Alex Jones Rant: DMT Elves Control Global Elites

[Canadian_watcher]

Had women actively fought against ALL men who were connected to sexism/misogyny throughout history we wouldn't have had any powerful allies.

Supporting your oppressor = Stockholm Syndrome. Not a recipe for a meaningful existence. Consider the social and scientific advancements which were sidelined or repressed by the actions of the men who refused women the opportunity to excel. In a similar manner, adherents of Icke and Jones can easily fall under the sway of the reprehensible aspects of their respective perspectives without even realising it exists. Before you know it, you've become a skinhead with hair.

Bottom line: there are reputable sources available for any and all of the truely valuable information in the work of these two.

Barracuda!! I am SHOCKED that you are putting forth the notion that agreeing with a part and disagreeing with another part of what someone with no direct power over you says is tantamount to Stockholm Syndrome! That is just so.. simple minded. What of the men, then, that agreed with their sexist contemporaries ? I suppose they are not victims and therefore not subject to the accusation of having Stockholm Syndrome?

Should the world have shunned the inventions of Thomas Edison or Nikola Tesla, or Alexander Graham Bell? The discoveries of Newton? Of Darwin? The theories of Plato, Socrates, Epicurus?

And secondly - do I sound like someone who would become a skin head? Are you really suggesting that exposure to viewpoints makes someone (adults in particular) susceptible to believing them?

[Canadian_watcher]

Canadian_watcher, the contradictions in your position towards racism and anti-Semitism vs. your position regarding misogyny speak volumes.

I don't see it. I told you that I overlook (but take note of) AJ's blatant stands against what I consider to be women's rights. How is that different from saying I overlook hints of racism, too? (NOT that I see any. This is feeling like a trap akin to "When did you stop beating your wife")

Of course I did understand your analogy to the missionaries who brought good things as well as horrible things.

yeah.. AND.. would you have recommended that the people who ate the food should have starved instead? Or are you saying that they were able to use their own discernment and accept that which nourished them and toss out that which did not?

Did you get my analogy to the Nazi leaders who- like Icke- did indeed have a metaphysical view of the world and did see a good vs. evil struggle against a dark cabal?

I did. I answered. I said it was about intention. We can see what the Nazi intention was. Do you know what Icke's intention is?

[American Dream]

Canadian_watcher, I am feeling too disgusted with you to make meaningful comment at this time.

More later...

[brainpanhandler]

Bottom line: there are reputable sources available for any and all of the truely valuable information in the work of these two.

It's just not more complicated than that (other than deciding what's truly valuable, of course.) But, really, that's about it.

And I don't believe anyone is suggesting AJ or Icke be censored. Rather, some members are trying to provide some needed warnings.

It might be an interesting exercise to have the icke/Aj apologists provide what they believe to be "the best of" and then have other members find alternate and what they believe less problematic/more reputable sources for the same information.

[Canadian_watcher]

wowsers.

disgusted?
apologists?
Stockholm Syndrome?
Warnings?

We are the other people, dudes. We are the other people.

[barracuda]

Barracuda!! I am SHOCKED that you are putting forth the notion that agreeing with a part and disagreeing with another part of what someone with no direct power over you says is tantamount to Stockholm Syndrome! That is just so.. simple minded. What of the men, then, that agreed with their sexist contemporaries ? I suppose they are not victims and therefore not subject to the accusation of having Stockholm Syndrome?

Should the world have shunned the inventions of Thomas Edison or Nikola Tesla, or Alexander Graham Bell? The discoveries of Newton? Of Darwin? The theories of Plato, Socrates, Epicurus?

I'm not a Luddite, but I'd gladly sacrifice the modern scientific advancements of someone like Edison for a world in which freedom and equality had meaning and substance.

And secondly - do I sound like someone who would become a skin head? Are you really suggesting that exposure to viewpoints makes someone (adults in particular) susceptible to believing them?

How exactly do you think people form their viewpoints? They are learned. So, yes, adults are rampantly susceptible to believing complete and dangerous nonsense that makes them feel better about themselves in some way. I'd suggest that the history of "western civilisation" over the last one hundred years is nothing but that, time after time.

[brainpanhandler]

apologists?
Warnings?

We are the other people, dudes. We are the other people.

Yes, warnings.

Perhaps apologists is not really the right term. Certainly not as applied to you.

I've had this conversation over and over and over here. I've seen this conversation take place over and over and over.

When you read Jeff what does your intuition tell you about his motives? Jeff is self effacing, humble. He offers his thoughts for consideration. His intuitions and speculations are presented to the reader with a dose of humility that admits his human limitations and foibles. He's an authentic and genuine voice of searching; fumbling about in the dark and seeking the light. Contrast and compare that with Icke or AJ.

On that sort of basis alone who are you going to trust?

For God's sake.

[Canadian_watcher]

I'm not a Luddite, but I'd gladly sacrifice the modern scientific advancements of someone like Edison for a world in which freedom and equality had meaning and substance.

I read your account of working for a soulless organization and loving it for the personal rewards (in PWs thread in the lounge)... what trade off did you make in that case?

How exactly do you think people form their viewpoints? They are learned. So, yes, adults are rampantly susceptible to believing complete and dangerous nonsense that makes them feel better about themselves in some way. I'd suggest that the history of "western civilisation" over the last one hundred years is nothing but that, time after time.

except not you, presumably, because you've extensively read Icke and not been turned in to an anti-semite.

[Canadian_watcher]

apologists?
Warnings?

We are the other people, dudes. We are the other people.

Yes, warnings.

Perhaps apologists is not really the right term. Certainly not as applied to you.

well thank you for that at least!

I've had this conversation over and over and over here. I've seen this conversation take place over and over and over.

yeah, it's an oldie but a goodie.

When you read Jeff what does your intuition tell you about his motives?

I have never gotten a motive vibe from Jeff in any direction, come to think of it. Except maybe to avoid conflict.. he seems to want to do that.

Jeff is self effacing, humble.

Is it simple bombast that turns you off then? it doesn't really bother me, personally. High levels of self confidence don't bother me. I can handle it. I can handle impoliteness, bluntness, volume, theatrics.. I don't like it when any of those characteristics of a speaker are used to undermine the arguments put forth in their speeches.

He offers his thoughts for consideration. His intuitions and speculations are presented to the reader with a dose of humility that admits his human limitations and foibles. He's an authentic and genuine voice of searching; fumbling about in the dark and seeking the light. Contrast and compare that with Icke or AJ.

or Gandhi, or Jesus, or Martin Luther King Junior. To me, those three came across as being pretty sure of their opinions...

and before anyone thinks I'm comparing Icke or AJ to Gandhi, MLK or Christ I'm NOT. I'm merely trying to demonstrate that we don't always have to shy away from what we believe the answers are in order to be taken seriously. We can be resolute without being classed as too arrogant to be taken seriously, can't we?

[Saurian Tail]

Bottom line: there are reputable sources available for any and all of the truely valuable information in the work of these two.

It's just not more complicated than that (other than deciding what's truly valuable, of course.) But, really, that's about it.

I'll agree. And I'll add that the inability to discriminate between sources in a field of interest is a result of a lack of understanding about how arguments are constructed and what makes one argument valid and another invalid. Elites, politicians, titans of industry, marketing executives, and hucksters of every stripe and denomination depend on our inability to get clarity on these sorts of issues.

-ST

[barracuda]

I read your account of working for a soulless organization and loving it for the personal rewards (in PWs thread in the lounge)... what trade off did you make in that case?

My humanity and integrity, for starters.

except not you, presumably, because you've extensively read Icke and not been turned in to an anti-semite.

I haven't read Icke extensively. Nor have I extensively read Fritz Springmeier, James Shelby Downard, Milton William Cooper, Lyndon LaRouche, or any number of other conspiracy writiers you may wish to mention. The information and excerpts I've been exposed to have demonstrated to me that there might be more profitable sources of information regarding how the world works, like, I dunno, perhaps studies of early Greek vase painting, or maybe the Sunday funnies.

[666]

666 wrote:

No but seriously....Is Icke's Reptilian/Moon Base theory that far out of the realm of possibilities?
Why is John Carpenter's They Live scenario instantly dismissed as paranoid nuttery?

How much do we actually know about the Universe?
In fact, how much do we actually know about our own planet?

And considering what little we do know about our own immediate surroundings, is based on our minuscule, almost insignificant range of perceivable phenomena, why is the existence of DMT elves and Reptilian Overlords and the like, asinine, idiotic and preposterous?

Are you mocking me?

[slimmouse]

Like any progressive thinker on a learning curve, doing the hard miles, talking to people, reading any number books, etc, Mr Icke has fallen for many a trap along the way. No doubt about it. How can I be sure of this ? Cos Ive been there done that too.


But this racist nonsense spouted by AD and co is simply risible , that is IF of course youve read more than what the occasional village idiot posts, and simply replicate wholesale........an AD trademark. According to him, Alice is of the same racist ilk.


Why exactly does the "illuminati protocols" not make sense to anyone who has read them ? Are they not an accurate reflection of how the reptilian/DMT elf/ whatever controllers operate ?

Ickes message for the best part of the last two years is this : We are consciousness. every nerve fibre and strand of me and you and everything. Its about the closest thing to the undistilled message of Buddhism there is.

In my own honest opinion, enough people understanding this - ordinary people who detest the liars, bullies thieves and murderers who rule us is a very scary prospect for these people - be they run by DMT elves or 4th dimensional reptiles or whatever.

A few others have understood this without going all Ickey on folks too. John Lennon, Bill Hicks, Bob Marley, Martin Luther King, Princess Di. But of course they say the good die young.

So go ahead AD - do your usual ignorant best. Your cartoons are missing one thing. The girl should surely be wearing a swastika on her arm - right ?

[Searcher08]

Indeed it is...

[Nordic]

Okay, this thread is getting derailed into a ridiculous arena of political correctness and silly accusations of racist-approval.

I was enjoying this thread until that.

CW made it perfectly clear what she meant, others are simply refusing to accept what she said so they can continue needling her.

There have always been great men and women who have had flaws. Nobody is without flaws. EVERYONE is a product of their time and culture.

Throughout history, plenty of brilliant men and women have furthered the knowledge and experience and wisdom of the human race while at the same time having qualities which now seem glaringly wrong.

Racism, sexism, religious views which seems ridiculously fundamental in today's light, whatever.

This does not take away from the vision that these people had. It just means they were human.

Hell, Beethoven was reportedly a racist (according to some). Does that mean we should quit listening to his music. "I hate that Beethoven prick. He was such a racist".

That's just silly.

I've found plenty of people on the far, far right who I have way more in common with than my fellow "Democrats". Plenty of far righters have realized that our government is in the pocket of a cabal of corporate interests, that our government is bogus, bought and paid for, and that our government is busy deliberately destroying the Constitution. Okay? Of course then they'll turn it all around, get it all backwards, and start blaming it on the leftists, the gays, the Obama socialists and things like that.

I think AJ is one of those folks, someone who has the vision to see what is going on to a point, but is then blinded by his own prejudices, which he probably grew up with and had ingrained into him as a child, to where he ultimately gets it just plain wrong some of the time. Then other times he's right.

At the same time, if you go to his site, he seems to be interested in one thing and that's making money off of what he has to know damn good and well is "conspiro-porn". Bogus shit that pushes the buttons of the paranoids.

(that's the major problem I have with AJ. I can't go to those sites. Trying to pick out what is true and what is completely bogus at his sites is such a waste of time I refuse to participate).

Anyway, American Dream is someone we all know well. When I first started being active on this board, he was ALL OVER ME suspecting I was a racist antisemite. It took a long time for him to accept me. (choosing the name "Nordic" didn't help).

He has his world view which colors everything he says and does. At the same time he's an incredible researcher and shares a great many wonderful things here.

So he has his perspective on Icke based on a fear and a suspicion that the guy is an antisemite. Fine. Whatever. Maybe he's right, maybe he's wrong.

But I think he's wrong in attacking anyone who expresses an openess to what Icke is saying.

Icke is worth discussing in this forum, especially on this forum! It's also worth discussing whether or not he's an anti-semite.

But please don't accuse people who are interested in what he has to say of being anti-semites. That's just, frankly, silly. And prejudicial on your own part.