About David Icke & James Redfield

My first question. David Icke

Hi!
At first I’d like to say hello and shortly introduce myself. I’m a member of this forum since few months or more and didn’t write anything yet because of my poor English which is not my native language and because I wanted first to find out what are your main ideas. I’ve read the Wave in my native language and some other texts mainly from the Polish version of the Cs site but also some from the sott.com. I have a lot of dilemmas after finding some of your ideas.

I don’t know if this section is a right place to add this question but I’ll try and hope it won’t be deleted.

It’s very difficult for me to express my thoughts in English and I hope no one would feel offended by many linguistic mistakes I’ll do or already did.

I’ve searched the forum to find some information on your idea that David Icke is a member or an agent of Cointelpro. There are four pages of results to “David icke” and I’ve tried to read them all but maybe I did it not as much carefully as I should or my English is not good enough because what I found were only some opinions. I’m sure there is some evidence confirming this idea and hope someone would give me proper links or lay out some arguments. If Icke is trying to delude others and really is an agent than it’s really horrible because so many people (also one of my family members) agree with him.

Carpe gave some links three years ago
"On David Icke:
http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=1575
may be you will also want to read series of Laura artilcles on ATS-Cointelpro on her blog and sott STS discussion
http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=751"

but they don't work...
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

I am sure the other members will provide specific discussions in the forum but until then you can reread Chapter 31 of Wave series where Laura specifically talks about David Icke and how disinformation sources operates. Here is the link of English version, you can find it in your own language if you want:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/wave13a.htm
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

Hi MilkoJanovich,

Welcome to the forum. I think Carpe may have been referring to How to Spot Cointelpro Agents here: http://laura-knight-jadczyk.blogspot.com/2006/01/how-to-spot-cointelpro-agents.html
There are other links to articles within the article that can shine some additional light on Cointelpro.

There is a search function at the top of the Forum page where you can enter search terms like David Icke to read more.

Happy Reading :)
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

Thanks!

I didn't know that there are so many chapters of the Wave. there are only seventeen in Polish.
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

welcome to the forum,

I think you will find the rest of the Wave very interesting reading. I hope it makes sense to you in English.

So with David Icke, there are a few simple points to bear in mind regarding COINTELPRO (which are explained more fully in the Wave):

There are various different roles filled by people who further the COINTELPRO agenda: Some people consciously and willfully set out to deceive others. Often they do this indirectly - by tricking others into doing their 'dirty work' for them. This is where the second type of person comes in: the unconscious dupe (or 'useful idiot').

Several standard techniques are used. The first is to mix in a little bit of truth with a little bit of a lie, so that attention is grabbed by those who sense the element of truth, but then this is vectored in the wrong direction. The second is to discuss a subject but to completely omit an important element, for example those who talk about 9/11 conspiracies but will mysteriously and consistently ignore the Israel element, or those who talk about political corruption but will not discuss psychopathy. The third is to play on people's emotions (such as the fearmongering of Alex Jones), which stops them from thinking objectively.

In this way, those who are curious about conspiracy, UFOs, 'reptillians' or whatever are deflected to look in the wrong directions and miss some important underlying truth. The way this works with unconscious dupes, is that someone prominent who seems to be investigating an important subject can be deliberately 'fed' misleading information to make them think that they are onto 'something special', but are actually being sent in a wrong direction. Another way this works, is that their human nature and sense of self importance is also fed, and this can fuel them into being emotionally invested into a particular line of enquiry, which causes mental 'tunnel vision'. (lack of ability to see around the edges of the subject).

Another technique is to find some valid research and then take steps to link it with something else that is NOT valid, and thereby tarnish it by negative association. It seems that these attempts are tried on every single investigator who appears to be making some progress in finding the underlying truth of the reality we live in. The Wave relates some examples of how these vectoring attempts were tried on Laura, too.

There are other tactics as well, but the result is always the same, to undermine sources of information and to lead people away from the truth.

It is difficult to be sure exactly what the case is with Icke, but the important thing is to look at the result ("by his fruits you will know him"), and the result of Icke's work is twofold: Firstly his theories have been pushed out into the ridiculous, which marginalises him, and neutralises the power of any valid things he might have to say (Political Ponerology, for example, is a robust and thorough study which would lose all academic credibility if it were associated with Icke's ideas). Secondly, he misses the point in some important ways, and so his followers will also miss the point. This is a double-edged sword because Icke is undoubteably a charismatic person, and has the power to generate interest in himself and his ideas, which possibly can open up the door to people investigating the weirder more hidden side of reality for themselves which they might not otherwise do (and he certainly has the power to make people stop and think), but his charisma is also a problem because it causes people to become attached to his particular view, and turn into 'Icke devotees', and this is a barrier which can make people closed-minded towards other possibilities.

This is why Laura always insists that people don't become devotees, but instead should learn to think for themselves, and to take everything as a hypothesis, open to revision upon discovering further data.

I hope that made some kind of sense.
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

Thanks for other replies!

It makes more sense to me now.

I was never interested in who David Icke is and what he says and thinks (I only heard one day something about this queen Elisabeth-lizard story), but few days ago I’ve watched a film about him (and made by him by the way) after which I had mixed feelings, so I decided to find some more details on him.

And then I had a dream in which I had a conversation with a women working in the Astropsychology publishing house that I have many books from, and one of the things she told me was she took part in the David Icke’s conference and that Icke mentioned something about possibility of using some technology or energy, actually she used there a word “polarization”, to make something like a mass UFO hallucination. Than I told her with excitement that I had some dreams about UFOs (which was true. They lately happen to me quite often ) and after that I heard a loud laugher of people standing around me who suddenly appeared there (mainly members of my family but also people I don’t know).

I woke up with a strong feeling that it was a very important dream, as it sometimes happens, and that I have to think about it for a while. . There happened some other things in that dream but it didn’t have anything to do with the Icke’s issue. That day I was looking for some info on Icke and this way I found your point of view on him which was for me rather shocking. Things I was concentrating on till than were mainly those “spiritual” ones. The Cointelpro subject wasn’t much interesting for me but now I know it was a mistake. What’s more, completely by the “accident”, while I was looking at the list of my favourite web sites, I realized that the third one ever added to this list text which is connected to the Cassiopea Experiment was the one about the COINTELPRO and during the time of my Icke-on-searchings this page was opening “by the accident” quite often! And what I was thinking than was “It is not what I am looking for! I WANT to know why do they think Icke is so bad!” :)

So as I said it makes more sense to me now but I’m still reading those texts and some others connected. And what is also very beneficial in this situation is that it mobilized me to search and read the stuff that is also very important but I didn’t pay to it much attention.
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

MilkoJanovich said:
Thanks for other replies!

It makes more sense to me now.

And what I was thinking than was “It is not what I am looking for! I WANT to know why do they think  Icke is so bad!”  :)

So as I said it makes more sense to me now but I’m still reading those texts and some others connected. And what is also very beneficial in this situation is that it mobilized me to search and  read the stuff that is also very important but I didn’t pay to it much attention.
Click to expand...

I have just recently come across another interview of David Icke done by the Conscious Media Network. This shows clearly that David is an honest searcher
who has grown from his earlier understanding. It is quite possible that he was sidetracked and manipulated to put excessive attention to the human side
of conspiracy and control. In this interview he mentions several points of interest:
1. Mind is not personal, i.e. it is not "my mind".
2. Mind is equated with the "processor" in his computer analogy
3. Identification with mind leads to slavery
4. Humanity had another communication link (not mind) that was removed (destruction of DNA)
5. Hyperdimensional "programmers" set up the "earth experiment".
This appears very close to the Cassiopaean Material. There is also mention how all the fearmongering keeps people focused on "mind" and the "game".
Here is the link to the interview:
_http://www.consciousmedianetwork.com/members/dicke6.htm
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

I'm busy watching David Icke's Freedom to Fascism 3 disc set. One thing that puts a giant question mark next to his name is his endorsement of Alex Jones. When he mentions Jones' name the audience cheers loudly, and then he carries on to speak of the Bohemian Grove footage taken by Jones. Now, knowing about Bohemian Grove (if it even exists) falls pretty much in the same category as knowing about 9/11 in advance (at least for me it does), as Alex Jones apparently did.

Not only does Jones manage to enter the highly secretive compound in that Redwood forest, he also practically has a front row seat (as a still frame from his footage clearly shows) when some or other apparent awful ritual gets underway. The people who conduct the ritual are facing him, yet no-one apparently sees him. From the still frame from his footage he has an unobstructed view of everything, no leafs or bushes visible. And he's quite close, because the quality of the sound is 'great' according to Icke, who says the camera is 'hidden inside a bag'. Why, if Jones is secretly leopard crawling out of sight in the dark, would he need to hide his camera inside a bag while filming?

Then Icke shows some picture apparently taken in 1957 of a secret Bohemian Grove meeting with Glen Seaborg, Ronald Reagan and some other ex-American president. How did Jones (1)acquire the picture (2)know it was taken in 1957 (3) know it was taken at Bohemian Grove (since it was taken inside - could be anywhere)? Icke says something to the effect of thanks to the internet, our researchers are able to uncover these things.

Really? Did the Bohemian Grove attendees upload a picture on their "happy memories" photo sharing blog taken in '57 (before digital cameras, so they must have scanned it in) with the caption "from left to right is so-and-so-and-so taken at Bohemian Grove in '57 ... but SSSSHHHHH, it's a secret!"

Then Icke continues to mention that "little" George Bush arrived shortly afterwards (after this ritual). Okay, so Jones (assumingly camouflaged) is apparently leopard crawling across the water while filming and (1) recognizes Bush from that distance while all the satanic ritual attendees are wearing masks (2) has a list of all the VIPs arriving and their arrival times...

Get outa here!
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

I think Freedom to Fascism was done by Aaron Russo, not David Icke  - am I thinking of the wrong movie?  I think I am - there is an Aaron Russo documentary by that name that has me confused. As I see from Google, there is also a David Icke film by the same name ...
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

Yeh I know about the Freedom to Fascism one. I'm sitting with the David Icke one here. The full title is "Freedom or Fascism: The Time To Choose" - my mistake.
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

E said:
Yeh I know about the Freedom to Fascism one. I'm sitting with the David Icke one here. The full title is "Freedom or Fascism: The Time To Choose" - my mistake.
Click to expand...

Hehe, - actually if I'd just taken a minute to look it up before posting, I wouldn't have posted, so my mistake for 'thinking out loud' - apologies for the :offtopic:
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

I just rewinded a little to watch that bit again. Icke also mentions that the Bohemian Grove is a 2700 acre area of Redwood forest. So, assuming any of this is true ... Jones knows exactly where (in a 2700 acre area!) and at what time this ritual takes place. Icke also says that the elite usually goes there in July, in small groups, so it's compartmentalized and isolated.

Seriously, an outsider does not have access to this kind of information. And even if he miraculously managed to sneak in and film all this and reveal it to the public, he would have been silenced long ago.

I also watched Icke's Reptilian Agenda with Credo Mutwa a couple of nights ago. At the beginning of the DVD he when he elaborates a little on Sangomas and Sanusis, when he says "some deeply ignorant people call them witch doctors", I wondered to myself if Icke is at all aware of the Muti killings happening daily in South Africa as a result of these witch doctors / Sangomas / Sanusis and their never-ending search for human body parts. They believe the muti (medicine) is more effective when it contains human body parts (equally as disturbing as the Congolese who believe muti only works after you raped someone).

And I must confess that I found Mutwa's elaboration (and almost justification) of the fundamentals and intent behind human sacrifice VERY disturbing. I'll have to watch it again, but a lot of what Credo says is ... questionable. When he says a "bush telegraph" was a telepathic way of villages communicating with one another over long distances. That's not how we have it, a bush telegraph is a kind of 'tongue in cheek' way we describe a runner taking news from one village to the next.

I like Mutwa, and he is much loved is South Africa, but some of the stuff he says is just … I don’t know …
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

E said:
I like Mutwa, and he is much loved is South Africa, but some of the stuff he says is just … I don’t know …
Click to expand...

I agree. I think he has some nuggets of truth in what he says, but he's so identified with being a Story Teller that his embellishments and tangents tend to 'wax creative' - or just mythical. But some of the things he says in that interview (I've only seen 2 of the 3 discs thus far) seem pretty off the mark, while others are a bit startling in their clarity. All in all, I take Credo with a grain of salt, mostly due to the 'Story Telling' aspect of his delivery. I don't get the sense that he means any 'harm' by it, just that myth and fact become so intertwined in his relaying of these stories, that one really must make an effort to discern between the two.
 
Re: My first question. David Icke

[quote author=anart]
But some of the things he says in that interview seem pretty off the mark, while others are a bit startling in their clarity.
[/quote]

Yes, that's a good description. I almost fell off my chair about what he said about Helen Zille, I voted for her..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom