David Icke on the Russell Brand show

[Meltingpot]

Well said longdog -- bit in bold especially.

Froggy has also done a pretty good demolition job on Melting Pot's bizarre -- and dangerous -- assertion that a lower standard of proof is needed for the more outlandish claims made by conspiracists.

Way to twist my words

Here's what I actually said, with the relevant bits bolded;

"That's a fair point, but it overlooks a second variable; the cost of not heeding a warning coming from that source. The problem with conspiracy theories is that even if the risks of them being true are small, the costs you would incur if they were true and you chose not to heed their warnings are massive (failing to prevent the advent of a global fascist / "1984" type state).

"It doesn't mean you accept what you say as gospel, but nor does it mean you dismiss them as nutters without at least being willing to put your preconceptions aside long enough to look squarely at what they're saying.

So, I think a case can be made for accepting a lower threshold of proof in order to start taking them seriously, than for something fairly trivial like whether or not Uri Geller is a hoaxer. He's a successful guy who kept a lot of people (including me) entertained during a bleak time in this country's history; power cuts, three day weeks etc."

The reason I said "start taking them seriously" is to present that as an alternative to dismissing them out of hand with a sneer, a guffaw and an insult aimed at the originator, which is what too many people on this thread seem to do. I'm not suggesting they should be accepted as true without further investigation, in fact I've specifically said they shouldn't be.

 

[editor]

they excavated at the site of the Temple of Solomon pbuh, and they found something, that is a fact.

They found... black magic?!! Gasp!

Please tell me more because it's getting very tedious having to continually push you to get past your increasingly vague wafflings and endless "google it" cop-outs.

 

[Structaural]

Say what you like about Icke you do have to admire the balls on the man, to go through all the public ridicule he's gone through and yet still carry on saying what he says cause he generally believes in it is, IMO, a pretty admirable quality.

It's got fuck all to do with balls and everything to do with making shitloads of money. I suggest you seek out the John Ronson programme about him as he laments doing this shit instead of sticking to sports. He's a self- publicising charlatan who's found a ready audience (New Age yanks, CTers and Radical Muslims).

 

[butchersapron]

yeah but the fact remains that they found something when they did the excavation, this isnt disputed.

So you thought you'd fill in the gaps and claim it was something occult (a skull they called Baphomet maybe?) and were instantly apostates. That was nice of you.

 

[butchersapron]

its easier for u to google it urself, all the links are saying different things, and it aint like there gonna set up the most secretive society on the planet and then put it on google anyway is it, whatever google says is probably what they definitely didnt find.

So where are you getting your super-secret info from then fattboy. (Given that you've already said it was from google and that you're now rubbishing google as a source).

 

[Meltingpot]

It's got fuck all to do with balls and everything to do with making shitloads of money. I suggest you seek out the John Ronson programme about him as he laments doing this shit instead of sticking to sports. He's a self- publicising charlatan who's found a ready audience (New Age yanks, CTers and Radical Muslims).

For somebody with his high media profile, there must be and have been an easier and less stressful way of making shitloads of money than doing what he does.

He constantly takes risks he doesn't need to take and which could get him sued - like calling George Bush Senior a paedophile on the Russell Brand Show - or which expose him to ridicule, such as talking about lizards controlling the world in "The Biggest Secret." If money was his prime goal, he'd be playing it a bit safer in order to appeal to the widest possible audience.

Whether or not he's a flake, I'm convinced he totally believes in what he's doing.

 

[butchersapron]

For somebody with his high media profile, there must be and have been an easier way of making shitloads of money than doing what he does.

He constantly takes risks he doesn't need to take and which could get him sued - like calling George Bush a paedophile on the Russell Brand Show - or which expose him to ridicule, such as talking about the lizards in "The Biggest Secret." If money was his prime goal, he'd be playing it a bit safer in order to appeal to the widest possible audience.

Whether or not he's a flake as many people think, I'm convinced he totally believes in what he's doing.

He's got a gauranteed 100% solid arket here. Why should he do anything else. Has he the skills to do anything else? Is he a secret Chomsky? Maybe he's addicted to the hero-worship that he gets as a result of this oddball stuff? The chances that he's sick *and* wealthy have to be pretty high. And if he's right, if he actually believes he's right - well what else is he to do? Walk away from the greated conspiracy of all history? You can't have it both ways.

And even if he wasn't doing it for money, this doesn't bolster his daft arguments one iota.

 

[Meltingpot]

He's got a gauranteed 100% solid arket here. Why should he do anything else. Has he the skills to do anything else? Is he a secret Chomsky? Maybe he's addicted to the hero-worship that he gets as a result of this oddball stuff? The chances that he's sick *and* wealthy have to be pretty high. And if he's right, if he actually believes he's right - well what else is he to do? Walk away from the greatest conspiracy of all history? You can't have it both ways.

That's a fair point actually. I was responding to Structaural's claim that he's a charlatan, i.e. saying stuff he doesn't believe in in order to "coin it in" and rake in the cash.

And as for what else is he to do, he could sell his expertise in the media in a host of other ways. For example, as an ex-Green Party leader with experience in both TV and radio and a high media profile, he could make documentaries on environmental themes such as global warming which would have a very large audience - like Al Gore did. Or, he could lend his name to the letterhead of green companies as a non-executive director, and earn money that way.

And even if he wasn't doing it for money, this doesn't bolster his daft arguments one iota.

Fair enough.

 

[butchersapron]

That's a fair point actually. I was responding to Structaural's claim that he's a charlatan, i.e. saying stuff he doesn't believe in in order to "coin it in" and rake in the cash.

And as for what else is he to do, he could sell his expertise in the media in a host of other ways. For example, as an ex-Green Party leader with experience in both TV and radio and a high media profile, he could make documentaries on environmental themes such as global warming which would have a very large audience - like Al Gore did. Or, he could lend his name to the letterhead of green companies as a non-executive director, and earn money that way.
.

I'm not sure he could myself! I wouldn't want anything i did associated with him - the only cachet he'd bring would be to that already gauranteed market which he's already tapping directly (motivation or genuinicity aside) without going through anyone else.

 

[Structaural]

For somebody with his high media profile, there must be and have been an easier and less stressful way of making shitloads of money than doing what he does.

He constantly takes risks he doesn't need to take and which could get him sued - like calling George Bush Senior a paedophile on the Russell Brand Show - or which expose him to ridicule, such as talking about lizards controlling the world in "The Biggest Secret." If money was his prime goal, he'd be playing it a bit safer in order to appeal to the widest possible audience.

Whether or not he's a flake, I'm convinced he totally believes in what he's doing.

Bollocks. He loves the notoriety and the feeling of being on the 'inside' and privy to 'secret' knowledge like most CTers. I'm pretty sure he believed it once, but I think he's 'sobered' up a bit since Wogan. He's a born performer and joker.

 

[editor]

And as for what else is he to do, he could sell his expertise in the media in a host of other ways. For example, as an ex-Green Party leader with experience in both TV and radio and a high media profile, he could make documentaries on environmental themes such as global warming which would have a very large audience - like Al Gore did.

Well, he could have if he hadn't reduced himself to a credibility-free laughing stock with his lizards/Son of God charlatan nuttiness. No normal people are going to take him seriously now.

 

[8den]

That's a fair point actually. I was responding to Structaural's claim that he's a charlatan, i.e. saying stuff he doesn't believe in in order to "coin it in" and rake in the cash.

And as for what else is he to do, he could sell his expertise in the media in a host of other ways. For example, as an ex-Green Party leader with experience in both TV and radio and a high media profile, he could make documentaries on environmental themes such as global warming which would have a very large audience - like Al Gore did. Or, he could lend his name to the letterhead of green companies as a non-executive director, and earn money that way.

Yeah gibbering lunatics who proclaim themselves the messiah don't regularly get tv or radio shows. Icke does though channel five gave him a documentary about his beliefs a couple of years ago.

Funny that since he thinks the mainstream media is controlled by the lizards.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

Well, he could have if he hadn't reduced himself to a credibility-free laughing stock with his lizards/Son of God charlatan nuttiness. No normal people are going to take him seriously now.

I agree, I think when he started doing it he did believe it and yes I still think he had balls, at least in the beginning but since his whole lizard/son of god shite no one takes him seriously. I still think he believes some of it but not as much as he did in the beginning, but the real reason he keeps doing it, IMO, is not cause he makes a shit load of money, I don't think he does, it's because his credibility got so ruined that no one will take him seriously in anything else and this is the only thing he can do for his bread n butter.

 

[8ball]

He's kind of dropped the whole 'Son of God' thing.

I think he sort of believes what he says and isn't all that unbalanced, but has abandoned his critical faculties cos deep down he knows he can't get back from here and he's made a viable alternative career.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

Why is he getting a fair amount of mainstream media time now? i've just come across another interview of him on kerrang radio and he was on talksport last year too.

 

[Structaural]

CTs are mainstream now - the Telegraph and Mail are always printing them. Don't 70% of Americans think that 9/11 was an inside job?
It's the debunkers who seem to be becoming rarer.

 

[editor]

Why is he getting a fair amount of mainstream media time now? i've just come across another interview of him on kerrang radio and he was on talksport last year too.

Because he's cheap, titillating entertainment, perfect for dumbed down media.

 

[frogwoman]

That's a fair point actually. I was responding to Structaural's claim that he's a charlatan, i.e. saying stuff he doesn't believe in in order to "coin it in" and rake in the cash.

And as for what else is he to do, he could sell his expertise in the media in a host of other ways. For example, as an ex-Green Party leader with experience in both TV and radio and a high media profile, he could make documentaries on environmental themes such as global warming which would have a very large audience - like Al Gore did. Or, he could lend his name to the letterhead of green companies as a non-executive director, and earn money that way.

He couldn't though.
he really couldnt

that would be one easy way to destroy the green party's credibility in a few seconds, were david fucking icke to make a documentary about global warming.

Hes not "known" for all the other stuff he did before this any more
When most people think about david icke, who actually know who is (and there are many people who don't) they all, without exception, think about the lizard conspiracy. they don't think about him being a famous sports presenter or any other stuff he did. I wouldn't want myself being associated with ANYTHING he did whether he was in his right mind doing it or not or whether he decided it was all a load of bollocks

he's "in too deep" now
everyone knows it and he can never restore his credibility again. People think david icke = lizards or coming on terry wogan's show declaring himself the son of god and those that don't haven't heard of him and can easily find out he's a "celebrity" for all the wrong reasons

he has achieved cult status among quite a few people for his lizard theory, he's able to get books and dvd's published, and he's found a "niche market" something he couldn't get if he went into the mainstream

i'm sure he believes it, although maybe not as much as what was in the beginning ... but strong beliefs don't make a person right, never have, never will ... we both know it.

 

[editor]

People think david icke = lizards or coming on terry wogan's show declaring himself the son of god and those that don't haven't heard of him and can easily find out he's a "celebrity" for all the wrong reasons

Don't forget the purple tracksuits!

 

[Doctor Carrot]

Because he's cheap, titillating entertainment, perfect for dumbed down media.

LOL Fair point

 

[frogwoman]

Don't forget the purple tracksuits!

Or the turquoise suits

 

[frogwoman]

Way to twist my words

Here's what I actually said, with the relevant bits bolded;

"That's a fair point, but it overlooks a second variable; the cost of not heeding a warning coming from that source. The problem with conspiracy theories is that even if the risks of them being true are small, the costs you would incur if they were true and you chose not to heed their warnings are massive (failing to prevent the advent of a global fascist / "1984" type state).

"It doesn't mean you accept what you say as gospel, but nor does it mean you dismiss them as nutters without at least being willing to put your preconceptions aside long enough to look squarely at what they're saying.

So, I think a case can be made for accepting a lower threshold of proof in order to start taking them seriously, than for something fairly trivial like whether or not Uri Geller is a hoaxer. He's a successful guy who kept a lot of people (including me) entertained during a bleak time in this country's history; power cuts, three day weeks etc."

The reason I said "start taking them seriously" is to present that as an alternative to dismissing them out of hand with a sneer, a guffaw and an insult aimed at the originator, which is what too many people on this thread seem to do. I'm not suggesting they should be accepted as true without further investigation, in fact I've specifically said they shouldn't be.

But why shouldn't people laugh at them? Some of it is really funny
Lets go through some of the things Icke has said

He has said that he is the son of god
He has said that a reptilian conspiracy controls the world including the Rothschilds (big alarm bell) and the royal family
He has said that Diana was murdered because she discovered that Charles and Camilla ritually sacrificed their own child (another alarm bell, especially combined with the Rothschilds thing)
He says that a network of secret societies control the world, something which he only has his own word for and a handful of nutters and which goes against everything we know about globalisation, international political economy, etc
He has said that a small cabal of "Jewish and non-Jewish" wealthy people financed World War 2 and Hitler ... Jews+non-jews = everyone, so why did he even feel the need to mention it?
He claims that the Protocols were written by a secret society - which is beginning to sound like a plot of the da vinci code, not something which could plausibly be true

Why shouldn't we laugh at this shite? I don't think the price of ignoring it will be very great and the price of listening to it may be greater. Do you really think Charles and Camilla sacrificing their child and Diana finding out and being murdered is likely?

I never said conspiracies don't exist ... of course they do but we don't need to listen to Icke to see that

 

[fattboy]

They found... black magic?!! Gasp!

Please tell me more because it's getting very tedious having to continually push you to get past your increasingly vague wafflings and endless "google it" cop-outs.

ive said all i can say on it tbh, u can accept or reject, makes no difference to me, im not gonna my waste time quarelling about it.

 

[fattboy]

So where are you getting your super-secret info from then fattboy. (Given that you've already said it was from google and that you're now rubbishing google as a source).

what i said was everyone agrees they dug into the site, historians and the like, everything else is pretty much speculation.

 

[butchersapron]

what i said was everyone agrees they dug into the site, historians and the like, everything else is pretty much speculation.

So, someone dug into a site and you speculate that they found black magic there?

Asalaamu Aleikum

 

[tarannau]

what i said was everyone agrees they dug into the site, historians and the like, everything else is pretty much speculation.

I heard that they found Lady Diana and her unborn child buried there. S'just speculation innit.

 

[Belushi]

I heard that they found Lady Diana and her unborn child buried there. S'just speculation innit.

I've heard itswhere they're keeping Maddie

 

[Yossarian]

they excavated at the site of the Temple of Solomon pbuh, and they found something, that is a fact.

I just excavated my navel (peace be upon it). I found...something!

 

[editor]

ive said all i can say on it tbh, u can accept or reject, makes no difference to me, im not gonna my waste time quarelling about it.

So you made it up and have absolutely no proof and no credible sources to back up your 'black magic' claim?

What's next? "Fairies are definitely real because I saw something about it in Google although I can't remember where or who said it"?

Way to go, Sherlock!

 

[longdog]

Because he's cheap, titillating entertainment, perfect for dumbed down media.

And you can't get much dumber than talksport, the radio station that would insult the intelligence of an amoeba.