Icke Interview

by **toscaveritas** » Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:38 pm

I always had contempt for those in power, but only after watching Alex Jones's 'Road to Tyranny' , did I actually begin to 'wake up'. Almost simultaneously, I came across David Icke's website and was seriously put off by the 'reptilian' references. It was way over the top for me. Over three years, I thus went on a search for truth, deliberately avoiding Alex Jones AND David Icke! I bought books, searched the internet. Studied Waco, OKC bombing, the JFK assassination, the dealings of Freemasonry, international cartels, CFR, trilateral commission, Bilderbergs, Ancient Civilizations and mythology, etc etc etc. Tiring, confusing and seemlingly overwhelming but highly gratifying because it freed me from so many mind-prisons which had previously been set up by the 'system' of 'education' and accepted versions of 'history'. Finally, after three years, I was given the book 'The Truth will set you free' by David Icke. By then, I pretty much had an idea of what the bigger picture was, so I felt ready to digest and disect the works of someone who I had previously thrown out 'with the bath water', so to speak. Just like so many, I was highly surprised at the mass of information Icke presented. Well referenced and researched, and in complete agreement with what I had found on my own elsewhere.I almost looked back at three years of my own research lauging, because it had all already been there in this ONE book! I understand why he is so horribly attacked: he dares to examine any facts without prejudice or fear. No mind-traps to defend. That takes tremendous courage and I've personally experienced how hard it is sometimes, to examine matters that directly contradict one's own paradigm of 'security'. Simultaneously, one has the urge to share new 'revelations' with loved ones and friends, only to be viciously attacked and/or ridiculed. I empathize with David on that and commend him for sticking to his guns. It takes real courage to stand up for one's beliefs, especially if they bust and /or threaten the security paradigms of so many. It would be alot easier to just learn and silently live a life of solitude and seclusion. But David is sincere about trying to educate people, even if he might also fall prey to disinformation at times (nobody is perfect). I also like his conclusion and solution. I'm certainly only a student and mostly self-educated, not at all as brilliant and learned as so many here, but I try to keep an open mind and not judge or fear new thoughts. I have no security paradigms to defend in my mind. My sense of security and life are not tied to any paradigm or physical identity. I love to dive into the realm of spirituality and consciousness, of which David also speaks so eloquently. Most who step out of the matrix of this prison, seem to also. One realizes, that if fear strikes, it is usually an emotion triggered by a sense of threat. Threat to one's own mind-prison, 'comfort zone'. Every time I come across something which triggers my defense mechanisms, I've learned that this is something I will HAVE to confront! That is the only way to battle that dark energy:direct confrontation! But it is NOT a confrontation with an entity outside of one's mind- it is WITHIN! It's easy to avoid confronting one's own fears and examining their origin. But if one really aspires to be free , free of fear , free of mind-control, one has to confront the fears within FIRST. That is where 'they' have their real power-seat, within our own fears. Beat your own fears, and you will have won the most crucial part of the war for freedom and humanity. Ironically, that is where psychology and spirituality (not religiousity) meet. in closing, I must say that I can't verify or debunk any of David's claims on the reptilian themes. It is however, quite noteworthy, just how the reptile theme HAS been of such fascination to mankind throughout history! Snakes, dragons, gouls, etc etc, are all over relics , churches, architecture, symbols, etc. What is the reason for this? I can't tell at this point, but it really does beg to be examined. one last thing i've learned: the more controversial a speaker or author is, the more he /she must be a threat to the status quo! Channelers/operatives of the global cabal usually go with little to no persecution, as far as I've seen. thanks for reading my little humble rant. Again, I'm very pleased and humbled by so many brilliant minds here! Keep posting, I love the intellectual challenge, information and insights! tosca

by **DrDebugDU** » Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:47 pm

Thanks for the great reply. It contains a lot of good and new information. The whole OKC stinks as well specially the lack of investigation. Timothy did it and that was all. I think that the strongest point is the bomb. There is no way that a small fertilizer bomb can explain that much damage. There are even witness accounts from Vietnam vets who says that they have never heard a blast like that before. The 9/11 WTC bombing and the OKC bombing shared a common denominator that nothing but dust remained which is unlike normal explosions or collapses of buildings. Some have suggested that in both cases a-neutronic bombs or Electro-Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Devices were used. <blockquote>Quote:<hr> The A-Neutronic bomb, or "Electro-Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Device," was reportedly developed by the young scientist- prodigy in the early 1980s while he was working for Hercules Manufacturing in Silicon Valley, CA. The first bomb test at the Pentagon's super-secret Area 51 in Nevada apparently resulted in the death of a technician and injured several others due to their underestimation of its power. The project was reportedly compartmentalized and classified under a "Nuclear Weapons" category by President Reagan. <a href="http://www.constitution.org/ocbpt/ocbpt_01.htm">www.constitution.org/ocbpt/ocbpt_01.htm</a> <hr></blockquote> I like the story about Rumsfeld too. Because Rumsfeld and Cheney still play a major role in 9/11. Especially Rumsfeld has himself talked about out some strange stories. He even started to talk about running to the scene and dragging out victims and being the helping hand. But it seems that both Cheney, Rumsfeld and Clarke were in a video conference the whole time and Rumsfeld never even bothered to leave the room when he heard that the Pentagon was hit (even though he was on the other side of the building) I think I'll go read William Blum. For those who don't know his work: <a href="http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/KillingHope_page.html">www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/KillingHope_page.html</a> Killing Hope is an amazing guide to understanding the politics of terror. He covered all coups from the 50s until the 80s and describes it with much details. Chapeau, Starman <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)">

by **Sweejak** » Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:23 pm

Tosca, I had a very similar journey and I still have only read small parts of Icke's stuff and only recently started seriously going to Jones's site. I only got online around 1998 and coming across Icke's lizard tales were amusing but I dropped it right there. A lot of people do and if they don't dig deeper well, they may just not be cut out for it. I still don't know what is so inflammatory about David's interview, the top post remember? Yes he may be sloppy, for instance his use of the 100th Monkey, even the one who did the experiment concedes it never happened as popularly known. However for me this is not fatal, I just sift it. A more interesting experiment along these lines is this: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>1.Start with a cage containing five apes. In the cage, hang a banana on a string and put stairs under it. Before long, an ape will go to the stairs and start to climb towards the Banana. 2.As soon as he touches the stairs, spray all of the apes with cold water. After a while, another ape makes an attempt with the same result - all the apes are sprayed with cold water. 3.Turn off the cold water. If, later, another ape tries to climb the stairs, the other apes will try to prevent it even though no water sprays them. 4.Now, remove one ape from the cage and replace it with a new one. The New ape sees the banana and wants to climb the stairs. To his horror, all of the other apes attack him. After another attempt and attack, he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs, he will be assaulted. 5.Next, remove another of the original five apes and replace it with a new one. The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked. The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment with enthusiasm. 6.Again, replace a third original ape with a new one. The new one makes it to the stairs and is attacked as well. Two of the four apes that beat him have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs, or why they are participating in the beating of the newest ape. 7.After replacing the fourth and fifth original apes, all the apes which have been sprayed with cold water have been replaced. Nevertheless, no ape ever again approaches the stairs. Why not? "Because that's the way it's always been done around here!" Hahahaha! <a href="http://www.dailyreckoning.com/old%20site/oldWriters/Mogambo/DREssays/PotandPorn.html">www.dailyreckoning.com/ol...dPorn.html</a> <hr></blockquote> Someone said take your wax wherever you find it but make your own candle. Also I think it takes all kinds to further the 'movement' from intuitive popularizers to left brained intellectuals. Willow, I didn't mean to say that my friend saw an actual reptile, he doesn't know what he saw. I don't know if these people he hung with were abused, but studying the businesses they were in they could be said to be abusers. I think your alternate explanation makes rather more sense. I had no idea that eye color can change! There is perhaps evidence of alien interference in human affairs. LLoyd Pye has some interesting questions in his Human Origins articles. <a href="http://www.lloydpye.com/2003Articles.htm">www.lloydpye.com/2003Articles.htm</a> and he may have actual proof. <a href="http://www.starchildproject.com/">www.starchildproject.com/</a>

by **Starman** » Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:25 pm

Heyia SW; In reply to my comment (to paraphrase) about stupid people making extreme leaps-of-logic to avoid taking responsibility for their critical thinking and moral integrity, You said: "Exactly, and that's how it works. A perception is created that makes the whole easily dismissable to a great many people. The problem is we need as many people as possible to have an impact on these criminal activities, not just the brave or smart or independant thinkers." Well said. I'll acknowledge the point that Icke may confound rigorous thinking on issues that seem to be coopted by his flair for the incredible -- As you point-out, it DOES seem to present an easy-out credibility hurdle by which many folks are put-off by the linkeage made in their minds between controversial issues re: horrible crimes that he publicizes and his more fantastic elaborations. Icke is a *bit* over-the-top as a self-promoting showman for me, so when I speak out about my concerns that he's being unfairly disparaged I do so out of upholding the principle of honesty and rigorous debate. Previously, I've only committed myself to saying that I found Icke occasionally provocative. To confound the issue, one can't easily determine if he puts-off more people than he attracts. This 'issue' is a little like accusing independant Presidential candidate Ralph Nadar of 'spoiling' the election -- a lot of arguments pro-and-con can be made. What's the answer? But calling Nadar an 'asshole' and 'insane' for throwing the election would be, IMHO, a *bit* disingenuous and not honest. Likely, Nadar would bring people to the vote who might otherwise remain ambivalent or cynical -- and by doing so, he would be encouraging greater political participation. (But with electronic voting being controlled, electoral participation might just be a scam to keep people compliant.) But in the spirit of being fair and committed to reasoned debate, I'd object to his being rudely disparaged or anyone intimidated from discussing or even considering him. So, I'm undecided whether Icke 'hurts' the cause for social justice by allowing folks an easy way to say "Oh, it's all just too incredible -- obviously anything associated with Icke is plain nonsense -- end of story." Sad but too tragically true, many folks are like that. So, should Icke be censored because some folks can't exercise reasonable critical discretion? It's a sad commentary on how naive and simple-minded people are. Ah, no 'easy' answers here, just a lotta hard questions and difficult 'truths'. Regrdz; Starman

by **dbeach** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:18 am

"CREDO MUTWA :On Alien Abduction & Reptilians" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This post is to clarify bout reptillian "Legend" from Mutwa whom was the African who provided David Icke the Zulu info about the reptilians... Its also in "Tales from the Time loop" by Icke www.metatech.org/credo_mutwa.html Great Zulu Shaman and Elder CREDO MUTWA On Alien Abduction & Reptilians A Rare, Astonishing Conversation 9/30/99 by Rick Martin By Permission from The SPECTRUM newspaper's Front Page story! September 1999 To order The SPECTRUM call (877) 280-2866. www.spectrumnews10.com "It has often been said that the Native Elders of any given tribe hold the keys to knowledge. This statement has never been more clearly confirmed than in the recent interview I had the great privilege to conduct with Zulu “Sanusi” (Shaman) Credo Mutwa, now nearing eighty years of age. Through the efforts and assistance of David Icke, I was able to establish contact with Dr. Johan Joubert, who graciously coordinated with Credo Mutwa, thus allowing the interview to take place by telephone, literally half-way around the world in South Africa. We at The SPECTRUM would like to convey our deepest appreciation to both David Icke and to Dr. Joubert for their selfless efforts at getting this man’s Truth out to the world. I first heard about Credo Mutwa five years ago, only at that time it didn’t seem possible to speak with him directly by telephone, as he lives in a somewhat remote area with no phone. When I heard from David Icke that he had spent time with Credo Mutwa and that he would be willing to speak with The SPECTRUM, well, that’s all it took. Through the wonder of the international telephone lines, on August 13 we had what turned out to be a 4-hour session! And no, we are not about to pare it down to “sound bite” size. The words he has spoken will appear completely and in full context, as is our usual policy-a matter of respect for the speaker as well as simply being good, honest journalism! Credo Mutwa is a man whom David Icke describes as: “The most amazing and knowledgeable man it has been my privilege and honor to call a friend, a genius.” After speaking with Credo Mutwa, I couldn’t agree more. I would like to comment that Credo Mutwa, while not a man of formal education, was kind enough and conscientious enough to spell all of the Zulu or African words, proper names, etc. for this article. Those of you who may be African scholars will find this level of accuracy more advantageous to your research than will the average reader, however such care taken by Credo is yet another facet of his honesty and precision. If Credo Mutwa: The Zulu people, who are famous as a warrior people, the people to whom King Shaka Zulu, of the last century, belonged. When you ask a South African White anthropologist what the name of Zulu means, he will say it means “the sky” (laughter), and therefore the Zulu call themselves “people of the sky”. That, sir, is non-sense. In the Zulu language, our name for the sky, the blue sky, is sibakabaka. Our name for inter-planetary space, however, is izulu and the weduzulu, which means “inter-planetary space, the dark sky that you see with stars in it every night”, also has to do with traveling, sir. The Zulu word for traveling at random, like a nomad or a gypsy, is izula. Now, you can see that the Zulu people in South Africa were aware of the fact that you can travel through space-not through the sky like a bird-but you can travel through space, and the Zulus claim that many, many thousands of years ago there arrived, out of the skies, a race of people who were like lizards, people who could change shape at will. And people who married their daughters to a walking (extraterrestrial), and produced a power race of Kings and tribal Chiefs, there are hundreds of fairy-tales, sir, in which a lizard female assumes the identity of a human princess and poses as her, and gets married to a Zulu Prince."

by **toscaveritas** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 12:42 pm

sweejak excellent experiment there! so telling indeed-- we can watch that being played out every day ! lol As far as methodology is concerned, I also 'sift out'. Often times, I come across topics or details where I lack the background to discern whether it is valid or not. Ironically, I often then use my intuition as guide. 9 times out of 10, the details matter little and I just disregard and move on, to later return if needed. For some reason, this has worked out fine for me so far. I've progressed alot and sometimes have returned to the previously disregarded matters for deeper study. When I first started out on my journey, I was almost overwhelmed with paths to take, topics to research. I've often had to remind myself that 'all roads lead to Rome', so to speak. And learning what I did, away from any Icke books, to then see it all neatly compiled in his books, was quite funny indeed. I've come to think that it matters not whether someone reads Icke or not. What matters is that one sincerely , fearlessly seeks the truth and is prepared to drop all mind-prisons, comfort zones. Then, we pretty much all end up in the same place. glad to meet you

by **Sweejak** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 1:39 pm

Prophetlady on another thread put it nicely <blockquote>Quote:<hr>We all tend to have our theories, and we scan the internet and the libraries to come up with info that will validate our theories, which in turn validates us as intelligent, thinking beings. Or, we read something somewhere and it strikes a chord with us--appeals to our logic and rationality, so then we in turn validate what we've just read or heard by positing the info further on forums such as this one. It is forums such as this one, on which we are able to intuit rigorously, that allow us to find others who will agree, thereby further validating what we believe to be so. It is interesting that some believe their assertions to be "gospel" and thereby attempt to invalidate others' assertions, no matter how well documented and well validated by others. The bottom line, however, is that NONE OF US KNOW ANYTHING TO BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. We can assert that we do, but we do not, really. And it's quite maddening, isn't it?<hr></blockquote> As far as 'facts' go, really we only have what we ourselves experience, and even then you have to ask "is it the truth". Everybody believes Tokyo exists but if you have never been there how can you know? It's a collection of likelihoods, intuitions and evidences threaded together that when they add up leads you to make the jump and believe it. I don't really need intuition to be able to believe Tokyo exists. I've never been to Tokyo but I know people who have, I've seen it on satellite photos, I've bought stock from their stock exchange etc. but in the end I don't really really know it is there. Yes, it is quite maddening.

by **Starman** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:59 pm

DrDebugDU; Heyia; OUTSTANDING article cited, the Mannlicher-Carcanno Bomb -- Glad I checked-it to see if it had more info -- One of the better articles I've seen deconstructing the apparant cover-up and disinfo hiding what appears to be some degree of complicity by yet-unidentified covert-ops players to make the Murrah Building damage much greater than is possible with the ANFO device. Particularly striking to me was the similiarity between the OKC and Bali/Davao City bombings in investigative lapses, confusion over press-release official explanations on type and size of explosion, unexplained discrepancies (such as evidence for OKC w/five bombs and recovery of additional 3 or-so unexploded bombs) and the near-identical pulverizing of concrete beams leaving once-embedded steel rebar exposed -- as well as an apparant political decision to severely limit investigation to specifically targetted suspects only -- massive evidence-tampering and obstruction of justice, which unfortunately there is abundant evidence to suggest has become de rigor with our top LE agencies, FBI, CIA, DEA, NSA, NIA and others. The speculation about use of an A-Neutronic Bomb or Electro-Hydronamic Gaseous Fuel Device to explain the tremendous differential pressure and high-psi blast-wave effects necessary to cause the damage observed are also appropriate to help explain the Bali bombing -- as well as the two very-mysterious huge explosions that occurred in North Korea. Clearly, there's a deep-level coverup going on in which the public is being deceived --the purpose which would seem to be (as apparently in the 70s covert false-flag ops by gov. agents) to dramatize the threat of terrorism in the public mind and the consequent expanding of police powers and reactionary militarization of public policy. We see the 'benefits' now all around us, fueling curtailing of civil rights and justifying pre-emptive & Perpetual War; --excerpt-- The Mannlicher-Carcanno Bomb "It had to have been mined," said the gruff, gnarly voice on the other end of the line. "It's real simple. You cannot bring down a building like that without cutting charges set on the support pillars." Bud, an ex-Green Beret who saw heavy combat in Vietnam, should know what he's talking about. Bud had military demolitions training — the kind taught to men who need to know how to blow up hardened targets. "It couldn't have been done externally like that," added Bud. "Without cutting charges, there's just no way to do it." Bud didn't want me to use his full name. He was worried about his VA benefits. One man who wasn't worried about government reprisals was General Benton K. Partin. A retired U.S. Air Force Brigadier General, Partin had responsibility for the design and testing of almost every non-nuclear weapon device used in the Air Force, including precision-guided weapons designed to destroy hardened targets like the Alfred P. Murrah Building. Partin has exhaustively researched the bombing and the resulting pattern of damage. In a letter dated May 17, 1995, hand-delivered to each member of the Congress and Senate, Partin stated: When I first saw the pictures of the truck-bomb's asymmetrical damage to the Federal Building, my immediate reaction was that the pattern of damage would have been technically impossible without supplementing demolition charges at some of the reinforcing concrete column bases…. For a simplistic blast truck-bomb, of the size and composition reported, to be able to reach out on the order of 60 feet and collapse a reinforced column base the size of column A-7 is beyond credulity. The full text of Partin's report, reproduced in the appendix, is too complex to elaborate on here, says a truck filled with ammonium nitrate could not have caused the degree of damage done to the Alfred P. Murrah building. Not when it was parked at least 20 feet away from that building. Without direct contact, the fall-off from the blast would be too great to do any serious structural damage.[5] ***** Right-on your comment that the strongest point is the bomb simply couldn't have done the damage claimed. Did you see the recent made-for-tv program (History Channel or something similiar) 'proving' how the fertilizer bomb ripped the face off the Murrah Building and weakening the four main pillars wehich then caused the upper floors to collapse? Utterly ridiculous -- almost as bad as the feature-'documentary' showing how the WTC bldgs 1&2 failed because the truss-bolts sheared because the trusses sagged from high heat -- utterly ignoring the central core supports which even IF such a thing as truss-bolt shearing were plausable would have remained standing. The extent to which so-called official 'experts' are complicit in lying to cover-up terrible truths of gov. betrayals and abuse-of-power and mass criminality by officials is almost unbelievable -- which helps explain why so many people are in a state of denial despite the severe cognitive dissonance of our age. I notice that official references to the Madrid and Bali and '93 WTC and OKC and 911 bombings/attacks still act as if these events are absolutely true as claimed and conclusive 'proof' of foreign terrorist plots -- with NO acknowledgement that there are serious questions about who planned them and why and how. Sometimes I 'forget' for a few moments at a time the profound depths of a manufactured false reality that so many otherwise intelligent people are invested in. I still have a hard time understanding how people can be so willfully ignorant and unaware of what, to me, is now so evident. Ah, but that's another thread! Regrdz, Stay strong and in the Light; Starman

by **DrDebugDU** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 4:07 pm

Good post Starman. Just clear this up: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Did you see the recent made-for-tv program (History Channel or something similiar)<hr></blockquote> I wanted to switch off the tv and about 14-15 months ago my television broke down. I have refused to repair it, so for over a year I am out of mass synchronization called TV. The beginning was hard, but I got used to it. So I haven't seen anything for a long while...

by **Sweejak** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 4:28 pm

Fascinating (maybe the wrong word) article Toscaveritas. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Sir, I have lived a long and very strange life<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.metatech.org/credo_mutwa.html">www.metatech.org/credo_mutwa.html</a>

Icke Interview

re:lantern

Re: re: Oklahoma City Bombing: False Flag ops?

Re: re:lantern

Icke: Self-promoting Martyr-Complex Showman or Dupe?

Re: Icke: Self-promoting Martyr-Complex Showman or Dupe?

Re: re:lantern

Re: re:lantern

re: Oklahoma City Bombing: Pattern of False Flag Ops

Re: re: Oklahoma City Bombing: Pattern of False Flag Ops

CREDO MUTWA

Who is online