David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby slimmouse » Tue Jul 09, 2013 3:36 pm

Making a strong argument that something they're associated with has such serious and inherent problems and pitfalls that the whole shebang is compromised to the point that continued association is self-defeating and maybe dangerous to people of good will isn't exactly the same thing, though.




Youve just made a judgement call there, presumably on ADs behallf. If thats both your calls, then Im kinda pissed that you havent recognised it, or more poigniantly the fact that I somehow havent taken this into consideration prior to making my own. My own opiinion you understand is a lot more liberated from the kind of myopic thinking that started this thread, and is there for all to see throughout.

And heres another judgement call of my own. The window of opportunity for avoiding/ preventing a totalitarian thought controlled fascist state is rapldly having the shutter permanently locked.

When humanity has so much to lose, the time for pointless confrontation and the kind of one sided bias exhibited by the Organisation of Anti Ickeism ( of which you could never be a member btw) is well and truly over.

Its a personal opinion of course, and you may disagree.

Thats your judgement call. As long as you understand that, thats fine by me.
Last edited by slimmouse on Tue Jul 09, 2013 3:57 pm, edited 3 times in total.
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby American Dream » Tue Jul 09, 2013 3:40 pm

Canadian_watcher » Tue Jul 09, 2013 2:33 pm wrote:
American Dream » Tue Jul 09, 2013 2:21 pm wrote:Here's what I said to CW, which really does reflect my position:

American Dream » Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:17 pm wrote:
Canadian_watcher » Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:56 pm wrote:AD, Mason I Bilderberg, Brekin:

Do you believe that I am an anti-semite or not?


I believe that working seriously on one's thinking about race, class, ethnicity, religion, oppression, and liberation is almost always of benefit and I have seen no indication that you want to perpetuate oppression. I don't think you believe anti-Semitism is a good thing but it still could be good to work some on these issues.



Over and out!


I wish you were over and out.
STOP telling me ANYTHING that has to do with my ability to understand racism, okay?

STOP DIAGNOSING ME AS HAVING SOME SORT OF DISABILITY WHEN IT COMES TO UNDERSTANDING RACE, ETHNICITY, RELIGION, OPPRESSION AND LIBERATION AND STOP IMPLYING THAT i'M UNWITTINGLY PERPETUATING OPPRESSION AND SORT OF HELPING ANTI-SEMITES BY NOT BEING SENSITIVE ENOUGH ABOUT IT.

GOT IT?


Take a look again: you asked a question- more than once as I recall- and you got an answer.

Sorry it wasn't the answer you wanted. If anything, I tried to be kind and emphasize the positive.


Now- back to my mental health break...
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby compared2what? » Tue Jul 09, 2013 3:51 pm

Canadian_watcher » Tue Jul 09, 2013 2:13 pm wrote:
compared2what? wrote:
That would be derelict if anybody had called you an anti-Semite. But nobody did. So it's effectively a "When did you stop beating your wife?" way of accusing AD, brekin, and MiB of doing something antagonistic and offensive to you that none of them did. And like most people, they probably don't respond any better to feeling like they're being unfairly accused of bad and hateful practices than you do.

You can understand that, right?


oh my dear. Of course little cw can undewstand you big words and compwex ideas!


^^That's the exact same thing. I didn't call you stupid. And you're accusing me of doing it.

Not only that, you're also mocking me for the way I talk.

Nothing in my fucking post was hostile, angry or insulting to you. What fucking justification do you have to reply to me with insults and taunts that suggest YOU'RE being insulted by ME?

Can you understand that your post can be turned around and aimed DIRECTLY at the people who originally posted that fucking stupid graphic which I then took and edited into a parody of itself?


Unless brekin and AD originally posted it, no you weren't.

At least you got how offensive and stupid it was and explained why.


Uh-huh. So that had been explained. Just as it had by me, you and many others every time it came up, leaving the matter settled unless and until it arose again, there being nothing to be gained by punishing anyone infinitely for having done something he/she stopped doing after having been called out for it.

I would have thought.

But you seem to be blind to the fact that I was making YOUR point TO them.


If nobody called you an anti-Semite, you didn't have a point.

Two out of three of the people you were seeking retribution from didn't even condemn or deride other people (including you) for their beliefs in any terms at all. And weren't doing so. So you were just tarring them with an unjust accusation of heavy misconduct for sport, essentially.

MiB had been called out already. And there wasn't exactly an imminent threat that his views were going to prevail, leaving you voiceless, persecuted and unable to express your opinion. So there was no casus belli there either.

It would have been offensive and stupid if they had called you an anti-Semite. But that goes without saying. So it can't have been your point.
_____________

I guess you're right. If it wasn't a preemptive first strike in a unilateral war of aggression that was thinly veiled by an ersatz claim of self-defense, I'm blind to it.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby Canadian_watcher » Tue Jul 09, 2013 3:57 pm

i\m not playing this game with you, C2W -

YES, whether you like it or not, your post came off as condescending to me.

Whether or not you personally feel that all of the hundred little implications along this thread (and others) from AD to anyone who will not completely denounce David Icke add up to an out and out accusation of anti-semitism that's on you. I don't really care or need to care whether or not you read it that way, because it has nothing to do with you. he didn't make those implications TO you or ABOUT you and you've not had to declare with a YES or NO answer whether or not you support icke.

IOW: maybe this little bit of this thread is absolutely none of your business and maybe you aren't being helpful to it whatsoever.

But maybe that's the point - get the emotions going and the epic post post post style which says just enough to REQUIRE that someone respond to you or else leave all these questions hanging there - and get the thread locked.

is that what you're after? Please, I'm begging you, just answer me straight up, without quotes of my words ripped into four word segments. I'm begging you.
Satire is a sort of glass, wherein beholders do generally discover everybody's face but their own.-- Jonathan Swift

When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift
User avatar
Canadian_watcher
 
Posts: 3706
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 6:30 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby elfismiles » Tue Jul 09, 2013 3:59 pm

WTF is this thread about again ... glad I'm not reading it.

Feel free to resume bashing your heads against each others walls. :wallhead: :eeyaa :starz:
goodbye farewell adieu au revoir ciao auf Wiedersehen adios sayonara buhbye tata laters
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8450
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby compared2what? » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:00 pm

slimmouse » Tue Jul 09, 2013 2:36 pm wrote:
Making a strong argument that something they're associated with has such serious and inherent problems and pitfalls that the whole shebang is compromised to the point that continued association is self-defeating and maybe dangerous to people of good will isn't exactly the same thing, though.




Youve just made a judgement call there, presumably on ADs behallf. If thats both your calls, then Im kinda pissed that you havent recognised it, or more poigniantly the fact that I somehow havent taken this into consideration prior to making my own.


I thought it went without saying. But I do recognize that. And thought I had said so, actually. (In response to the post in which you said 99 percent of the people in the world had common cause.)

But please consider it said for now. I'll try to say it more eloquently at the very next opportunity.

And heres another judgement call of my own. The window of opportunity for avoiding/ preventing a totalitarian thought controlled fascist state is rapldly having the shutter permanently locked.

When humanity has so much to lose, the time for pointless confrontation and the kind of one sided bias exhibited by the Organisation of Anti Ickeism ( of which you could never be a member btw) is well and truly over.

Its a personal opinion of course, and you may disagree.

Thats your judgement call. As long as you understand that, thats fine by me.


I agree with you on all the parts that count.

I think, feel and believe that since that's what you get from Icke, it's all to the good, barring the kind of details that political people inevitably have to debate and settle anyway. And that's about it, on my end. We can't all strike gold in the same places. They all have their pros and cons.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby The Consul » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:00 pm

Canadian_watcher » Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:17 pm wrote:
The Consul » Tue Jul 09, 2013 2:10 pm wrote: Any coherent criticism of the Bildebergers and now be dismissed with "you sound like David Icke. Next you will be asking me to pull down my trousers to see how many penises I have.".


love ya, Consul, but that argument is one of my pet peeves.

If you are dealing with someone who will throw out a whole bunch of ideas based on someone they don't like having said them well then you're dealing with someone that's lost. Lost.

You are also handing a great tool to the Powers That Be. (They already have it, I know.) But you are perpetuating the ease with which "they" can bury the truth in front of our faces.


Well, yes - that could probably hold true for anyone who has posted on RI more than 20 times. And, believeme, as one who misses Hugh Manatee, your point is well taken. I am dangerously close to violating my promise not to enter into the Ickesphere. So I will only say that IMHO certain figures are at least as useful by image to the emperor as anything they would unsheeth by force or ideas to dethrone them, and they are usually easy to spy, for their voices are loudened more by fiction than reason. And when this fiction is at the very heart of their manifesto, they can become useful against those who assail the beast with more than fairytales and fantasies. One thing the men behind the curtain know how to do very well, is lump things together.
" Morals is the butter for those who have no bread."
— B. Traven
User avatar
The Consul
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:41 am
Location: Ompholos, Disambiguation
Blog: View Blog (13)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby Canadian_watcher » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:00 pm

AD wrote:
Take a look again: you asked a question- more than once as I recall- and you got an answer.

Sorry it wasn't the answer you wanted. If anything, I tried to be kind and emphasize the positive.

...


I asked a yes or no question which you failed to reply to with a Yes or No, just like your friend MIB and you high fived each other over earlier when the same flow chart YES/NO bullshit was on the other foot.

So no, I don't like your answer. It should be yes or no or I'm sorry to say that you are perpetuating a fascist agenda - not that I think you LIKE to do that, but you are. It's worth learning more about, AD, All I want is for you to learn.
Last edited by Canadian_watcher on Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Satire is a sort of glass, wherein beholders do generally discover everybody's face but their own.-- Jonathan Swift

When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift
User avatar
Canadian_watcher
 
Posts: 3706
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 6:30 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby Searcher08 » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:02 pm

2 But I still think David Icke and his pals- basically any person who traffics in Nazi Holocaust revisionism or denial or might claim that the Protocols are essentially true- brings nothing but the kiss of death to real organizing for Palestinian Liberation.
is your quote

David Icke AND his pals-
(basically any person who
traffics in Nazi Holocaust revisionism OR
denial OR
might claim that the Protocols are essentially true)

brings nothing but the kiss of death to real organizing for Palestinian Liberation.
David Icke and his pals are qualified as indicated



STOP DIAGNOSING ME AS HAVING SOME SORT OF DISABILITY TO UNDERSTAND RACE, ETHNICITY, RELIGION, OPPRESSION AND LIBERATION OR THAT i'M UNWITTINGLY PERPETUATING OPPRESSION AND SORT OF HELPING ANTI-SEMITES BY NOT BEING SENSITIVE ENOUGH ABOUT IT.

GOT IT?


this makes me think of AD's very first response back nearly a thousand posts ago, which was to you CW, in respose to you posting a couple of short Icke videos.

Of course that's a very, very weak defense for a person who conveys lots of highly questionable information as well as some "true" stuff...


This assumes from the outset of the thread
a) Your are defending Icke
b) Your response is categorised as 'very very weak' - as though it is being assesed objectively, but you are not told HOW it is very, very week nor the standard you are being assessed against.
c )You are not told specifically WHAT Ickes 'highly questionable information' is in this instance.
d) Highly questionable according to WHOM?
e) some "true" stuff - WHICH true stuff?
f) "true" is ambiguous - scare quotes often mean a reversal of meaning

Now immediately the conversation splits into multiple 'logical levels' -
There is the content and the 'metamessage' here:
a) You are against my position
b) I will let you know my assessment without tell you the yardstick
c) I will use ambiguous language that will make it difficult to answer clearly and make it easy to question your motivation

...the fractal pattern from which these thousand posts played out
User avatar
Searcher08
 
Posts: 5887
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby Searcher08 » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:04 pm

elfismiles » Tue Jul 09, 2013 7:59 pm wrote:WTF is this thread about again ... glad I'm not reading it.

Feel free to resume bashing your heads against each others walls. :wallhead: :eeyaa :starz:

:hug1:
User avatar
Searcher08
 
Posts: 5887
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby slimmouse » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:06 pm

elfismiles » 09 Jul 2013 19:59 wrote:WTF is this thread about again ... glad I'm not reading it.

Feel free to resume bashing your heads against each others walls. :wallhead: :eeyaa :starz:


You need to read the thread to understand many of the principles at stake here.

If you dont think that important, then I feel youre missing a few very sailent points in the here and now as the foam of collective concsiousness collapses into the next point of reality.

But rest assured that the lunatics who really run this asylum on earth do.
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby compared2what? » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:19 pm

Canadian_watcher » Tue Jul 09, 2013 2:57 pm wrote:i\m not playing this game with you, C2W -

YES, whether you like it or not, your post came off as condescending to me.

Whether or not you personally feel that all of the hundred little implications along this thread (and others) from AD to anyone who will not completely denounce David Icke add up to an out and out accusation of anti-semitism that's on you. I don't really care or need to care whether or not you read it that way, because it has nothing to do with you. he didn't make those implications TO you or ABOUT you and you've not had to declare with a YES or NO answer whether or not you support icke.

IOW: maybe this little bit of this thread is absolutely none of your business and maybe you aren't being helpful to it whatsoever.

But maybe that's the point - get the emotions going and the epic post post post style which says just enough to REQUIRE that someone respond to you or else leave all these questions hanging there - and get the thread locked.

is that what you're after? Please, I'm begging you, just answer me straight up, without quotes of my words ripped into four word segments. I'm begging you.


No.

If it came off as condescending, I regret it. But you do bear some responsibility for understanding it that way.

I've already said that I don't see those implications, explained why, and asked to have that blind-spot illuminated, if that's what it is.

There's no particular reason why I should have to show that it's my business. It's a discussion board. But fwiw, I've also more or less said what my concern about it is, both here:

If you put saying that the material propagates anti-Semitism out of bounds on the grounds that it makes people who disagree feel like they're being called anti-Semites, how are the people who find the case that it does both legitimate and persuasive supposed to express their views?

And how are they supposed to say to those who feel accused of anti-Semitism that they're not being, if:

(a) saying: "I'm not saying that's what you want or intend, but that's what endorsing the material does" isn't it?; and
(b) those who feel accused don't explain why it isn't?


And here:

compared2what? » Tue Jul 09, 2013 1:23 pm wrote:FWIW, speaking of context:

Seems to me that this is formulaically very similar to the conflicts that have arisen on most of the misogyny/sexism-themed threads, although that's gotten much, much better over time.

But basically, in that iteration it's:

    STEP ONE: Someone who wants to talk about a misogyny-sexism-themed topic starts a thread.
    STEP TWO: Posters who feel that whenever anyone speaks of misogyny or sexism at all they're being called misogynist or sexist show up and start throwing counter-punches.
    STEP THREE: The people who want to talk about misogyny-sexism respond defensively and/or evasively and/or reassuringly and/or angrily, while reiterating the basic message: No, we want to talk about the topic.
    STEP FOUR: The posters who feel accused start arguing that it's really women who have power over men, as demonstrated primarily by the mere existence of concepts such as misogyny and sexism, which women use to cudgel everyone into submission, QED, the whole subject is self-mooting.
    STEP FIVE: Bitter antagonism on and off until lockdom.

I understand that it's not easy for anyone. But there's gotta be a better way.


Short version: If people feel so personally implicated by the mere fact that others see some form of discrimination where they don't that they regard all discussion of it as a discriminatory attack on them, it can't be discussed.

And that's never a good thing.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby Canadian_watcher » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:21 pm

EDIT: for Searcher08

yes, yes, thank you for that.
(I can tell whoever disparaged your study of NLP that their position is incorrect and your study *did* in fact produce a benefit !!)

I particularly resonate with the last part. the feeling of being judged and cruelly, too, is strong.
Last edited by Canadian_watcher on Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Satire is a sort of glass, wherein beholders do generally discover everybody's face but their own.-- Jonathan Swift

When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift
User avatar
Canadian_watcher
 
Posts: 3706
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 6:30 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby elfismiles » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:21 pm

Fair enough ... and I immediately thought about deleting my snide comment but since it got quoted and pushed downstream almost immediately ... well, there it is for posterity and posteriors.

Peace out brothahs and sistahs. :coolshades

slimmouse » 09 Jul 2013 20:06 wrote:
elfismiles » 09 Jul 2013 19:59 wrote:WTF is this thread about again ... glad I'm not reading it.

Feel free to resume bashing your heads against each others walls. :wallhead: :eeyaa :starz:


You need to read the thread to understand many of the principles at stake here.

If you dont think that important, then I feel youre missing a few very sailent points in the here and now as the foam of collective concsiousness collapses into the next point of reality.

But rest assured that the lunatics who really run this asylum on earth do.
goodbye farewell adieu au revoir ciao auf Wiedersehen adios sayonara buhbye tata laters
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8450
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

Postby compared2what? » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:33 pm

Canadian_watcher » Tue Jul 09, 2013 2:57 pm wrote:i\m not playing this game with you, C2W -

YES, whether you like it or not, your post came off as condescending to me.


That's exactly the same as it would be if I said:

    I'm not playing this game with you C_w.

    YES, whether you like it or not, when you say "I'm not playing this game with you C2W," it comes off as both an insult and as code for "I refuse to acknowledge that AD and brekin did not post that chart or that I attacked both them and you because I felt like it, then justified doing it by blaming them and you for some non-specific bad act, such as game-playing and making unexampled implications."

Incidentally.

It's an insulting attack disguised as self-defense against an insulting attack, in other words. Same thing as what I was responding to to begin with. Exact same thing. Three times in a row.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests