David Icke 2011

[Seikou-Kishi]

That's Maxwellian etymology there Spellbook... you have something in common with your dearly beloved hero

[Dale]

I suppose one can sit near a fire and decode the origins of varying words every evening until their last year of life. Though many etymological definitions can be traced back several centuries with reasonable certainty of their origins, many cannot. And then we introduce the concept of phrases. And myths. And symbols.

It becomes near impossible.

To say the word "sunset" comes from ancient Egypt can prove to be as difficult as saying it does not.

With regard to Mr. Icke, he's quite a passionate researcher, and is fully convinced of what he states. This does not make him 100% correct, as common sense would state, but he does introduce an audience to concepts they would never come across seated in front of a television screen. If one takes what they need while listening to one of Icke's presentations, and disregards what isn't needed, I suppose they'd be in a reasonable situation.

[9eagle9]

In English the term SET doesn't make sense in regards to SunSet. As if the Sun was SET below the horizon, as if placed there. We know the Sun does not Sit. So...where did the term for the sun setting==Sun SET== come from?

SETTLING makes more sense? The Sun Settling below the horizon. Set-ling.

Lol. Sorry. I may be pot stirring too. But something to think about.

I'll look further.

[Benign]

Posted by StephenW11UK (here)
Hi Benign, is ''atheist' the word you mean to use here? Because in 15 years of following David Icke's research work (as an a-theist myself) I have never come across anything to suggest that he is a theist. In fact, he considers religion to be a creation of TPTB for the express purpose of enslaving humankind.

Hi Stephen,please forgive me for not answering sooner but I've been very busy these days.

It seems to me the term ''atheist'' is open to some classification.For my part, I should say I'm a materialist-atheist, meaning I only will give credence to what has been scientifically and empirically proved.

That does not mean however that I'm not open minded and I'm always eager and willing to listen to all interesting theories on various subjects. Nor do I believe that science always tells us the truth,unfortunately it does not,especially when it has been employed to serve the interests of the few in order to enslave and manipulate the many.Sometimes the powers that be,allow only part of the truth to be revealed to the public to confuse the issue and not allow them to realise some truths.

But there are some scientists who,to their credit,do serious,honest work,and they are a source of sanity,logic,creative thinking and healthy reasoning in our world.For example I love Richard Dawkins and his work,have read almost all his books.On the subject of UFO research I like the work of Stanton Friedman.Astronomy could benefit by the original but serious scientific work of Paul La Violette whom Bill Ryan has recently interviewed and so on.

Now for subjects like Kundalini,for example, I'm fascinated but I would approach it from a medical,psychiatric point of view as,with all due respect,the tradition and theory around it is based on religious dogma from India.Some honest ''metaphysical'' experiences, and I had myself some from a very early age,could well be communication from alien beings who for some reason have taken an interest,or built in potential that we humans,possess.In antiquity ,the comparatively primitive man of that time,associated these attributes with some God,while such an idea is totally unacceptable to me personally.I do not believe in a creator,I think it is naive.

However,these legends and ancient religious beliefs may well have hidden in them,and I believe a lot of them have,interesting truths that man with his science and logic can take advantage of ,for his improvement.It is science not yet discovered.
As Arthur C Clark said : '' Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic'' and that about sums it up for me.

For example look at this small clip and how Richard with simple,lucid,understandable,irrefutable science replies to the creationist myth.I find it so clever and hilarious.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=TjxZ6MrBl9E

[noamsh]

I'm also not impressed with David Icke. he just doesn't seem credible to me. and lets face it , thats really almost all we have to go on in the alternative domain,most of the time its simply people telling their story.

[Benign]

Posted by noamsh (here)
I'm also not impressed with David Icke. he just doesn't seem credible to me. and lets face it , thats really almost all we have to go on in the alternative domain,most of the time its simply people telling their story.

Well you've got a point ,I agree.Now I do not want to say ''almost all'' but wasn't it Charles who was interviewed in December by Bill who said about 70% was rubbish and that the Elite were having a great time laughing at it?

David Icke in his social criticism,to me is extremely credible and correct.Now the other things and the reptilian agenda is hard to swallow.It might well have some truth in it.

But right now the world is plagued by most pressing problems like pollution,overpopulation,starvation e.t.c. I'd rather we found a way that so many children in Africa don't die from hunger and disease every day for example,let's make a better,fairer world in the global society which is up to us,and we can sort out the reptilian thing later.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Binaryspellbook (here)

Posted by 9eagle9 (here)

Posted by Binaryspellbook (here)
Eagle,

I may have lots of little letters after my name, but I'm certainly not guilty of any showcasing. I simply object to being blatantly lied to by certain people who should know better.

I guess I'd have to ask you why you feel like you've been blatantly lied to? If its not appropriate to post here give its own space.

Hi Eagle,

Take a look at the video I posted. It's full of lies, unresearched "facts" and gibberish that could only be described as "made up nonsense." Take your pick.

[Mod hat on]

Binaryspellbook, again you spun off into your favorite personal rant. Please don't derail the thread. This thread is about David Icke.

An honest and appropriate response to 9eagle9 (after you simply couldn't stop yourself once again) would have been something like

I was referring to Jordan Maxwell: please refer to my comments on this different thread [then refer to the thread or the posts]. I'm aware that the research of Maxwell and Icke is almost entirely unrelated. Apologies.

I enjoy your many other comments. And I agree about Bob Dean and David Adair. No more unrelated rants, please.

[jasonzwsa]

Removal of posts

[greybeard]

Posted by jasonzwsa (here)
I agree Stephen. Kundalini awakening is not related to any religion.

Yes agree and the spontaneous awakening of Kundalini in a person of Scottish culture proves that.
It is a great blessing and a minor curse.
There is a certain frustration that all of a suddenly you see essence of things clearly witout words and have difficulty in conveying this in a left brain fashion.
David Icke certainly experienced something similar.
The reptilian bit early on with David Icke put me off but his recent talks yes, in particular the statement. "Its all an illusion except unconditional love."
We can get seduced and distracted by the sensational but its all in Davids statement repeated here.
We are here to learn unconditional love and that we are One with Source

My head is in the tigers mouth (readers of Ramana will know what I mean) I wish Kundalini would finish the job.

Chris

[last50cobra]

The thing that has started to turn me off to Icke lately is the fact that he is always changing his beliefs. Granted in an ever changing world, we must seek new information. But the part that drives me crazy is that he never goes back and corrects or explains his previous beliefs. I don't know i guess it is frustrating to start thinking one way, and then have him come out with something contradictory to his own stuff. Does that make sense?

[jasonzwsa]

Removal of posts

[JoshERTW]

David Icke probably doesn't talk to scientists because he is a spiritual being more than anything. The Vatican came to an agreement with the scientific community (through the Royal Society I believe) at the turn of the century - science was free to investigate whatever it wished so long as it stayed out of all things spirtual/religious. Hence began the phenomenal separation of science and spirituality, and the ridicule of anyone within the scientific community who even tries to put any type of scientific basis to anything non-physical or paranormal.

Why is it that all these award winning scientists (Einstein comes to mind) seem to turn towards the metaphysical once they are so far established in their careers and near retirement? Is it fear of their own mortality or because they no longer fear the ridicule of their peers for exploring the "forbidden science" of spirituality? I'm not saying theirs a grand conspiracy to keep it from being explored, I'm just saying the system of ridicule was put in place a long time ago by some crusty old priests and scientists who were towing the same line, and now we have the scientific community that we do. And this is also why people like David Icke don't bother with them (or with the education system for that matter).

Also I've never heard him say he is God - he regularly mentions that we are all "god's" but doesn't the bible also say something along the lines of "we are all children of god" and that "part of the lord lives in all of us?" (Paraphrasing here as I'm a lapsed and now highly skeptical former-Catholic, and don't remember all the quotes).

[greybeard]

Posted by JoshERTW (here)
David Icke probably doesn't talk to scientists because he is a spiritual being more than anything. The Vatican came to an agreement with the scientific community (through the Royal Society I believe) at the turn of the century - science was free to investigate whatever it wished so long as it stayed out of all things spirtual/religious. Hence began the phenomenal separation of science and spirituality, and the ridicule of anyone within the scientific community who even tries to put any type of scientific basis to anything non-physical or paranormal.

Why is it that all these award winning scientists (Einstein comes to mind) seem to turn towards the metaphysical once they are so far established in their careers and near retirement? Is it fear of their own mortality or because they no longer fear the ridicule of their peers for exploring the "forbidden science" of spirituality? I'm not saying theirs a grand conspiracy to keep it from being explored, I'm just saying the system of ridicule was put in place a long time ago by some crusty old priests and scientists who were towing the same line, and now we have the scientific community that we do. And this is also why people like David Icke don't bother with them (or with the education system for that matter).

Also I've never heard him say he is God - he regularly mentions that we are all "god's" but doesn't the bible also say something along the lines of "we are all children of god" and that "part of the lord lives in all of us?" (Paraphrasing here as I'm a lapsed and now highly skeptical former-Catholic, and don't remember all the quotes).

Along those lines
Jesus said
The father and I are one.
I am within the Father and the Father is within me
Of myself I do nothing it is the Father within who is the doer

To put it into context Jesus also said that we could do all he did and more.

Chris

[StephenW11UK]

Hi, last50cobra, I feel sure that what I'm about to say here would be agreed with by many avaloneans, and it's this:

The times when I've made worthwhile changes in my personal life, when the quality of my experience has moved to a new level, when I realise that I'm actually enjoying being alive, those changes have always come about because I've made a point of 'changing my beliefs'.

A new David Icke YouTube video, both funny and profound: Deprogramming Yourself (The Parting of the Ways)

[jasonzwsa]

Removal of posts

[DawgBone]

Posted by ndroock1 (here)
I am trying to understand the popularity of David Icke. This is what I know:
- worked for BBC as a sports anchor;
- self proclaimed 'God'
- has been / is considered a nutcase in the UK because of appearance in Wogan show
- has no formal education, is entirely self-taught
- never discusses with scientists only with friendly interviewers
- he has no source he -is- source through so called contact with higher entities
- he is making tons of money with his hour long talks.
- he seems to know -everything- ( LOL )

Are you into David Icke? ( Why? )
Would you accept him as the leader of your country?
Do you believe he has contact with higher entities?
Do you believe in reptilians?

A classic way of dealing with uncomfortable information is to attack the messenger. TPTB and their agents are adept at character assassination.

[StephenW11UK]

Hi jasonzwsa, A very sincere thank you for this video. Since the mid-50s I've heard David talking about his 'Wogan' background in writing, interviews and at Brixton, but have never seen the actual video. What I find so impressive is how calmly and positively he responds to the jibes, and that in the very midst of his 'spiritual' confusion.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by StephenW11UK (here)
A new David Icke YouTube video, both funny and profound: Deprogramming Yourself (The Parting of the Ways) David Icke

This one? Deprogramming Yourself (The Parting of the Ways)

[Benign]

I must say I admire David Icke for his courage to go on with research after all that he had been through and I have great respect for his courage that moves me deeply.Also his political and social analyses,are ballsy and to the point.

[Ba-ba-Ra]

I happen to like David Icke and am in agreement with most of what he says and how he says it.

However, if he doesn't speak to you, listen to someone else. There are many with great information out there and we all resonate with different personalities. Most are saying the same general things, but in different ways.

It's rather like, let's say ice cream. The basic ingredients for ice cream are the same, it's just the flavor that's different. Some like strawberry some like chocolate - some like to try all. Order (or listen to the flavor you like), but it's not necessary to make it a contest between the flavors. It's all ice cream.