About David Icke & James Redfield

[Argonaut]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Thank you again Argonaut.

[quote author=Argonaut]what metaphors/symbols have meaning for you personally, but may not be understood by others?

Oops spent too much time winging out in Silicon Valley coffee shops, or maybe it was the surf, teehee.
These visuals that sum things up for me are hard to relate well, I see. If I do attempt. It can be truly
noise now that think about it, unless a detailed explanation is warranted. ok.

[/quote]

Exactly. There are times when analogies, symbols, metaphors, and figures of speech are helpful. They can clarify a point, make a reader say "Aha! Now I get it!" But other times they add nothing, or may even take something away. I used to like giving analogies and metaphors myself. Sometimes they would get pretty elaborate and I'd find myself having to explain them. But then I realized that directly saying what I wanted to say - and leaving it at that - took less time and effort, on both my part and the part of the reader. I also started asking myself why I felt the need to spin these lengthy analogies. I finally understood that I did it to draw attention to myself. To show everyone how clever and witty I (thought I) was. Even now on this forum I sometimes have to fight the urge to write a long analogy to illustrate my point. I think up all kinds of "deep" symbols and metaphors that I just find so clever. But then I catch myself (usually). I think this is partly why I chose to start pointing these things out to you. I see a lot of my own tendencies in your posts.

I also have other writing habits I'm trying to work on. I like to over-explain things. Sometimes I repeat myself, unneccesarily making the same point in different ways. I'm also overly wordy sometimes. For instance I'll say stuff like "My tendency is to sometimes..." when I could just say "I sometimes..." Or I use a big "intellectual-sounding" word when a simpler one would do. Writing clearly is a matter of practice and attention. And I'm not fully there yet myself.

I found this thread very helpful: Good writing style as defined by George Orwell. Maybe it'll have some value for you too.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

[quote author=Argonaut]I think your message to Icke would have little to no effect. [/quote]

Yup, and many years of struggling with what to say were distilled into this one post. That is very useful
to me for the next time I try and dissuade one of my believer friends. Usually when I commit to a topic
this thoroughly, I use the printer and bind the ref mat'ls into a ring binder, During that process I hope to
re-read the other's sentiments now that my head has closure and is not buzzing, so much.

[/quote]

That could be very helpful. When it's on paper you can also make notes and highlight things. I might try that. As for re-reading sentiments once your head's not buzzing, that's also a good idea. It can be beneficial to do this even before replying. There's much wisdom in the phrase "let me sleep on it." It can give the mind time to process. I've posted noise and emotional reactions in response to things, and lots of it could've been avoided if I'd have put some space between reading and responding. Regarding some of my posts in this thread, it would've been far better for me to say, "I had an emotional reaction when I first read this, but after some observation I realized it was my predator." But instead I "went off," then had to come back later and clean up my own mess.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

[quote author=Argonaut]He added that later (along with the conspiracy angle), but it was like "the icing on the cake." The essence of his disinfo was already there. If anything, the new stuff serves to hide the New Age disinfo more effectively. Because it was pretty blatant in his earlier writings.[/quote]

Interesting. Perhaps it was new age disinfo that hit me over the head so many years ago.
I'd really like to come to grips with the scope of which themes are truly considered "New Age disinfo."

[/quote]

I think the crux of his New Age disinfo lies in two things: (1.) His use/abuse of astrology and karma. With these two concepts, he twists Free Will into something negative and being a machine into something positive. He also hides garden-variety psychopathy, eliminates the idea of Organic Portals, and prevents an understanding of STS and STO. All because for him, one's "life path" is mapped out from birth. (2.) He promotes synchronicities and high strangeness as guidance from positive forces. This is largely why he claims to trust all sorts of channelers and psychics, because their reliability was "confirmed" by external events. He warns of negative entities who wish to deceive, but he never talks about himself meeting one. He seems to think he's immune to deception. Apparently, in Icke's world only positive entities have the power or inclination to engineer amazing "signs" and omens.

So Icke takes genuine esoteric and spiritual ideas and twists them to have the opposite meaning. He has plenty of other New Age disinfo too, but the above two are his foundation. They lead into the rest of it. Especially the second, because most of his ideas supposedly came through channelers and psychics.

To grasp the full scope of it, remember Icke's line of force - that you can wake all by yourself, using your own current thinking process. All you have to do is believe what Icke tells you and you're there! This theme runs through every page of his books, both his new and his old stuff. And as Laura said, the direction of this line is towards Entropy. With that in mind it makes sense that most of Icke's ideas are like distorted "funhouse mirror" reflections of the concepts presented here. Doing Fourth Way work per Laura and the C's helps align one with Creation (STO). Following Icke - with or without his "Reptilian" idea - leads one in the complete opposite direction.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]
I don't know if you read my review of the pantheon laid out by Stan Deyo in his 1978 "Cosmic Conspiracy"
(http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=10474.0) but the scope of that work is very much like
Icke, plus sprinkle in few bible verses. Don't think I have we ever seen Icke reference Deyo.
[/quote]

I hadn't, but I have now. In his autobiography, David Icke claims he was told that one of his "guides" is St. Germain. And guess what St. Germain is a part of? The "Ascended Masters" - otherwise known as the Great White Brotherhood! Hm... There really does seem to be a "pantheon" of themes which keep repeating, doesn't there? Probably because it all has the exact same line of force. And there's so much of these disinfo teachings, too, compared to genuine paths to Creation! I think this is the true meaning of Matthew 7:13-14: "Enter ye in by the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leads to destruction, and many are they that enter in thereby. For narrow is the gate, and straitened the way, that leads unto life, and few are they that find it." In other words, if a "way to salvation" is widespread and popular - if the teaching has armies of promoters and "fans" - it's very likely STS-oriented. In fact, I'd say you could take that to the bank.

 

[durabone]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

I finally understood that I did it to draw attention to myself.

I'd have to agree with that, for me. Well, almost. I also see
that I admire linguistic construct and find beauty in it. And
that might add an alement of vanity. Plus I am in general comforted
at seeing new forms of order, and metahpor is a treasure chest of
those. So there you have it. Three times self is involved.
I'm wondering now how it plays out in sci-fi I have written.
I admire Orwell, and thanks for the thoughts on writing.

His use/abuse of astrology and karma.

Let's affirm that. Are you saying that he tosses these two
traditions about like positioning chess pieces to win his point,
and in doing so he defiles them at the same time? Buzz words.
He does breathe them as if it is a given that he is an expert.

With these two concepts, he twists Free Will into something negative.
and being a machine into something positive.

All because for him, one's "life path" is mapped out from birth.

In The Robot's Rebellion he adovcates that free will can change your
life. "I am me, I am Free!" Interesting hypocrisy, did I read that
right?

prevents an understanding of STS and STO

If you mean by that he obviates the concept, then not only do I agree,
but I smell a rat. Note the jump, and how it skips learning and
responsibility. We have on one side the dark draconian lords and
their nefarious ways. Most experiencing Icke do get exposed at
some point to some additional, new shocking scary stuff. He has
kept expanding that corner of the business over the years, adding
micro-chip, EM attack, the sundry. Then we shift to infinite love.
And this love is hung before us as a state involving submission in
effect: All that dark scary stuff, and the thieving, and the lying,
and the dumbing you down, don't be a drag, plunge into Infinite Love
ever after! That's like hollywood, an ideal formula for evolutional
cul-de-sac.

but he never talks about himself meeting one. He seems to think he's immune to deception.

Or, he deliberately does not want to draw attention to that concept.
That's creepy if correct, because then the two above ideas combined
produce a net result that is eerily familiar.

leads one in the complete opposite direction.

Yes, that is what I am talking about. Entropy is a great word,
I also like:

dissolution
noun
1 the closing down or dismissal of an assembly, partnership, or official body.
• the action or process of dissolving or being dissolved.
• disintegration; decomposition : the dissolution of the flesh.
• formal death.
2 debauched living; dissipation : an advanced state of dissolution.

St. Germain.

I wish he'd said something, I'd have bugged out then!

Probably because it all has the exact same line of force.

An idea I got from Icke ironically, is that not only is there a shortage of original
material, but staying true to the traditions of the adepts as described in Masons,
Manly Hall, etc. and using these known connections can affirm to your distant perhaps
unknown ally as to which side they should be on.

Good stuff. Thanks.

 

[Argonaut]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

I finally understood that I did it to draw attention to myself.

<snip>

I'm wondering now how it plays out in sci-fi I have written.

It may play out with that, but writing fiction has some different principles than writing fact. I'd say it's a bit more lax; you're more free to be "artistic" with what you write. But writing clearly would still be important.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

His use/abuse of astrology and karma.

Let's affirm that. Are you saying that he tosses these two
traditions about like positioning chess pieces to win his point,
and in doing so he defiles them at the same time? Buzz words.
He does breathe them as if it is a given that he is an expert.

[/quote]

More like he takes the concepts too far by saying that every move we make is predestined - if we're correctly following our "life plan," that is. But if we use Free Will to act against our "life plan" we can veer off of our destined path, which Icke portrays as an undesirable outcome. Note that "life plan" is Icke's actual term. I was mistaken before when I said "life path."

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

With these two concepts, he twists Free Will into something negative.
and being a machine into something positive.

All because for him, one's "life path" is mapped out from birth.

In The Robot's Rebellion he adovcates that free will can change your
life. "I am me, I am Free!" Interesting hypocrisy, did I read that
right?

[/quote]

Icke reconciles this contradiction by saying that the preset "life plan" is our choice at a higher level. We chose it prior to birth. So down here on Earth we should just follow the orders of our higher self, because it knows best. He defines "freedom" and "free will" as two separate things. The first is an ultimate goal - freedom from negativity, oppression, etc. The second is an act of rebellion against one's "life plan." And freedom can only be achieved by trusting and obeying our higher self's direction. So ultimate freedom comes from giving up your Free Will. How's that for a brain-twister? Icke currently downplays these earlier ideas of his, probably because it doesn't fit with his current anti-conspiracy image. It's easy to tell a bunch of New Agers that they must surrender their Free Will, but he couldn't sell that to his current audience. So now he just emphasizes "freedom" and buries the anti-Free Will stuff.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

prevents an understanding of STS and STO

If you mean by that he obviates the concept, then not only do I agree,
but I smell a rat. Note the jump, and how it skips learning and
responsibility. We have on one side the dark draconian lords and
their nefarious ways. Most experiencing Icke do get exposed at
some point to some additional, new shocking scary stuff. He has
kept expanding that corner of the business over the years, adding
micro-chip, EM attack, the sundry. Then we shift to infinite love.
And this love is hung before us as a state involving submission in
effect: All that dark scary stuff, and the thieving, and the lying,
and the dumbing you down, don't be a drag, plunge into Infinite Love
ever after! That's like hollywood, an ideal formula for evolutional
cul-de-sac.

[/quote]

You got it. And the "new shocking scary stuff" is the hook. It's bait. Many people can see that something's wrong in the world. Icke offers to explain what's going on, and some of it is even accurate. It's how he hooked me, because I was just learning about 9/11 at the time I found him. This could be his whole purpose for putting the conspiracy stuff as a major focus now. It pulls in far more people than his New Agey fluff did. But he needed to begin with the New Age stuff in order to become what he is today. His wrong magnetic center had to be formed around all those lies coming from channelers and psychics. If he had gone the conspiracy route from the start, he may have turned out completely different. While in the media, and then the Green Party, he was just starting to think about the corrupt nature of the system. But then it seems he was vectored away from this by his first high strangeness incident. And from that point it became all about "spirituality." It was like 4D STS didn't want him to "go there" yet. Not until they had properly programmed him. That's my impression, anyway.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

but he never talks about himself meeting one. He seems to think he's immune to deception.

Or, he deliberately does not want to draw attention to that concept.
That's creepy if correct, because then the two above ideas combined
produce a net result that is eerily familiar.

[/quote]

Exactly. And at the and of his autobiography Icke clarifies how one should discern negative influences from positive. I was actually a bit off when I said he based it on high strangeness alone. It's actually far worse than that - he says the best way to know is whether or not it "feels right!" Here's an excerpt about negative forces, from the last few pages of the book. Note that the "vortex" represents the physical universe that we view as reality. It's basically his early version of the "Matrix."

Not all communications are from highly evolved minds and some can be from very imbalanced and negative sources trying to control and disrupt. Be careful. Are the communications coming from outside the vortex from the highest levels, or from within the vortex? The quality of the information between these sources is vastly different. [...]

Again, be very, very careful. Don't be fooled. Check everything out with as many people as you can and most of all be honest with yourself and trust your own instincts. The best way is to sit quietly, free your mind from all irrelevances and listen to your higher self speak to you. If what you hear sounds right to you in the light of all information available, then act upon it, but only if it feels right.

Beware, too, of the "spiritual arrogance" which can be found within a few elements of the "New Age" movement. These are people and groups who say, "We know how things are and we know best." They might have some useful information for you to act upon, but then again they might not. In the end the only one who knows what's best and right for you is.. YOU. I view with some concern the way parts of the New Age movement are turning themselves into little more than another church. They reach a certain point in the journey to enlightenment and then stop. Like most organizations that begin to gather rules and rigid belief systems around them, they start to see new information that questions some of those beliefs as a threat. That is no different from what the churches have done. Evolution is a continuing process. Remember it matters not what you believe, but what you do. [...]

It is also easy to become obsessed with the extreme negative forces at work around this planet. That obsession can lead you to see everyone as a person "from the other side" and this brings paranoia and fear. Both states of mind attract to you these very negative energies. [...] It happened to me for a short period in 1991, which gave me an essential understanding of those who think in this way. They are not "bad" people. They just need to understand what is happening to them. Everyone, but everyone, gets mixed up during the awakening process as you shift through many levels very quickly. The danger is getting stuck at the mixed-up stage and staying there.

It is right that we should all acknowledge the existence of extreme manifestations of negative energy and be aware of how they work, but the best way to reduce their affect is not to fear them. Fear creates and attracts negative energy very effectively and it is fear that the system uses to control us. In truth most of what we call power is the ability to make others fear, and not being fearful is the key to self liberation.

It is vital never to lose your sense of humour. There is no greater antidote to extreme negative forces and the extremes of karmic experience than to laugh, especially at yourself. It is so very hard to keep a sense of humour amid the confusion sometimes, but remember that a sense of humour can give you a sense of proportion. Have fun! We make our own reality and if we think of life as joyous and fun it will be. Life is not meant to be full of fear and misery. We are not meant to be serious all the time, forever looking into the deep significance of everything that happens. Let's all have a laugh whenever we can. The more joyous and happy we are, the stronger the channels of guidance become because there is less negativity around us to get in the way.

He talks a good game, that's for sure. Certain aspects make sense, others seem to make sense but fall apart upon examination. And then there's the sneaky statements which can be misread. For example, Icke says "Check everything out with as many people as you can." This sounds decent on the surface. But he's talking about taking a channeled message and checking it with other channelers. If they agree, that's a sign it's correct. He doesn't even mention that a single entity or a group can use multiple channelers. Or that the so-called "higher self" you ask for confirmation may actually be "in on it." Or that any "good feelings" could be imposed on the mind by these entities. He can say "Be very, very careful" all he wants, but he actually promotes just the opposite.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

leads one in the complete opposite direction.

Yes, that is what I am talking about. Entropy is a great word,
I also like:

dissolution
noun
1 the closing down or dismissal of an assembly, partnership, or official body.
• the action or process of dissolving or being dissolved.
• disintegration; decomposition : the dissolution of the flesh.
• formal death.
2 debauched living; dissipation : an advanced state of dissolution.

[/quote]

Yes, dissolution fits very well too. :)


[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

St. Germain.

I wish he'd said something, I'd have bugged out then!

[/quote]

Well, he did. He just doesn't say it now, and with good reason. He's probably hoping nobody goes "back in time" through his old books and figures it out. Good thing there were people on Amazon selling old copies of that autobiography, otherwise we might never have seen some of this stuff. We technically didn't need it to determine that Icke is COINTELPRO, but it did help clarify some things. It's Icke in more of a rough, raw form than today. Which can be quite helpful to look at.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

Probably because it all has the exact same line of force.

An idea I got from Icke ironically, is that not only is there a shortage of original
material, but staying true to the traditions of the adepts as described in Masons,
Manly Hall, etc. and using these known connections can affirm to your distant perhaps
unknown ally as to which side they should be on.

[/quote]

Hm... Are you saying that Icke may use certain ideas and symbols to signal his "brothers" that he's one of them? So they'll know to support his ideas? Very possible, I suppose. Maybe there are also signals that they'd use to let each other know when to "move" or do certain things. Like, say... joining together, as Icke, Jones and the rest are now doing?

 

[durabone]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Thanks for the comments.

[quote author=Argonaut]All because for him, one's "life path" is mapped out from birth.

[quote author=potamus]In The Robot's Rebellion he adovcates that free will can change your
life. "I am me, I am Free!" Interesting hypocrisy, did I read that right?[/quote]

Icke reconciles this contradiction by saying that the preset "life plan" is our choice at a higher level. We chose it prior to birth. So down here on Earth we should just follow the orders of our higher self, because it knows best. He defines "freedom" and "free will" as two separate things. The first is an ultimate goal - freedom from negativity, oppression, etc. The second is an act of rebellion against one's "life plan." And freedom can only be achieved by trusting and obeying our higher self's direction. So ultimate freedom comes from giving up your Free Will. How's that for a brain-twister?[/quote]

Now I got it. Nice job working that out, ya'll. By "riling the troops" is he not directly distracting people from their "life plan?" Does he feel he is on his "life plan" to be "God's gift to sheeple" or something? Feels icky.

[quote author=Argonaut]But he's talking about taking a channeled message and checking it with other channelers. If they agree, that's a sign it's correct.[/quote]

Back to the graven image concept and the emotional transference of ideas. Plenty of images and conviction, but he doesn't really know, now does he? What I find interesting is that my eyes did pass over these words years ago. But I was so enthralled with the "Hunt for for the dread manipulators" that I didn't want this diversion and glazed it over.

[quote author=Argonaut]Hm... Are you saying that Icke may use certain ideas and symbols to signal his "brothers" that he's one of them? So they'll know to support his ideas? Very possible, I suppose. Maybe there are also signals that they'd use to let each other know when to "move" or do certain things.[/quote]

I'm saying something specific Argonaut, a little more explanation might help. A number of years back,
a high-up mason in our company who I had already found dark and scary, handed me some books, suggested
there might be some people I would have stuff in common with. 1995, I think. The masons don't normally
solicit in my experience, and I remember digging around and finding some evidence that they were down
on new enrollments, etc. Whether he knew I had already read many authors proposing Masonic conspiracy -
I don't know.

But I enthusiastically accepted and read the books. Practically the very first tale was one of an inn-keeper
about to go broke, but when he put up a certain sign out front, a signal to his masonic brethren, his rooms
became full. In the dark ages, masons affixed something to their left foot so they could spot each
other, and if you look at the real version of my avatar you can see another example where the left
foot of the figure is rotated outwards. I'm saying that much like the marks of kosher and "made in china"
one can be informed as to where one puts their money, "The only vote that Matters" according to R.E.M.

A secret handshake, perhaps. I once entertained the notion that were are dealing with the Babylonian
religion here, so adherents making a contribution may be required to mark them for future generations to
see, vis-a-vis the eternal flame that Icke target above Lady Di's "memorial." Texe Marrs might agree.
This tome: _http://www.amazon.com/Mysterious-Monuments-Encyclopedia-Illuminati-Architecture/dp/193000446X/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264882681&sr=1-3 likely mentioned here already, is a tour de force of such symbols in architecture.

Anyways, citing his source as Germain suggests to me that either the great vizier is still slumming
around (think Bramley) and had actually touched Icke, or Icke or his channel has just identified himself, especially if
the whole idea of the real Germain channeling these days is false.

 

[Argonaut]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

By "riling the troops" is he not directly distracting people from their "life plan?" Does he feel he is on his "life plan" to be "God's gift to sheeple" or something? Feels icky.

Pretty much. Icke says that his life plan is to help "heal the Earth" by helping humanity to awaken. He doesn't portray this as interfering with the life plans of others, because those who listen to him are meant to listen, and the rest won't pay any attention. However, since Icke sees this as a time of transition, he claims that more and more people will become open to his message. And at this time, millions of people are incarnating with a life plan of helping to heal the Earth. So he says that many like him are being born at this time. According to him, if this plan isn't successful, the Earth will rise up and destroy us all in order to preserve her own existence. But he says the plan WILL succeed. Then humankind and the Earth will evolve together, reaching the "next level." Which is essentially a perfect Utopia, free of pain and evil of any kind. All of this is, of course, a distortion of the upcoming Wave and the shift to 4D. It's a theme which is very common in the New Age these days.

Essentially, Icke has revealed that he's here for the same reason Laura is - to prepare people for what's coming. The difference is how Icke is "preparing" them. It's like that old Twilight Zone episode, where the aliens' book "To Serve Man" was really a cookbook. No matter what Icke thinks he's doing, he's "preparing mankind" like a chef prepares a gourmet meal - getting them nice and tasty for his true masters. He's also preparing them to have their souls smashed.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

[quote author=Argonaut]But he's talking about taking a channeled message and checking it with other channelers. If they agree, that's a sign it's correct.[/quote]

Back to the graven image concept and the emotional transference of ideas. Plenty of images and conviction, but he doesn't really know, now does he?

[/quote]

No, he doesn't. And even he admits that his understanding of the details may change. But it's likely that a wrong magnetic center has been formed in him, as shown by statements like these:

I will go on doing what I believe to be right in the face of whatever may come. Fortunately I am extremely stubborn when necessary and the more anyone tries to stop me the more determined I become to go on.

I have no doubt whatsoever that at least the basic themes of what you have just read are correct, and this is the message that I and many others are trying to communicate to the world.

In other words, his path is now fixed. He will not be dissuaded from it by anything. And he feels he's not only qualified, but that it's his cosmically-appointed duty to teach others what he "knows."

Now here's what Gurdjieff said about wrong magnetic center (from In Search of the Miraculous):

So far I have spoken of the right magnetic center, of the right guide, and of the right way. But a situation is possible in which the magnetic center has been wrongly formed. It may be divided in itself, that is, it may include contradictions. In it, moreover, may enter influences of the first kind, that is, those created in life, under the guise of influences of the second kind but distorted to such an extent that they have become their own opposite. Such a wrongly formed magnetic center cannot give a right orientation. A man with a wrong magnetic center of this kind may also look for the way and he may meet another man who will call himself a teacher and will say that he knows the way and that he is connected with a center standing outside the law of accident. But in reality he may not know the way and may not be connected with such a center. Moreover here again these are many possibilities:

1. He may be genuinely mistaken and think that he knows something, when in reality he knows nothing.
2. He may believe another man, who in his turn may be mistaken.
3. He may deceive consciously.

Then if the man who is seeking the way believes him, he may lead him in a quite different direction and not where he promises; he may lead him very far from the right way and bring him to results directly opposite to the results of the right way.

But fortunately this happens very rarely, that is, wrong ways are very numerous but in the majority of cases they do not lead anywhere. And a man simply turns circles on the same spot and thinks that he is going somewhere.

So from this we see a couple possibilities for Icke. Either he himself has formed a wrong magnetic center, his teachings tend to attract others who have, or both. His teachings may even lead to the formation of a wrong magnetic center around them, if one's belief in Icke becomes strong enough. His message definitely qualifies as "influences of the second kind but distorted to such an extent that they have become their own opposite." We've also seen that Icke's teachings will lead one "to results directly opposite to the results of the right way."

What I find interesting is that my eyes did pass over these words years ago. But I was so enthralled with the "Hunt for for the dread manipulators" that I didn't want this diversion and glazed it over.

It's easy to miss subtle "hints" when we're busy looking for the big, obvious signs of manipulation. But the more we learn, the less "subtle" the hints become. For you, me, and others here, Icke's signs have now become extremely easy to see - complete with big flashing arrows. But that's only because we've taken a long, hard look at him.

[quote author=Argonaut]Hm... Are you saying that Icke may use certain ideas and symbols to signal his "brothers" that he's one of them? So they'll know to support his ideas? Very possible, I suppose. Maybe there are also signals that they'd use to let each other know when to "move" or do certain things.

I'm saying something specific Argonaut, a little more explanation might help.

<snip>

Anyways, citing his source as Germain suggests to me that either the great vizier is still slumming
around (think Bramley) and had actually touched Icke, or Icke or his channel has just identified himself, especially if
the whole idea of the real Germain channeling these days is false.

[/quote]

Ah, I see. Thanks for explaining that. I think that whatever's calling itself "St. Germain" is not him. Icke was promoting the typical view of St Germain, that he was a genuine mystic and all the tales about him are true. Laura has thoroughly discussed the issue of St Germain here: http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/grail_5d.htm. She also mentions that the concept of St Germain being one of the "Ascended Masters" originated with none other than Mdme Helena Blavatsky! So as with most major New Age concepts, we're back to Theosophy once again.

Several people claim to channel St Germain by name, but in Icke's case he came through using the name "Rakorski." Despite communicating with many different channeled beings, this Rakorski turned out to be Icke's primary source back then
+. From Love Changes Everything (The book largely channeled through Mari Shawsun):

Since the publication of The Truth Vibrations I have learned so much more as I have communicated almost daily with Rakorski, the one known as Lord of all Creation, who is directly responsible for the changes the Earth will undergo.

Here is what Icke said about Rakorski/St Germain specifically:

Our most memorable moment on the visit [to France] came when we arrived at the former home of the remarkable Frenchman, Count St. Germain, who in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was dubbed the "Wonderman of Europe" for his feats and abilities. One, so it was claimed, was the ability to disappear. No-one knows how long he lived except that it was a very, very, long time. Voltaire called him "the man who never dies and who knows everything." It is widely held that the mind or aspect of Infinite Consciousness I call Rakorski had incarnated as St. Germain, and the moment we saw his house both Linda and I had the same reaction: wow! We were both very moved just looking at the place and the energies were incredibly powerful. It was lunchtime and we couldn't go inside, but as I stood there a very clear thought came into my mind: "You will come back here with your family and your new son next year (1993), and you will release energies that will have an enormous effect on the world." Again, we'll have to see what happens.

But here's something very interesting... I did a little searching and found that Icke has something quite different to say about St Germain (and the "Ascended Masters") nowadays. Here's an excerpt from The Biggest Secret. I included some extra at the beginning, so you can get a feel for St Germain's supposed friend William of Hesse-Hanau.

Mayer Rothschild became banker and manipulator to Prince William IX of Hesse-Hanau, another member of the Black Nobility reptilian bloodline, and they attended Freemason meetings together. According to the book, Jews And Freemasons In Europe (1723-1939), William’s younger brother, Karl, was accepted as the head of German Freemasons and members of the Hesse dynasty were closely involved with an Elite Freemason group called the Strict Observance. This was later called the Beneficent Knights of the Holy City, and was known in Germany as The Brethren of John the Baptist (a code for Nimrod).

The House of Hesse were on Hitler’s side in the Second World War and Prince Philip of Hesse was a messenger between Hitler and Mussolini. After they took the British throne William and Rothschild made a fortune hiring Hesse troops to the German Hanoverians. Many of the troops who fought for ‘Britain’ in the American War of Independence were William’s German mercenaries. William was the grandson of the Hanoverian king of England, George II, and is therefore an ancestor of Queen Elizabeth II. By another line, he is also related to her husband, Prince Philip.

Goodness knows how many of the reptilian Hesse bloodline are out there, because William alone is estimated to have fathered at least 70, yes 70, children by various women. How did he find the time? But this is another important point. The reptile-Aryan offspring produced through the arranged marriages are the official heirs. But literally thousands are produced unofficially outside of marriage and these are not credited to that bloodline. However, they are carefully documented and the Brotherhood know exactly who these people are.

They want to know which are the reptile bloodlines because they know they will be easiest to ‘plug in’ to the reptilians on the lower fourth dimension. This is one reason for the highly detailed genetic records kept by the Mormons, another Brotherhood operation at its top level. So when people in power appear to have no blood links with these families, the opposite may be true. A number of researchers believe Bill Clinton to be a closet Rockefeller and he is certainly blood-related to the British monarchy, every Scottish monarch, and King Robert I of France. St Germain, now a ‘messiah’ figure to many New Agers, was a friend of William of Hesse-Hanau, and his brother, Karl.

Apparently, Karl wrote that Germain, an alchemist and magician, had been raised by the de Medici (Black Nobility) family in Italy. Many New Agers today talk about the Great White Brotherhood of ‘master souls’, including Germain, who are communicating ‘guidance’ to channellers about the coming transformation. This is yet another mind control operation by the Brotherhood to misdirect and imprison the more extreme of the New Age mentality and to stop it getting off its collective arse (and the ceiling) and so making a real difference.

And

In the 18th century, a Matthew Kennedy from Ireland went to Paris to work with his good friend, the Illuminati frontman called Saint Germain, who presided over the Illuminati Lodge at Ermenonville near Paris. The lodge took part in blood rituals on an altar made from human bones.

Any man can make mistakes or learn things which change his understanding. But Icke doesn't claim this. He does say his understanding has "grown" since his early days, but he has never come out and said he was dead wrong. Besides, since he felt moved by such "incredibly powerful" energies while visiting St Germain's old home, and received a prophetic message about returning, he was clearly convinced that St Germain was a positive force. And these methods of "knowing" things are what inspired his entire mindset. Remember, according to Icke we need to trust our own guidance; if it "feels right" then it is right. So if his "feelings" were mistaken about St Germain, how can we trust him about anything else? This is why Icke can't say "I was wrong" when it comes to things like this. Instead he just hopes nobody notices the contradictions. The autobiography is 17 years out of print, after all. How many people nowadays are ever going to read it? And if any Icke followers do read it, how many will actually smell a rat?

When I read the above excerpts from TBS I also realized just how different Icke writes now compared to then. I've become so immersed in Icke's old stuff that the contrast shook me up a bit. As Kimber suggested, it's as if his books have literally been written by different people. There are ways to analyze writings and discover if they're written by the same person. I wonder how difficult it would be to have one of Icke's early works and one of his newer books scientifically analyzed and compared?

 

[Argonaut]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Just to let everyone know, I've found a potentially valuable piece of data (while searching for Icke and St Germain). It's the Ivan Fraser article we've discussed previously - with an extra addition at the end. It appears to be something Ivan posted to the Icke forum. The entire thing is here: _http://www.scribd.com/doc/14160623/David-Icke-is-being-used-by-Illuminati-. This info lines up well with what we've already learned about Icke, plus it may give a rare behind-the-mask look at him.

In this post, Ivan first quoted his own article, which I won't reproduce (the article is here if you haven't read it: _http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=54). But the following is what he wrote afterwards. I've reformatted it from the version I found at the link, as it was very messed up and a pain to read.

I believed that he was educated and insightful when I read his first book and had no idea that the information that grabbed me had been taken lock stock and barrel from others. I thought David was special because he was 'in tune' and because he reprinted his own and others' psychic messages about him and what is going on in the world.

When he released his second book, I accepted his word when he said he was in almost daily communication with ascended masters, Jesus Christ, Rakorski, Saint Germain etc. But I know better now.

I accepted that his - what I would have judged otherwise intolerable - behaviour of flaunting his pregnant girlfiend in the face of his wife and expecting her to accept it because if she didn't she didn't understand unconditional love. I know better now.

I accepted and was stunned by the conspiracy material in Robot's Rebellion. I thought his observations and witticisms were profound. That is, until I read Behold a Pale Horse by William Cooper which was where most of what I considered astute observations had been taken from, despite David saying directly that he had come up with, for example renaming the Protocols of the Elders of Zion the Illuminati Protocols to get away from the anti-Semitic tag. I know better now.

I also know that half of Robot's is erroneous, even Cooper himself stated that the alien agenda was a fake and he had been used as an unwitting dupe to perpetuate it. And ...and the truth was and still is in my opinion one of the best conspiracy books ever written. But I know better now to understand that the alien links are erroneous, and that it is merely a collation of other people's work, some of whom were not credited. I know now that when David makes a profound statement, or a good witicism, it is most probably directly from someone else, who deserves the praise for it and the dollars.

I accepted that he published a book called Lifting The Veil, shortly after I gave him a copy of my own book called Lifting the Veil. And on up to 1996, even when I was beginning to hear from various people who were consistently telling me that they had provided information for David, but were surprised at his lack of gratitude, I thought 'ah well he's a busy man and at the forefront of waking people up'. And when people started telling me that Icke was brash and rude when not in the public eye, that he was egocentric and behaved like he really expected people to see him as a very important person, I thought they were just misreading a very talented and intelligent man whose spirituality was deep, and that he needed his style and ego to enable him to carry on and get into the limelight, and into the faces of those who needed to know such important truth.

But in September 1996, I was with a number of friends of David and Linda Icke who had been involved in helping him with his work. Even they didn't like him personally, found him rude, but believed the 'work' transcended any personal feelings. They introduced me to Linda. The very first thing she said to me was 'David isn't the man you see on stage. He doesn't walk his talk.' During the day she told me that she believed he was mixing with a crowd that were planting disinformation, and he was vulnerable to it because they were sycophantic-type women. She told me that David had admitted having ego problems but felt he was over them, and asked Linda to tell him if she saw him going down the 'ego road again'. She said she tried, but he wasn't receptive - he was too concerned with breaking America and his ego had been boosted by the success of ...and the truth.

I STILL saw David as 'the man' for the job, but by then I had a very different view of him personally. I felt sorry for Linda being treated like a doormat. I realised that Icke had a very distorted opinion of himself, and that this delusion made him vulnerable to his naive view of the material he was writing. I began to agree with those people i now knew, who had been involved with David from the early days, who almost to a person said they couldn't stand the man personally, did not like his company, but believed he was the best person for the job.

But then, at that time, we all thought he was a very clever man with amazing powers of observation, and that the material he was writing was essentially the truth.

So I started to help him out by sending information. I introduced him to the topic of satanic organisations, I introduced him to the first satanic cult mind control victim, I provided the first health-related material for his then David Icke/Bridge of Love newsletter 2 of which he put his own name to! I felt confident he would do the research and wasn't afraid of breaking it into wider consciousness. I had no idea he would make such a pig's ear of the occult-related information and end up being the instigator of one of the biggest mythologies of our age - the reptilian aliens - and that he would demonise so much that provides the very keys of understanding Creation and the way things are created by the astral level of consciousness, which is controlled by the very forces operating through satanists and Illuminists, religions etc. I didn't expect him to become the vehicle by which they could introduce a mass psychomemetic virus into the consciousness of those beginning to wake up. And they achieved this quite easily because David Icke was seen by so many as an intelligent, astute, spiritual, nice, trustworthy, discerning and scholarly and special kind of person.

When he came up to meet Patti - the cult victim - I was really beginning to lose the veil I had with David. But the work was important. I saw first-hand what those people meant by him being rude. The way he blanked Shona trying to tell him some important information about the occult (she knew a lot about it Icke didn't, but he just talked her down). And when he waltzed into my house and sat down without invitation then swiped my cat off the arm of the chair without a blink, I realised that he wasn't spiritual at all. All that unconditional love stuff is a front. He knows how to sell himself and make people fawn for his material, but when his act ends, the guy is in my view just a rude, arrogant, egomaniac who is struggling with his own masks and trying to convince himself that he's very special. That cat had more true spirituality in its paw than Icke has in his entire body.

So I stopped defending Icke, but I still promoted his work. Until The Biggest Secret, that is, when I had really started investigating the references, and the subjects in earnest, and found so many errors, and so much ignorance of the subjects on his part that I could no longer ignore it. But having tried to inform him and getting no feedback, but genuinely fearing for his welfare at the hands of organised disinformationists, I posted my concerns on his forum. The rest is history - I became unceremonially 'dumped' in public for saying things on an uncensored forum of 'the most controversial ayhtor and speaker in the world'. And never once did he address any of my concerns or correct errors in his research.

Yes, he corrected a typo. is that a major point you are making? Please consider it in context. From 'buy the Truth Campaign, the magazine that tells it like it is'. Suddenly it was nothing, and I was a disinformationist attacking Icke and his work for no discernible reason. He plastered every page of his forum with his total disassociation with me and his site still bears The Truth About The Truth Campaign. Despite informing him that he had misunderstood certain comments that I had made, and had been listening to people who were clearly part of an agenda to create turmoil on the board, discredit me and cause friction between the 2 of us (even the forum moderator told me that because she had access to the board data and knew that people were using multiple handles and playing games), he chose to take the position of self-righteous indignation and personal offence. Hypocrite! How can a man who discredits individuals at the drop of a hat, says he speaks for truth, encourages people to 'just say it' when they feel they have important things to say, tells everyone to listen to contrasting opinions, and who openly writes frankly about his personal life choose to be offended by and refuse to listen to conflicting opinions and actively censor an uncensored platform?

But when I saw his words about me and The Truth Campaign, I saw just how manipulative and calculated a disinformationist he was. And how cruel cold and heartless. And I have seen much more of that since. Additionally, I was now getting masses of mail and calls about reptilians. I was witnessing the unfolding of the damage his half-researched and erroneous material was having on people. People were one step from the mental hospital - they were in fear, depressed, feeling helpless, and some had started hallucinating, hearing hissing voices and being convinced the reps were everywhere, from their friends and family to hiding in the house. I had to spend quite a bit of time with some to help them through their delusions and happily, it was successful. But I can't be there for everyone.

At that time I was quite saddened but very very angry. Angry that I had laboured under an illusion for so long, and furious that he would behave so dishonestly and against everything he publicly projects onto others. I'd needed to experience it first-hand to break the last of the spell. But over the years I have heard from numerous sources how this kind of behaviour is nothing new. It's a common theme that i hear - such as the opinions of Jordan Maxwell and others who claim he has taken and given nothing and unceremonially dumped them when they were no longer useful.

But I still sent him free copies of my magazine. And I saw his style shift slightly towards that in my own work and in the magazine. Our articles about the illusory nature of reality, the nonphysical nature of the 'reptilians' and their illusory nature started creeping into his work. He started contradicting himself and seemed to be finding it difficult to correlate a cogent definition of what the reptilians were. After exposing the fake et agenda in my magazine, I noticed he wasn't giving space to ET reptiles anymore. But never once did he ever say he was mistaken. He just steamrolls ahead, changing his mind about things and gradually moving from one interpretation to another via a process of contradictions. Things he used to mock others for, he later accepts.

Now he is grossly misrepresenting quantum physics (what the bleep style) and using fiction such as the Matrix to try and convince people that everything is an illusion and that our beliefs create reality. I see people really starting to dissociate into way-out cult-consciousness with this new approach. And getting people to dissociate from reality is EXACTLY what the Illuminists are trying to achieve. There ARE rules and laws of physics that exist with or without our observations. To tell you that science has proved otherwise is nonsense. Again, he clearly has a very shallow understanding of that material if he believes that science is proving these things. To create a current dissociated religious cultic mindset, you have to keep it up to date, so you create modern interpretations, exciting-sounding quantum theories, tales of spaceships and ETs etc. to do it. In ancient times it was the same - they created Christianity by simply rewriting it according to modern references. If they'd had technology then, Jesus would have been brought into Jerusalem in a car or even ascended in a spaceship, rather than on a donkey and in a supernatural format.

Mitch, you remind me of me when I didn't know most of the above, before I heard of the low esteem that others in the 'cicrcuit' have for him, his research and his integrity. The biggest fans of Icke are those who read his books and attend his lectures, who usually have less than the requisite information to judge his material and who don't realise that most of the material was researched by others and collated by David. But those who do that research tend not to agree with his interpretations of their work. They enjoy the new found attention for a while and say nothing about it, but in my experiences, those who communicate with me personally do not speak out about their concerns for fear of causing a distraction to 'the cause'. Oh you can't criticise the man as he's on our side - an ally. I have seen that position change a number of times once they get the inevitable Icke brush off.

To me, Icke bears all of the main attributes of a cult leader. I am of the opinion that ALL who open themselves to guidance from external forces are being manipulated by the unseen archons that influence religion, control the illuiminists, Masons, cults, New age channellers, prophets etc. they are astral souls who did not ascend to Source and are stuck in the astral heavens that they themselves created by their misperceptions whilst alive. They see themselves as ascended masters and guides and are trying to programme humanity via their influence through the auric field, by preprogramming souls to reincarnate into new born souls, all with the intention of creating their heaven on earth.

They create gurus and messiahs and prophets and these people then programme others by dint of their cult of personality. Many are absolutely genuine and don't realise that spirituality comes from within, even though they continually tell people it does. They lose self-awareness and become convinced they are on a mission to save others, or they cannot ignore the drive to preach to others what is being fed to them from 'beyond'. The more they heed the voices and the more mytical experiences they have, the more they open up. And their drive is male intellectual energy. It isn't felt within, it doesn't come from their spirit, it is downloaded and repeated. Their veil of perception makes them see only what the controllers want them to see. They filter what goes in and then spew it out as a distortion of reality. They don't sympathise or empathise with others, they intellectualise and create rules and regulations and interpretations to explain things to others. They believe they have a gift and become impermeable to criticism, finding reinforcement of their opinions by others who parrot back the same misperceptions to them, and they couldn't care about those who disagree.

The effect that has on followers is submission, and they too get infected by the same consiousness. Cult members are usually replications of characteristics of their idols. But you disrespect their guru and often you see a radical shift, from parroting the usual 'love' to venemous attacks on the critic. They become less penetrable to reason and more faithful to the idol, as they see the criticism as proof that the idol is right, and need to protect them from the heretical critic. They look down on the critic, sometimes hate the critic, and ignore however much reasonable information the critic provides in his case. They invent and assume things about the critic, because they are not ready to accept that perhaps the critic is honestly reasonable.

And having communicated with hundreds and hundreds of Icke fans over the last 15 years, as well as cult followers of many variations, I personally see the same psychic traits in many of them. The same denials, and the same patterns developing.

This is why i have been outspoken about Icke. I think people need to know that there are forces at work that control the minds of people on this planet that are largely unrecognised. They play sides against each other, create distractions, and even create belief systems that address their very existence, but divert and distort it so much that they have a net for virtually everyone to fall into. They set patterns of thinking in your mind via key personalities, and this creates a veil that filters perception. By the end of your life you end up in a loop of recycling your soul between their 'heaven' and this planet. They want your soul, that's all.

When Icke hears voices, when he accepts that 'they' have chosen him for a special task it cannot be coming from within from
Source. That experience is different - no voices, no face to face with God, or masters, no alien experiences or 'trips' or angelic encounters. That is ALL coming from the astral sphere in which previous PEOPLE have chosen to become guides, angels, ets, teachers, to guide people through life and into what they on earth viewed was the TRUTH. But if they knew the truth, they would never have ended up in that state.

Icke's Matrix is real. But Icke's portrayal of it and understanding of it is like a naive child's. He has no depth of understanding and insufficient experience in the field. His veil is strong, and his influence great because he connects his ignorant level of energy with others of ignorance and the energy is transferred, auric field breached, and controllers plugged in.

You yourself spoke of feeling the flow at his meetings. Me too - I had to leave the room at one of his lectures because something was desperately trying to force its way into me. But because I know what is going on, I defend myself whereas 99.99% of people on this planet have no idea what is going on. Icke is one of them - he gets flashes of it but they always steer those into their own propaganda. They get in first with people like Icke, so that anyone revealing the truth of it will fall on deaf ears, on those that have already believed they have the answer and have already plugged into their astral reality, and have already reinforced the Veil of perception.

Mitch, you appear to be suggesting an ulterior motive for my posting at this time. It is synchronicity that things have become heated here against Icke. I came to network a new health article. 2 days later I read of the issue occurring with Icke removing his association with this forum. I saw a lot of anger and criticism and I saw a few minds starting to realise that there is a different side to icke that they hadn't appreciated. Then I got an email advertising the latest newsletter and I decided to post my views on his incessant references to Semiramis. Following that, I did start adding my experiences with Icke to the thread, because I believe people deserve to know and it helps give context and perspective.

I am not here to tell anyone to believe me, I am exercising my right to have my say. I am doing what I believe is right, because I am passionately concerned that in general icke readers tend to get a distorted picture of life through the Icke lens, and they deserve to know that there are other interpretations, as well as errors in his material. Fortunately, I have studied many of these topics and can hopefully shed a bit more light. It is up to people to interpret what I say in whatever way they wish.

From the feedback here, it would appear that many people are glad to have some of the information because it makes sense to them. Others will undoubtedly question my motivation that always happens, as does the conspiracy theories and the trolling and flaming, wherever I post, it follows.

All I have to say is that everything I have posted is done with the best of intentions and is true to the best of my knowledge. I am not trying to stop people reading Icke, liking Icke, or anything else. I just believe that the more information we have, the more reasonably we can make our choices in life. I call a spade a spade - Icke calls hundreds of people publicly and makes money out of it. Icke exposes what he considers to be charlatans, and so do I and I think Icke is one, and I presented my case. You don't have to accept it. And naturally, you probably are thinking the same or similar about me. And although such things sadden me, I understand and accept the consequences.

All I can do is tell it the way I see it and have the courtesy to put a lot of time and effort into it, rather than a few loaded one-liners.

If you would have the courtesy to provide me with further references for the Australian Annannu, I will check it out. But as I alluded to earlier, I'm finding it tough going at the moment, so would like to have some time away from the forum.

Ivan Fraser

[EDIT: I noticed that all hyphens seem to have been removed from that version as well, so I've re-inserted them where needed for clarity. Also fixed the obvious typos.]

 

[shijing]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Thanks for posting this last Ivan Fraser piece, Argonaut -- I agree that its potentially valuable, and offers a really nice inside look at Icke when he's off-stage. It seems meaningful, if Fraser's right, that everyone who actually interacts with Icke feels that he's kind of a big, self-important jerk. Very interesting.

 

[Argonaut]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Thanks for posting this last Ivan Fraser piece, Argonaut -- I agree that its potentially valuable, and offers a really nice inside look at Icke when he's off-stage. It seems meaningful, if Fraser's right, that everyone who actually interacts with Icke feels that he's kind of a big, self-important jerk. Very interesting.

What struck me is how Fraser's picture of Icke dovetails so well with what we've already learned. Someone with an agenda or personal vendetta can make up such things, but with investigation their accusations fall apart. In Icke's case, investigation only seems to support what Fraser wrote. This piece also made me think about my own interpretation of Icke - that he started out sincere then degenerated towards Entropy over time. I now realize that it may not be a simple matter of Icke being a dupe, a liar, or mind-controlled. He may be all of them at once. Maybe the more confident Icke's become that he's "awakened," the more he's unknowingly letting his true character come through. Gurdjieff talked about holding wrong ideas that one is awakening, and it actually leading deeper into sleep. This appears to be what's happened to Icke. His negative character traits are now more in control - and more obvious - than they were at the beginning. And Icke's ability to notice and acknowledge (or hide) these traits has almost vanished. So now his family and associates must deal with his colossal arrogance and rudeness, because he has become a "legend in his own mind."

On a slightly different topic, I found Fraser's views of channeling to be interesting. It made me wonder if some "Ascended Masters" could be dead New Agers who carried their wrong beliefs into the afterlife. It makes sense - if someone dies believing in Ascended Masters, he may be inclined to think that he himself has become one. I read a book a few years back called "Hungry Ghosts" by Joe Fisher. After being taken in by channeling himself, Fisher investigated various channeled entities and concluded that most of them are lying. He feels that these lying spirits are getting something out of masquerading as "wise teachers" to the living. Possibly energy, or a connection to the living that they'd otherwise lose. In essence, he thinks that some of the dead may feed off of us via channelers and mediums.

As Laura says, it's a jungle out there. 4D STS can and do use channelers for their own agenda, but maybe they're not the only ones. In any case, if dead New Agers (and others) are doing this then they're definitely serving an STS agenda, and manipulating the living to do likewise. So in the end the Lizzies are still getting what they want.

Or maybe Fraser is just totally barking up the wrong tree with this idea. He does like to portray it in absolutes, which is a problem. He says that these "dead dudes" are THE one-and-only source of channeled disinfo. Then he claims that "ALL who open themselves to guidance from external forces are being manipulated..." And yet he accuses ICKE of wrongly "demonizing" ancient occult concepts? So that's the odd thing which stuck out for me regarding Fraser.

 

[durabone]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Argonaut; I had just about decided that I was finished posting on this topic, but your last post triggered some more things.

[quote author=Argonaut]because those who listen to him are meant to listen, and the rest won't pay any attention. However, since Icke sees this as a time of transition, he claims that more and more people will become open to his message."[/quote]

That's correct, I heard all of this.

[quote author=Argonaut]According to him, if this plan isn't successful, the Earth will rise up and destroy us all in order to preserve her own existence. But he says the plan WILL succeed.[/quote]

I heard this, too. Funny how I dodged this arrogant presumption to hear about reptilian lords.

[quote author=Argonaut]Then humankind and the Earth will evolve together, reaching the "next level." Which is essentially a perfect Utopia, free of pain and evil of any kind.[/quote]

That promise of happily ever after is at the center of a number of religions these days.

[quote author=Argonaut]getting them nice and tasty for his true masters. He's also preparing them to have their souls smashed.[/quote]

"Marinating the meat" (a figure of speech I have used) while appealing to us through an obsequious approach that blends "I am just an indignant pauper," "a voice in the wilderness," and the old favorite: "you are as God, you have all the answers within you" ? That last bit smacks of satanism, and might be one of the oldest traps out there.

So how can I still be grateful to him for his urgent cries and their effect on shaking me up, yet not vindicate his actions? Ivan Fraser's idea is that I was only exposed to "the show" via his books and lectures. And that is precisely the part of him that may have been designed by committee. So formulaic: “You are right to be afraid, and you must find the answers within yourself.” This is almost precisely the “royal will” which Icke claims to be exposing.

But then I wouldn’t be here trying to help decompose the anatomy of what I now see as a toxic phenomenon, were it not simply for my technical background, aka my education, as average as it is. And I can say for certain, that I have sat through Icke’s lectures with others that had no problem at all with what he said. And they had similar educational credentials as me.

And that makes me wonder. A lot. People who have trouble accepting Icke’s message “as-is” may be experiencing the simple nature of inductive reasoning, “it doesn’t compare with my experience.” And people seem to vary a lot in terms of how much the inductive reasoning capacity is developed. Having a strong internal model of reality, and comparing it critically to current circumstance is a two step process: 1) having the strong internal model; and 2) having the esteem to use it. Such reasoning skills are the mortal enemy of a man such as Joseph Stalin. And inasmuch Icke’s presentations make little attempt to appeal to a technical or a critical audience, we can say somewhat fairly that he is addressing the same audience as a dictator does, guiding their thinking as Goebbels did. The conclusion of this line of thought supports earlier statements here that Icke’s effect is greatest on the less reasoning and/or weaker part of us.

I remember one video of his, where the camera swept the cheering audience, and I got the sickly feeling I was watching “Jerry Springer” or something. (Joking: Or perhaps like “The Price is Right” ..... The next contestant who can guess the scope of my theory without going over, wins!!)

[quote author=David Icke]I will go on doing what I believe to be right in the face of whatever may come. Fortunately I am extremely stubborn when necessary and the more anyone tries to stop me the more determined I become to go on.[/quote]

Sounds like Winston Churchill's cry: "We shall never surrender."



Good find from Ivan Fraser. Thank you. His struggle on Icke’s forum reminded me of that Canadian attorney who was trying “shut him down.” Icke claimed foul by a "Zionist" I think.

[quote author=Ivan Fraser]this delusion made him vulnerable to his naive view of the material he was writing.[/quote]

Precisely one of the points made in this thread.

GRRR: [quote author=Ivan Fraser]sat down without invitation then swiped my cat off the arm of the chair without a blink[/quote]

We like cats: [quote author=Ivan Fraser]That cat had more true spirituality in its paw than Icke has in his entire body.[/quote]


Over the top: (whether true or false)
[quote author=Ivan Fraser]I was witnessing the unfolding of the damage his half-researched and erroneous material was having on people. People were one step from the mental hospital - they were in fear, depressed, feeling helpless, and some had started hallucinating, hearing hissing voices and being convinced the rep[tilian]s were everywhere, from their friends and family to hiding in the house.[/quote]

That’s dreadful! (And more proof of above assertions)

[quote author=Ivan Fraser]The biggest fans of Icke are those who read his books and attend his lectures, who usually have less than the requisite information to judge his material and who don't realise that most of the material was researched by others and collated by David.[/quote]

That was me exactly. Man, was I proud of him.

[quote author=Ivan Fraser]They play sides against each other, create distractions, and even create belief systems that address their very existence, but divert and distort it so much that they have a net for virtually everyone to fall into.

[quote author=Argonaut]He says that these "dead dudes" are THE one-and-only source of channeled disinfo.[/quote]
[/quote]

Yes, but if Ivan Fraser was lacking some of the expressions that the concept of 4D STS enables, it is perhaps not a bad approximation.



Thanks for this link:

[quote author=Argonaut]Laura has thoroughly discussed the issue of St Germain here: http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/grail_5d.htm. She also mentions that the concept of St Germain being one of the "Ascended Masters" originated with none other than Mdme Helena Blavatsky![/quote]

Nice read, and that’s an interesting take about the AMs, she was known for twisting her non-existent moustache when channeling Germain. And thanks for bringing this back to my attention:

[quote author=David Icke]Mayer Rothschild became banker and manipulator to Prince William IX of Hesse-Hanau, another member of the Black Nobility reptilian bloodline, and they attended Freemason meetings together. According to the book, Jews And Freemasons In Europe (1723-1939), William’s younger brother, Karl, was accepted as the head of German Freemasons and members of the Hesse dynasty were closely involved with an Elite Freemason group called the Strict Observance. This was later called the Beneficent Knights of the Holy City, and was known in Germany as The Brethren of John the Baptist (a code for Nimrod).[/quote]

In "Proofs of a Conspiracy" published in 1798 about the founding of the Adam Weisphaut's Illuminati (review here: www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=11082.msg78463#msg78463), we see that the Strict Observance were Rosicrucians and that Adam Weisphaut was also a member. That ties Weishaupt, Germain, and Mayer Rothschild together as members or associates of the Illuminati.

The burst of France’s embellishment of freemasonry with “exorcism or ghost-raising, magic, and other gross superstitions” often borrowed from the Rosicrucians, produced a group that ultimately overthrew German freemasonry and seized control of many publishing presses in Europe just before the American Revolution. Robison's thrilling pen-manship, a scholarly and frank British Baptist's perspective, makes scant to zero mention of Mayer Amschel Rothschild, but it does cast a decomposition of a depth similar to this thread on Icke, and it does settle in no uncertain terms: The Illuminati were noweheres near Christianity or Christian values.

[quote author=James Robison]The order was said to abjure Christianity and to refuse admission into the higher degrees to all who adhered to any of the three confessions.[/quote]

I see now that this reinforces Germain’s involvement:

[quote author=Laura, The Grail Quest and The Destiny of Man]In 1779, Saint-Germain was an old man in his 60's who continued to claim to be vastly older. He must have learned to subdue his ego somewhat because, at Eckenforde in Schleswig, Germany, he was able to charm Prince Charles of Hesse-Cassel.[/quote]

If this isn’t a curious nexus in history, then I can’t think what would be. We have Benjamin Franklin in France partaking of the a newly ebullient and darker French Feemasonry. We have this same movement infiltrating and sweeping German freemasonry, resulting in enshrinement of the Bavarian Illuminati. So between them, these four individuals carve out: 1) the privately-owned banking cartel that is now feeling the need to take population control into its own, covert hands; 2) The system of rank and power that has made such men as presidents of the US and Chairman Mao; and 3) The US-French pact that arguably won the Americans their freedom.

In Isabel Cooper’s work “The Comte of Saint-Germain The Secret of Kings” we find another important connection that puts Germain squarely amidst the Lodge “des Amis-Reunis” from which the “new Freemasonry” flowed per Robison, and gives him presence as the first notch taken out of traditional 3-rank masonry, adding now the fourth degree “Chevalier Macon Ecoffois.” Read that: Germain was involved in overturning traditional masonry, he charmed the richest man in Europe in parallel with Mayer Amschel Rothschild, and he was in the same group of “intellectuals” that was present during the embezzling of that money which enabled the Rothschild fortune, and their monopoly. He was also amidst the formation of the Illuminati.

It is also interesting that Count Spiridovich in “The Secret World Goverment” between his bursts of anti-semitism adds these words to the whole thing:

[quote author=Major General Count Cherep-Spiridovich]There is no dispute that Mirabeau was a freemason, member of Lodge"Les Amis Reunis", where his partner was Talleyrand, who with Robespierre "discovered" Napoleon, and thus became the "missing link" between him and Amschel [Rothschild]. Mirabeau was introduced to the freemasons "Illuminati" by his mistress a Jewess Henriette Herz in the house of a Jew Moses Mendelson in Berlin . Mirabeau was present at the Freemasonic Congress in Wilhelmsbad, which was then a Landgrave's palace, managed by Amschel, who headed the "deadly secret conclave beyond the masons and unknown to them", mentioned by George F . Dillon, by Robespierre and others. Weisshaupt and Cagliostro (Joseph Balsamo) were Jews. They and Mirabeau, Talleyrand etc. were mere agents of Amschel. "From what Pandora's box did the American Colonial revolution leap forth?[/quote]

All of this adds fuel to the notion that St. Germain was instrumental in the creation of Illuminati and the privately owned central bank cartel. IMHO if anyone is channeling him today, they may channeling an Illuminati founder.



"So if his "feelings" were mistaken about St Germain, how can we trust him about anything else? This is why Icke can't say "I was wrong" when it comes to things like this. Instead he just hopes nobody notices the contradictions.

And/or he hops, hoping he doesn't have to face his own contradictions. That's addictive behavior.

[quote author=Argonaut]Gurdjieff talked about holding wrong ideas that one is awakening, and it actually leading deeper into sleep. This appears to be what's happened to Icke. His negative character traits are now more in control - and more obvious - than they were at the beginning. And Icke's ability to notice and acknowledge (or hide) these traits has almost vanished. So now his family and associates must deal with his colossal arrogance and rudeness, because he has become a "legend in his own mind.[/quote]

Doesn't that sound like a slow slide into addiction or alcoholism?

 

[Argonaut]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Argonaut; I had just about decided that I was finished posting on this topic, but your last post triggered some more things.

I think I'm about finished too, unless I come across something new that could add to the discussion (like that Ivan Fraser piece).

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

[quote author=Argonaut]Then humankind and the Earth will evolve together, reaching the "next level." Which is essentially a perfect Utopia, free of pain and evil of any kind.[/quote]

That promise of happily ever after is at the center of a number of religions these days.

[/quote]

It is, but some might claim it's also at the center of our own hopes - graduating to 4D and becoming STO. I think the "happily ever after" scenario has a basis in truth, but has been deeply distorted through ponerization. And Icke's New Age version is even worse. He promises evolution for the whole human race - just as long as a key number of "enlightened souls" do the required work.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

[quote author=Argonaut]getting them nice and tasty for his true masters. He's also preparing them to have their souls smashed.[/quote]

"Marinating the meat" (a figure of speech I have used) while appealing to us through an obsequious approach that blends "I am just an indignant pauper," "a voice in the wilderness," and the old favorite: "you are as God, you have all the answers within you" ? That last bit smacks of satanism, and might be one of the oldest traps out there.

So how can I still be grateful to him for his urgent cries and their effect on shaking me up, yet not vindicate his actions? Ivan Fraser's idea is that I was only exposed to "the show" via his books and lectures. And that is precisely the part of him that may have been designed by committee. So formulaic: “You are right to be afraid, and you must find the answers within yourself.” This is almost precisely the “royal will” which Icke claims to be exposing.

[/quote]

Exactly. This is partly Fraser's point, that Icke's concepts lead towards the same ideals and attitudes held by the elite. Which reveals the true nature of his work and his sources. And if Fraser is correct, then Icke's "humble voice in the wilderness" act is just part of the show (although Icke himself may be part of the "audience" there, as well as the actor).

Also, I think you can be grateful to anyone who teaches you something. That doesn't mean you must vindicate his actions. If all there is is lessons, then that makes everyone in your life a potential teacher. You and I went along the same path with Icke. Would we have ever found the Cass material without finding him first? Maybe, maybe not. In my case, I was opened to 9/11 Truth before finding Icke. And I accidentally stumbled across the Cass site while researching abnormal psychology. Maybe together, these two things would've been enough. Who knows? But it just happens that our eyes were opened somewhat through David Icke, and that process continued here - only because we were able to leave Icke behind us. So I think we can be grateful to him without vindicating, just like we can with any other "teacher" we've encountered in our lives.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

But then I wouldn’t be here trying to help decompose the anatomy of what I now see as a toxic phenomenon, were it not simply for my technical background, aka my education, as average as it is. And I can say for certain, that I have sat through Icke’s lectures with others that had no problem at all with what he said. And they had similar educational credentials as me.

[/quote]

Not all minds process information in the same way. People have different programs and operate from different centers. So for many, whether they accept or reject Icke might have little to do with anything but programming or whether they're man 1, 2, or 3.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

And that makes me wonder. A lot. People who have trouble accepting Icke’s message “as-is” may be experiencing the simple nature of inductive reasoning, “it doesn’t compare with my experience.” And people seem to vary a lot in terms of how much the inductive reasoning capacity is developed. Having a strong internal model of reality, and comparing it critically to current circumstance is a two step process: 1) having the strong internal model; and 2) having the esteem to use it. Such reasoning skills are the mortal enemy of a man such as Joseph Stalin. And inasmuch Icke’s presentations make little attempt to appeal to a technical or a critical audience, we can say somewhat fairly that he is addressing the same audience as a dictator does, guiding their thinking as Goebbels did. The conclusion of this line of thought supports earlier statements here that Icke’s effect is greatest on the less reasoning and/or weaker part of us.


I remember one video of his, where the camera swept the cheering audience, and I got the sickly feeling I was watching “Jerry Springer” or something. (Joking: Or perhaps like “The Price is Right” ..... The next contestant who can guess the scope of my theory without going over, wins!!)

[/quote]

True, but how many people can really trust their experience? I agree that someone can be resistant to change if they have a strong internal model of reality. But the "strong internal model" could just be a sacred cow - and for most people that's the case. For instance, those types who like to mock Icke and laugh at his "ridiculous" beliefs. They're just as likely to laugh at genuine truth. They're not interested in thinking critically; they want to protect their own paradigms. I think the key is to "pay attention to objective reality left and right," as the C's have said. So I agree that Icke can greatly effect the weaker part of us. But in some cases the weaker part is what might reject him. It depends on many things.

From my own personal journey, when I followed Icke I kept an "open mind" - I accepted that he may be wrong, and just treated his ideas as a "working hypothesis." This is probably why I could walk away so easily after finding the Cass material. I do think I've spent much of my life preparing myself for the work, by studying, digging, and refusing to just believe things. So I developed a pattern of thinking that led me here. I was still programmed, still operating from false paradigms, but with a tendency towards critical thinking. Since coming here, I've seen just how SMALL a tendency it really was... But it was enough to get me here, to prepare me. And I think mindsets like this can really help when faced with people like Icke.

Some people have the opposite tendency, and quickly attach themselves to whatever "wise teacher" or savior-figure comes along. They're prone to the whole "cult of personality" trap. Very much the same type appealed to by dictators, like you said. This "worshipful" tendency happened with Obama, and with Sarah Palin to a lesser degree, and it was scary to watch. And then there's those who can view the PTB with a very critical eye, yet they practically grovel at the feet of men like Icke, Alex Jones, Ron Paul, etc. They can't stop being "sheep;" they can only switch to a different "shepherd."

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

Good find from Ivan Fraser. Thank you. His struggle on Icke’s forum reminded me of that Canadian attorney who was trying “shut him down.” Icke claimed foul by a "Zionist" I think.

[/quote]

Hm... Icke has claimed that Fraser was making "anti-Semitic" remarks on his forum, which led to Icke getting targeted. Whether this is true or false we'll never know, because the old Icke forum is long gone. But Icke does seem to like taking the anti-Semitic accusations made against him, and using them to his advantage.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

Over the top: (whether true or false)
[quote author=Ivan Fraser]I was witnessing the unfolding of the damage his half-researched and erroneous material was having on people. People were one step from the mental hospital - they were in fear, depressed, feeling helpless, and some had started hallucinating, hearing hissing voices and being convinced the rep[tilian]s were everywhere, from their friends and family to hiding in the house.[/quote]

That’s dreadful! (And more proof of above assertions)

[/quote]

When I read this part, I wondered if Icke can really be blamed for such unbalanced delusions. But it's possible that believing his lies could affect minds in this way. Especially if it opens one to hyperdimensional influence. Fraser supposedly felt something trying to force its way into him while hearing Icke speak. Could the same energies gain access to those who read his books?

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

[quote author=Ivan Fraser]The biggest fans of Icke are those who read his books and attend his lectures, who usually have less than the requisite information to judge his material and who don't realise that most of the material was researched by others and collated by David.[/quote]

That was me exactly. Man, was I proud of him.

[/quote]

So was I. I thought he was an excellent researcher. And having "less than the requisite information to judge his material" definitely described me well.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

[quote author=Ivan Fraser]They play sides against each other, create distractions, and even create belief systems that address their very existence, but divert and distort it so much that they have a net for virtually everyone to fall into.[/quote]

[quote author=Argonaut]He says that these "dead dudes" are THE one-and-only source of channeled disinfo.[/quote]

Yes, but if Ivan Fraser was lacking some of the expressions that the concept of 4D STS enables, it is perhaps not a bad approximation.

[/quote]

I agree there. He's very close; his view is possibly just limited by the information he has available.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

In "Proofs of a Conspiracy" published in 1798 about the founding of the Adam Weisphaut's Illuminati (review here: www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=11082.msg78463#msg78463), we see that the Strict Observance were Rosicrucians and that Adam Weisphaut was also a member. That ties Weishaupt, Germain, and Mayer Rothschild together as members or associates of the Illuminati.

[/quote]

It does appear that way, yes.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

The burst of France’s embellishment of freemasonry with “exorcism or ghost-raising, magic, and other gross superstitions” often borrowed from the Rosicrucians, produced a group that ultimately overthrew German freemasonry and seized control of many publishing presses in Europe just before the American Revolution. Robison's thrilling pen-manship, a scholarly and frank British Baptist's perspective, makes scant to zero mention of Mayer Amschel Rothschild, but it does cast a decomposition of a depth similar to this thread on Icke, and it does settle in no uncertain terms: The Illuminati were noweheres near Christianity or Christian values.

[quote author=James Robison]The order was said to abjure Christianity and to refuse admission into the higher degrees to all who adhered to any of the three confessions.[/quote]

[/quote]

Interesting. Sounds like a book I'll have to check out.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

I see now that this reinforces Germain’s involvement:

[quote author=Laura, The Grail Quest and The Destiny of Man]In 1779, Saint-Germain was an old man in his 60's who continued to claim to be vastly older. He must have learned to subdue his ego somewhat because, at Eckenforde in Schleswig, Germany, he was able to charm Prince Charles of Hesse-Cassel.[/quote]

If this isn’t a curious nexus in history, then I can’t think what would be. We have Benjamin Franklin in France partaking of the a newly ebullient and darker French Feemasonry. We have this same movement infiltrating and sweeping German freemasonry, resulting in enshrinement of the Bavarian Illuminati. So between them, these four individuals carve out: 1) the privately-owned banking cartel that is now feeling the need to take population control into its own, covert hands; 2) The system of rank and power that has made such men as presidents of the US and Chairman Mao; and 3) The US-French pact that arguably won the Americans their freedom.


In Isabel Cooper’s work “The Comte of Saint-Germain The Secret of Kings” we find another important connection that puts Germain squarely amidst the Lodge “des Amis-Reunis” from which the “new Freemasonry” flowed per Robison, and gives him presence as the first notch taken out of traditional 3-rank masonry, adding now the fourth degree “Chevalier Macon Ecoffois.” Read that: Germain was involved in overturning traditional masonry, he charmed the richest man in Europe in parallel with Mayer Amschel Rothschild, and he was in the same group of “intellectuals” that was present during the embezzling of that money which enabled the Rothschild fortune, and their monopoly. He was also amidst the formation of the Illuminati.

It is also interesting that Count Spiridovich in “The Secret World Goverment” between his bursts of anti-semitism adds these words to the whole thing:

[quote author=Major General Count Cherep-Spiridovich]There is no dispute that Mirabeau was a freemason, member of Lodge"Les Amis Reunis", where his partner was Talleyrand, who with Robespierre "discovered" Napoleon, and thus became the "missing link" between him and Amschel [Rothschild]. Mirabeau was introduced to the freemasons "Illuminati" by his mistress a Jewess Henriette Herz in the house of a Jew Moses Mendelson in Berlin . Mirabeau was present at the Freemasonic Congress in Wilhelmsbad, which was then a Landgrave's palace, managed by Amschel, who headed the "deadly secret conclave beyond the masons and unknown to them", mentioned by George F . Dillon, by Robespierre and others. Weisshaupt and Cagliostro (Joseph Balsamo) were Jews. They and Mirabeau, Talleyrand etc. were mere agents of Amschel. "From what Pandora's box did the American Colonial revolution leap forth?[/quote]

All of this adds fuel to the notion that St. Germain was instrumental in the creation of Illuminati and the privately owned central bank cartel. IMHO if anyone is channeling him today, they may channeling an Illuminati founder.

[/quote]

Hm... So there's something to what Icke is now saying about St Germain. Or more likely, what other researchers are saying and Icke is parroting. After "artificially flavoring" it with his reptilian bloodline schtick, of course.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

"So if his "feelings" were mistaken about St Germain, how can we trust him about anything else? This is why Icke can't say "I was wrong" when it comes to things like this. Instead he just hopes nobody notices the contradictions.

And/or he hops, hoping he doesn't have to face his own contradictions. That's addictive behavior.

[/quote]

Indeed. In fact, the term "all of the above" has taken on new meaning for me regarding Icke. If Ivan Fraser is correct, almost every explanation put forth in this thread is true of him, simultaneously. It seems contradictory that a man can manipulate, deceive, and act like an arrogant jerk, yet still believe his own BS about being "enlightened." But it makes sense if his ego - with the help of info from his hyperdimensional "friends" - has convinced him that he's special and can do no wrong.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

[quote author=Argonaut]Gurdjieff talked about holding wrong ideas that one is awakening, and it actually leading deeper into sleep. This appears to be what's happened to Icke. His negative character traits are now more in control - and more obvious - than they were at the beginning. And Icke's ability to notice and acknowledge (or hide) these traits has almost vanished. So now his family and associates must deal with his colossal arrogance and rudeness, because he has become a "legend in his own mind.[/quote]

Doesn't that sound like a slow slide into addiction or alcoholism?

[/quote]

Yes, now that you mention it. It makes sense that the process would look similar; substance addiction is also a descent into entropy. It's just approaching the same destination from a different angle. Good observation.

[EDIT - fixed a messed-up quote]

 

[durabone]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Thanks Argonaut;

[quote author=Argonaut]It is, but some might claim it's also at the center of our own hopes - graduating to
4D and becoming STO.[/quote]

Could be, but there is a big difference: Icke proposes "Pastoral Utopia" ever after, just as the left-brain
religions do.

The promise here is more like "Growth ever after", a big battle in progress that we
can barely conceive, and that we 3D are only beginning to learn.

[quote author=Argonaut]He promises evolution for the whole human race.[/quote]

Yes, and that is just about as deep of a philospophical difference
from the material presented here that I can think of.

[quote author=Argonaut]So I think we can be grateful to him without vindicating, just like we can with any
other "teacher" we've encountered in our lives.[/quote]

Thanks, and fair enough.


I found Ivan Fraser's site (_www.ivanfraser.com) and took the liberty of sending
him a two-line thank note from me with a link to this thread. Hope that's ok.

I hope you do read Robison. That is an exercise in slowing down our modern English
and reading some passages 3-4 times to get it to sink in. But well worth it, imho.
The jewel perhaps lies in his moral analysis of Illuminati philosophy. It has the
same flavor as does much analysis here, from 210 years ago.


cheers

EDIT: I got a pleasant answer back from Ivan, he said he's never been here before
and gives his site URL as: _www.truthcampaign.co.uk.

 

[Argonaut]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Thanks Argonaut;

[quote author=Argonaut]It is, but some might claim it's also at the center of our own hopes - graduating to
4D and becoming STO.

Could be, but there is a big difference: Icke proposes "Pastoral Utopia" ever after, just as the left-brain
religions do.

The promise here is more like "Growth ever after", a big battle in progress that we
can barely conceive, and that we 3D are only beginning to learn.

[quote author=Argonaut]He promises evolution for the whole human race.[/quote]

Yes, and that is just about as deep of a philospophical difference
from the material presented here that I can think of.

[/quote]

Exactly. It's only a superficial appearance of similarity, just like Icke's other concepts. And for someone who believes in "time loops" and other such concepts, it's an awfully linear way to see things.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

I found Ivan Fraser's site (_www.ivanfraser.com) and took the liberty of sending
him a two-line thank note from me with a link to this thread. Hope that's ok.

[/quote]

It's a good idea, I think. I'd welcome his input on what we've been discussing. Plus, if he becomes familiar with the Cass material maybe he'll change his mind about all channeling being disinfo.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

I hope you do read Robison. That is an exercise in slowing down our modern English
and reading some passages 3-4 times to get it to sink in. But well worth it, imho.
The jewel perhaps lies in his moral analysis of Illuminati philosophy. It has the
same flavor as does much analysis here, from 210 years ago.

[/quote]

It sounds like an interesting read, especially since it was written so long ago. I'll be on the lookout for a copy.

[quote author=nut'n purrsnl]

EDIT: I got a pleasant answer back from Ivan, he said he's never been here before
and gives his site URL as: _www.truthcampaign.co.uk.

[/quote]

Cool, maybe he'll find something of interest here. I checked out his site and he seems right on about many things, but there are also some huge gaps in his knowledge, such as:

I believe there is good in the hearts of everyone and a desire for peace and harmony. I believe that even the materialists and power-hungry have this in their heart, even if it is buried beneath greed, corruption, and ignorance.

Hopefully, browsing certain threads here (ones on psychopaths, the Work, the C's, etc) may give him some real food for thought. Or he may just decide we're misguided and walk away. It's up to him. But at least he's now got the opportunity to see the info and make the choice.

 

[ivanfraser]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Thank you for your comments.

I have been reading and skimming a lot of information on the Cassiopaea site to try and come to grips with the fundamentals. I can't say that I've been able to absorb enough yet to be conversant with most of it, but 'gaps in my knowledge' certainly exist.

I'd like to clarify one point though. I wouldn't say that all channelled information is disinfo. Neither do I recollect ever saying that. I think it should be treated as info, but with care. One cannot be sure to whom one is conversing. It's like talking to someone in the street, round a corner, unseen and unknown - it could be anyone - there are a lot of dead people's souls out there. I would say that the deliberate and active opening up of one's consciousness to external intelligences can place you at risk of being infiltrated by those who do not necessarily have Truth and integrity as their aim. Some may be downright malicious, whilst others may be entirely genuine, but have carried erroneous beliefs into the afterlife and are at pains to be our guides or helpers.

Thank you

Ivan

 

[durabone]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Hey Ivan;

Welcome. Glad you decided to check it out. Tradition is to post to the newbies thread. There are plenty of examples there to see!

 

[Argonaut]

Re: About David Icke & James Redfield

Thank you for your comments.

I have been reading and skimming a lot of information on the Cassiopaea site to try and come to grips with the fundamentals. I can't say that I've been able to absorb enough yet to be conversant with most of it, but 'gaps in my knowledge' certainly exist.

I'd like to clarify one point though. I wouldn't say that all channelled information is disinfo. Neither do I recollect ever saying that. I think it should be treated as info, but with care. One cannot be sure to whom one is conversing. It's like talking to someone in the street, round a corner, unseen and unknown - it could be anyone - there are a lot of dead people's souls out there. I would say that the deliberate and active opening up of one's consciousness to external intelligences can place you at risk of being infiltrated by those who do not necessarily have Truth and integrity as their aim. Some may be downright malicious, whilst others may be entirely genuine, but have carried erroneous beliefs into the afterlife and are at pains to be our guides or helpers.

Thanks for coming, Ivan. The Cassiopaea site intro is a good place to start. And also the Newbies Forum here, as nut'n purrsnl mentioned. You can post an intro there too, if you'd like. There are many gaps in our knowledge too, regarding your work. As you probably already know we found you while researching David Icke. And we haven't read much of your writings yet, beyond what you've said about him. I'm sorry that I jumped to the wrong conclusion about your views on channeling. Our view here is the same as yours - channeled info should be treated with care. Hopefully you'll come to a better understanding of the scientific "Critical Channeling" that is the Cassiopaean Experiement. But I should also add that the C's are considered the "10% inspiration" to the "90% perspiration" that Laura and the other Cass members engage in daily. Any info coming from the C's is used as a springboard for research and hard work. And feel free to interact here whether you agree or disagree with what you read. Our goal here is objectivity and Truth.

I may have some questions for you at some time about David Icke (if you don't mind), but for now I'll just say welcome to the forum! :)