot of his materials are free to look at online.

I agree that he says things that are out there. I also think that Noam Chomsky says things that are out there. I think Chomsky is right about certain things. Just because I disagree with him on one point doesn't mean that I must, by reflex, disagree with him on all points. This would mean that if he were to say that the sky is blue I would have to disagree. I would not take this approach. If Chomsky said that there was a connection beyween Bush and the Nazis I would have no choice but to agree with him even though I think he's a douchebag. Just because I hate him doesn't mean he's incapable of producing a true statement.

I feel that if one applies this to David Icke then you get an idea that Icke says things that sound initially like fantasy. The direct inverse of how things that Obama says sound just wonderful at first until you realize that he's a tool and is about as trustworthy as McCain. Anyone can says true or false statements. If they say mostly true I'm willing to bet that you'll listen to them despite their inconsistency. I still think Kubrick is really good even though I didn't like 2001. I still like large portions of the Bible even though I kind of disagree with certain parts. I still love my family even though they are pretty much crazy people who actually think that being Republican is a good thing (my mom thinks being a Democrat is a good thing - she's on the other side of the same crazy coin).

I reject the idea of rejecting someone based on not the entirety of their statements.

I do not reject you. [thought I'd throw that in there]

[CaptainPajamaShark]

he sounds like a nutter, like michael tsarion

[Asharak]

Hmm...
http://www.theawl.com/2012/04/do-sup...tist-thinks-so

[kingka]

He's an interesting character, I'm listening to a 4 hour presentation of his on youtube. fascinating stuff.

[kingka]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p91N...eature=related