It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


David Icke...for real???

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 10:57 PM

Originally posted by watcheroftheskies
does anyone find it suspicous that the bush family has been friends with the bin laden family for years and the day of the 9/11 tragedy that bush personally paid to have them flown out of the u.s !!!!

So does that mean that the Bin Laden family are shape-shifting reptilians as well?

The Bin Laden family is HUGE and wealthy, it does not surprise me at all that they would want to leave the US after 911.

posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 02:57 AM
where is the brotherhood of mystery babylon to illuminate us within the flames of their hell when you need them? oh well...until then, as ace rock put it best, "must not sleep, must warn others."

posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 12:21 AM
I think he provides a lot of good info, you just have to make up your mind on what you think is or isn't.

The thing I don't get though is that if what he claims is really the truth or even if he wasn't close to the 'truth' then how come he hasn't been killed or shut up for good? Truly if he was on the right track his work would've ended by now, no?

posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 10:36 AM
if they would have killed him then everyone would know something was up ? it would have increased his popularity and made him a martyr....better to let him say what he wants so people can question the validity of it ....if they kill him then people know somethings up and there must be valid info in his books and speeches...

question if Icke called you a satanic mass mudering child molester wouldnt you sue for him for slander to clear your name ?????

posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 10:56 AM

question if Icke called you a satanic mass mudering child molester wouldnt you sue for him for slander to clear your name ?????

In common law, this is a slippery slope, and the "reasonable person" standard is used to determine whether an incident is slanderous or libelous.
What happens is this: if David Icke calls John White a "satanic mass mudering child molester", would a hypothetical "reasonable person" take him seriously?
Probably not. This is also how tabloids like the National Enquirer have gotten away with a lot of similar stuff. If a tabloid reported that you were an alien agent plotting a Martian takeover of earth, a "reasonable person" would not take it seriously, and the article technically would not be libelous.

Fiat Lvx.

posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 11:19 AM
your comparing apples and oranges masonic light ...and you avoided the question....those rag mags have been sued in the past its not a question of how outraegous the claims are just how much truth is contained therein

posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 01:09 PM

your comparing apples and oranges masonic light ...and you avoided the question....those rag mags have been sued in the past its not a question of how outraegous the claims are just how much truth is contained therein

It's not apples and oranges at's the way that libel and slander laws are interpreted by the courts.
Under the standard used, if it is shown that the hypothetical reasonable person would be duped by false information, then the victim may collect damages. Slander and libel are civil torts, not violations of criminal law, and the plaintiff must demonstrate that he or she has been negatively affected by slanderous or libelous behavior.
Since the "reasonable person" does not take Icke's claims seriously, nor has his books and speeches negatively affected those whom he has attacked, it would be difficult winning a law suit against him. Icke of course understands all of this, and makes sure he doesn't cross the line, using, for example, his lizard people doctrine, which would be laughed out of court.
So what you really have here is a real cpnspiracy....not one cooked up by intra-dimensional reptilian rich guys, but one in which Icke and his collaborators squeeze money from the gullible through selling books and lectures, while skirting just within the legal limits of fraud.

Fiat Lvx.

posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 01:40 PM
I think some of you are getting the wrong end of the stick with David Icke's writings, I have read 4 of his books now, as well as listening to some of his radio interviews, and the thing that you are mis-understanding is the way Icke writes,

Lets take the book the biggest secret for example, he has put together all the threads of literally hundreds of other authors and books, which amounts to a much bigger picture of which you would never get in a single book.

so when he talks about a particular subject, He lists books/authors from which he has put together this HUGE jigsaw puzzle on why the world is like it is today and where it came from as well as where its going, so then YOU can look at the references for YOURSELF and make YOUR own judgements.

And since reading his books that has lead to me to follow my own lines of research, such as CIA mind control slaves of Project Monarch, as well as anti-gravity and supressed free energy systems..

If you just say ahh yes the Queen Of England is Shapeshifting Reptile, of course people will call you crazy, but if you read all his rmaterial on the subject with an open mind AND then look at all the material he has gotten this conclusion from, you might find the crazy thing is it might actually be true.

At the end of the day if you are prepared to look at things with an open mind, you might just start finding out about wonders you never dreamed off....

posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 08:29 PM
that's a good way to put it there andy

[Edited on 19-4-2004 by LookingIntoIt]

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 12:00 PM
David Icke can draw some convincing parallels between seemingly unrelated conspiricies. But people will never take him seriously if he keeps pushing the 'reptilian agenda' so hard. Its a pretty out there concept.

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 02:05 PM

Originally posted by Facefirst
I posted this in another thread, but I think it has relevance here.
I think we have entered this realm:

Is that for real. I found that link ...words escape me.

As you can see, while I have read some of Icke, I'm not readay for the helmet

very weel put. That is exactly what Icke has done.
Taken a whole lot of references and put them together jigsaw fashion.
I'm not saying he's 100% correct. but that he has, through his research, come to some very interesting conclusions.
You can't make all this stuff up!!!!

[Edited on 20-4-2004 by DontTreadOnMe]

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 03:40 PM
i've done psychedelics quite a bit. from those experiences i feel i've experienced the universe as "multi-dimensional". so Icke's 4 dimensional reptilians aint much of a stretch for me to get. Also during those trips, i've seen friends and strangers turn "reptilian", one buddy turned into a frog, but also other animals too, lions are common and one girlfriend turned into a chicken! I've also enjoyed "group hallucinations" in which all us trippers "saw" the same *unbelievable* thing which makes me think it wasn't so much in my mind/eyes as we are all able to tune to the same other dimension at the same time to see it (in this case a "light" that faded in and out stronger and dimmer, moving eradically around the night sky).
so along with what the other guy said about our limbic system "r complex" and all that it seems completely fruitful to continue researching the possibility of an emotionally stuck reptilian race on a power trip for eons #ing with us poor genetically modified simians. proof? besides my experience which i cant prove any more than Arizona Wilder... well sorry. and I'm not asking for faith nor belief just cuz. for me its about understanding what Icke's arguement is and deciding for yourself.

Are there any other reseachers/writers who also talk about this reptile issue? David Icke seems to be the most vocal, and I'm not sure if I've seen any other people write about it.

someone else correctly mentioned stewart swerdlow and checking the footnotes of Biggest secret i've found
Dr. Arthur David Horn
john Rhodes
Dale Russell
William Bramley
Andrew Collins
I've also found a guy on the web calling himself purple reptoid crow, here's his website: i really like him cuz he's all about the love!

but putting aside the reptilian thing, even Alex Jones will admit that he'll agree with 99% of what Icke says, just not the reptilian part. and from reading three of his books, the reptilian parts are pretty small. I really liked his treatment of "Israel" in his latests "loop". and its good of him to tie all the disparate parts of the story together like that. I call him the Ken Wilber of conspiracy research cuz he's got this grand unifiying field theory that I've got a soft spot for.
belief is the booby prize.
maybe he is a stooge but what would make him so would be the reptilian part cuz everything else seems well researched and represented other places. But then i think that Greer and the Disclosure project is a disinfo campaign. if you believe that stuff and not icke...yeah, the aliens only came to this planet this century.. yeah. right.

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 04:02 PM
yes ....i will say well said also andy ...if you look at the compilation of Ickes work it is outstanding with references and research kudos given to many outstanding biggest kick is to those who outright dismiss Icke because of the reptilian thing and then even worse many who dismiss him have not read a single one of his books....if they read his earliest books that dont include that agenda i think you find few people who would disagree with what his is trying to put forth

posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 09:23 PM

posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 06:56 PM
David Icke has a lot of things right but he never talks about the Jesuit Order of the Catholic Church and they fit into the picture, why?

What I don't like is his New Age religion rubbish and how everything doesn't really exist, it is just all the mind rubbish.

posted on Nov, 9 2008 @ 07:46 PM

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
David Icke has a lot of things right but he never talks about the Jesuit Order of the Catholic Church and they fit into the picture, why?

You read "The Sparrow" and "Children of God", didn't you?

posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 02:35 PM
reply to post by Anonymous ATS

Why doesn't he have any evidence, only wild speculation? How can you say he's right, if he can't even prove his points?

posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 12:08 PM
We can say he is right for the same reason that Xians can talk about 40 days and 40 nights.

Belief, brother.

Also, he writes well and the reading is interesting.

Of course I cannot prove empirically that his work is interesting.

But I believe that it is.

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5   >>

log in