David Icke: Methods Of A Madman

[Canadian_watcher]

lovely observations (obfuscations) ShinShin..

but is the showing of the Nazi / Jewish Holocaust war films to young children not troublesome to you?
Does it not meet the criteria of "propaganda"

If school history lessons were a court of law, would this practice not be thrown out as prejudicial?

Are we not trying to teach our kids the truth for them to make up their own minds, or are we trying to get them into a social cubicle from an early age?

[Searcher08]

well that's bogus because they can teach about the Second World War Holocaust without traumatizing little kids. And you know it.
They don't bother to traumatize little kids about the Native populations that were decimated, for one example and yet they teach about the colonization of America.

They also don't teach children about Palestine. At all.

Traumatizing kids and not teaching specific incidents of colonialism are wrong of course but these are other issues.

I stand by my previous statement that "your position that Rothschild Zionism theory is not racist and that the teaching of the Nazi Holocaust is the real danger shows how pernicious and compelling some of those problems actually are...

So what are your thoughts on the Rothschilds?
Subject for serious investigation? or a Flat Earth theory? An example of racism?

Some or all or none of the above?

I'm not really up for a discussion with you till the unfinished business between us is resolved.

I'll simply say that Rothschild family members certainly have held a place in the ruling class- and some certainly still do. A deep politics map of the world should include them.

That said, David Icke's Rothschild Zionism theory is deeply racist, misguided and unhelpful, for reasons already laid out and more that will be to come.

You can pm me if you want but that's it for me with dialogue with you here.

This is important for me to write, because this thread has been taking place at multiple levels - content, context and meta-context.

A dialogue is a state where two people are listening to each other - and I am not experienceing yout listening to me. I politely asked you previously to show empathy with slad slim CW and myself and that then I would (in private if you prefer) discuss what were behaviours I had an issue with.
I explained previously the need to do it in that order .
It is not a 'commutative' operation any more than in cooking boiling followed by baking produces the same result as baking followed by boiling(!)
and if it wasnt done in that order it would be more of the same.
You declined to do that -fair enough. Anything which didnt start with empathy would perpetuate the pattern - which is precisely what then happened:
You created another double bind- that
you were 'willing to entertain my request' to go first on this, as long as...
you could go first.

At no point AFAIK have you commented about a major long standing member has stopped posting because of how she felt she was treated. Three *other* people have described the experience of being 'driven crazy'.
This is the 'elephant in the room'. You are not the one who has been affected enough to leave.

Having an attitude of "Sod that, Im not speaking to you till you show me what you were whining about - which I'll show is a load of crap. Hrrumph!" sure aint dialogue.

IMO
Your content is about Icke and is mostly secondaty or tertiary sources.
Your context is that we (Slad, CW, Slim and myself) may be nice people but are we are supporters of vile racist ideas and Holocaust Denial authors and Rothschild Zionism fans and are a demonstration of how dangerous David Icke is.
Your meta-context is activism and what gets the job done making good things happen in the world and fighting injustice

My content has been to answer specific questions about what I think about different areas of what he talks about - which to me is actually asking for a 'global map' of paraculture - surely a fascinating question, no? For example, around ETI, I think of Rich Dolan and Tim Good, not Icke.
My context is doing my best to show communication patterns in action and to facilitate changing them to ones which are more productive and constructive.
My meta-context is to be a catalyst and embody love, creativity, excellence and humour.

[American Dream]

Now, alien hybids, I thought that was a non-starter? We've already geometrically proven that we're at least part "not of this world". Why? The still as yet unexplained genomes that were, in the words of genetic scientists, "horizontally inserted" into the early hominids that gave us our "humaneness". There are cultural answers as well. You could reference various ancient histories, and current indigenous ones to get the answers you seek. The answers abound here. Man in Black has been asked numerous times to look up past threads...amazing what you learn just hangin' around.

So this means that theire is scientific proof of David Icke's contentions about human-alien hybrids who run the world?

Sorry, I don't think so...

[American Dream]

My meta-context is to be a catalyst and embody love, creativity, excellence and humour.

OK, then pm me but until we work things out there, expect no more replies from me here on this thread- besides it's a big distraction from some of the more sticky topics here. But I think you already knew that...

[Canadian_watcher]

Now, alien hybids, I thought that was a non-starter? We've already geometrically proven that we're at least part "not of this world". Why? The still as yet unexplained genomes that were, in the words of genetic scientists, "horizontally inserted" into the early hominids that gave us our "humaneness". There are cultural answers as well. You could reference various ancient histories, and current indigenous ones to get the answers you seek. The answers abound here. Man in Black has been asked numerous times to look up past threads...amazing what you learn just hangin' around.

So this means that theire is scientific proof of David Icke's contentions about human-alien hybrids who run the world?

Sorry, I don't think so...

AD, for the love of your personal God (whatever that is)... can you not see that there are human beings who do not need "scientific" proof of things in the way that you do for ideas to be convincingly true?

But, just in case.. PANSPERMIA is 'scientifically" accepted (by some)
Even your Scientific Overlords don't agree on the actual ORIGIN of life.

[American Dream]

AD, for the love of your personal God (whatever that is)... can you not see that there are human beings who do not need "scientific" proof of things in the way that you do for ideas to be convincingly true?

Yes- they have "faith" in the existence of the (supposed) reptoid masters of Earth- I know. Science fiction is only one of the problems though when deeply pernicious and reactionary doctrines are also attached..

[brekin]

CW wrote:

AD, for the love of your personal God (whatever that is)... can you not see that there are human beings who do not need "scientific" proof of things in the way that you do for ideas to be convincingly true?

But, just in case.. PANSPERMIA is 'scientifically" accepted (by some)
Even your Scientific Overlords don't agree on the actual ORIGIN of life.

It appears that some people do not need "any" proof for things they would like to believe. What if I believed that a conspiracy of lawn gnomes really were running the world? What responsibility do I have to convince people that what I believe is correct? Would you just accept that what I believe is true CW? Why should I provide any evidence to you that the lawn gnome conspiracy is true if we can all believe whatever we want to believe? Like it or not the world is based on separating fact from fiction and if you advocate for something as fact, you need to back it up with reasoning, proof, evidence, etc. If not, you are asking people to accept things on faith and then you are really dealing with spiritual matters. Which is fine, but when you start laying a spiritual template over the world's working you have to recognize you will be held to a higher standard of precision by others in the world.

[Canadian_watcher]

AD, for the love of your personal God (whatever that is)... can you not see that there are human beings who do not need "scientific" proof of things in the way that you do for ideas to be convincingly true?

Yes- they have "faith" in the existence of the (supposed) reptoid masters of Earth- I know. Science fiction is only one of the problems though when deeply pernicious and reactionary doctrines are also attached..

you're being difficult, do you know that?

there are lots of people (and through the millenia, possibly there have been a majority of people) who have known things that today our science cannot prove.
it's a problem .. for science.
When a person witnesses a phenomenon that is currently inexplicable by Science what are they to do?

[American Dream]

AD, for the love of your personal God (whatever that is)... can you not see that there are human beings who do not need "scientific" proof of things in the way that you do for ideas to be convincingly true?

Yes- they have "faith" in the existence of the (supposed) reptoid masters of Earth- I know. Science fiction is only one of the problems though when deeply pernicious and reactionary doctrines are also attached..

you're being difficult, do you know that?

there are lots of people (and through the millenia, possibly there have been a majority of people) who have known things that today our science cannot prove.
it's a problem .. for science.
When a person witnesses a phenomenon that is currently inexplicable by Science what are they to do?

I don't recall you saying that you have witnessed the reptoids...

[Canadian_watcher]

CW wrote:

AD, for the love of your personal God (whatever that is)... can you not see that there are human beings who do not need "scientific" proof of things in the way that you do for ideas to be convincingly true?

But, just in case.. PANSPERMIA is 'scientifically" accepted (by some)
Even your Scientific Overlords don't agree on the actual ORIGIN of life.

It appears that some people do not need "any" proof for things they would like to believe. What if I believed that a conspiracy of lawn gnomes really were running the world? What responsibility do I have to convince people that what I believe is correct? Would you just accept that what I believe is true CW? Why should I provide any evidence to you that the lawn gnome conspiracy is true if we can all believe whatever we want to believe? Like it or not the world is based on separating fact from fiction and if you advocate for something as fact, you need to back it up with reasoning, proof, evidence, etc. If not, you are asking people to accept things on faith and then you are really dealing with spiritual matters. Which is fine, but when you start laying a spiritual template over the world's working you have to recognize you will be held to a higher standard of precision by others in the world.

that's right, some people don't.

if you believed that I wouldn't give a shit. Seriously. YOu ask, I answer. Why would it bother me?? No, I wouldn't ask you to provide evidence, I'd just walk away and go "that guy is nuts." Unless one day I saw a garden gnome creep out of the oval office or something. then I'd say to myself, "Holy crap! Maybe brekin was on to something all along." Or, if many hundreds of thousands of people said the same thing, well, I'd look at it to see if it had any resonance with my own knowledge and experience. That's how I roll.

Like it or not the world changes. There was once a time where the Church rules and didn't need to separate fact from fiction in any "scientific way" before they killed many millions of people for their disbelief. I don't want a return to that, however I kind of feel like that's where we're heading only now instead of the slaughter being led by the Church it is being led by "Science."

Capital S. (I know, I know.. people hate that. there's science which is the pursuit of truth and then there is Science the industry/control mechanism)

I don't have to recognize your bullshit conspiracy if I don't want to, Brekin, If you're all married to it, that's your head trip.

[Canadian_watcher]

AD, for the love of your personal God (whatever that is)... can you not see that there are human beings who do not need "scientific" proof of things in the way that you do for ideas to be convincingly true?

Yes- they have "faith" in the existence of the (supposed) reptoid masters of Earth- I know. Science fiction is only one of the problems though when deeply pernicious and reactionary doctrines are also attached..

you're being difficult, do you know that?

there are lots of people (and through the millenia, possibly there have been a majority of people) who have known things that today our science cannot prove.
it's a problem .. for science.
When a person witnesses a phenomenon that is currently inexplicable by Science what are they to do?

I don't recall you saying that you have witnessed the reptoids...

misdirection.

people who witness things that science can't currently explain includes people who have seen ghosts, moving objects, people who have died on the operating table and seen and heard things, people who claim they can communicate without being in the presence of anyone else, people who remote view, people who have been visited by aliens or demons, priests who perform exorcisms, shamans who claim dialog with other worldly entities, healings to diseases that are claimed by mainstream medicine to be incurable and fatal, and on and on.

[American Dream]

AD, for the love of your personal God (whatever that is)... can you not see that there are human beings who do not need "scientific" proof of things in the way that you do for ideas to be convincingly true?

Yes- they have "faith" in the existence of the (supposed) reptoid masters of Earth- I know. Science fiction is only one of the problems though when deeply pernicious and reactionary doctrines are also attached..

you're being difficult, do you know that?

there are lots of people (and through the millenia, possibly there have been a majority of people) who have known things that today our science cannot prove.
it's a problem .. for science.
When a person witnesses a phenomenon that is currently inexplicable by Science what are they to do?

I don't recall you saying that you have witnessed the reptoids...

misdirection.

people who witness things that science can't currently explain includes people who have seen ghosts, moving objects, people who have died on the operating table and seen and heard things, people who claim they can communicate without being in the presence of anyone else, people who remote view, people who have been visited by aliens or demons, priests who perform exorcisms, shamans who claim dialog with other worldly entities, healings to diseases that are claimed by mainstream medicine to be incurable and fatal, and on and on.

Sure, and when people make such reports, I'd like also to see some corroborating evidence. Videotapes, skeletons, controlled studies and the like all are great.

Don't you think that some people can be: hallucinating, lying, deceived, delusional, misinterpreting things and/or batshit crazy?

If so, what about them?

[norton ash]

Don't you think that some people can be hallucinating, lying, deceived, delusional, misinterpreting things and/or batshit crazy?

If so, what about them?

Well, they can post all day on the web as one option.

[Canadian_watcher]

AD, for the love of your personal God (whatever that is)... can you not see that there are human beings who do not need "scientific" proof of things in the way that you do for ideas to be convincingly true?

Yes- they have "faith" in the existence of the (supposed) reptoid masters of Earth- I know. Science fiction is only one of the problems though when deeply pernicious and reactionary doctrines are also attached..

you're being difficult, do you know that?

there are lots of people (and through the millenia, possibly there have been a majority of people) who have known things that today our science cannot prove.
it's a problem .. for science.
When a person witnesses a phenomenon that is currently inexplicable by Science what are they to do?

I don't recall you saying that you have witnessed the reptoids...

misdirection.

people who witness things that science can't currently explain includes people who have seen ghosts, moving objects, people who have died on the operating table and seen and heard things, people who claim they can communicate without being in the presence of anyone else, people who remote view, people who have been visited by aliens or demons, priests who perform exorcisms, shamans who claim dialog with other worldly entities, healings to diseases that are claimed by mainstream medicine to be incurable and fatal, and on and on.

Sure, and when people make such reports, I'd like also to see some corroborating evidence. Videotapes, skeletons, controlled studies and the like all are great.

Don't you think that some people can be: hallucinating, lying, deceived, delusional, misinterpreting things and/or batshit crazy?

If so, what about them?

yes, AD, I think and often do that people are lying, deceived, delusional or batshit crazy.
it's called discernment that helps me to separate one from the other. Discernment includes but is not limited to the scientific method.

[Canadian_watcher]

Don't you think that some people can be hallucinating, lying, deceived, delusional, misinterpreting things and/or batshit crazy?

If so, what about them?

Well, they can post all day on the web as one option.

it's funny, because one of the dangers that AD, brekin and MIB are 'warning us of' is that people who believe Icke (and by extension, I'm beginning to see, they include people who believe in any kind of non-scientifically provable entities including God) are going to wind up feeling so very jaded, cynical and helpless over it.

But I offer you, Norton Ash, to be exhibit A of the most incredibly cynical, disengaged and mean spirited human being who already DOES NOT believe in any non-scientifically provable entities I've ever encountered. So, there's one piece of evidence of the "helpless and cynical" theory up in flames. BPH is number two.

the people who have their minds closed* to possibilities that are currently inexplicable by our Science are the ones who seem the most resigned to "oh well, we're all dead and doomed and there's nothing we can do about it".

* edit: had to change open to closed, as it was clearly an error.