posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 01:55 PM
It seems unlikely. Although Jim Marrs' research has become increasingly sloppy, and he appears on very bad TV programmes, he can certainly
communicate and I'd think he retains enough clout to speak for himself. Also, he seems to depend on our subjects financially, and I can't see how
he'd gain much this way.
For me, the question is, if anybody has real, important information to give out why on earth would they choose Wilcock to spread it? At least with
Icke, his chosen crazies apparently did OK out of DVD sales, but I can't see what the limp and unconvincing Wilcock has to offer anybody. If only for
that reason, I suspect that any authority Wilcock presents us with is only saying Wilcock's words, which are pretty much worthless
10-4-2012 by Snippy23 because: ignorance