|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
deadman
Joined: 27 May 2006
Location: Suwon
|
 Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 10:18 pm Post subject: In defence of the indefensible (David Icke) |
 |
|
I'd like to address the (edit - sp) Wikpedia entry on David Icke (a clear example of it's inherant bias) and raise some issues Icke address which I think are worth considering.
For a start, the implied claim that he is anti semitic is false.
Anti-semitism IS making negaive generalisations about the motives, character etc of people of the Jewish faith, (or ethnicity of they don't actually practice Judaism) eg "Jews want to control the world", "Jews are evil and avaricious who consider themselves the chosen race".
Anti-semitism is NOT
a) criticising Israel for apparent injustices,
b) objecting to Zionism (a political movement consisting of people of any religion who suppport the idea of a Jewish homeland). Zionim does not equal Judaism.
c) questioning the figures or methodology of the official account of the holocaust
d) alleging that there is a group of incredibly wealth people who use that wealth to influence the world according to their wishes, some of whom happen to be Jewish.
Of course, a)-d) all come with the caveat "as long as they aren't linked to racist generalisations". Of course, they are linked in by some individuals who deserve the term anti-semite, but some who do not make that link, have it made for them by the ADL or whoever, and then FALSELY accused of anti semitism, for example David Icke.
In his words "I believe that researchers over the years who have blamed the entire conspiracy on the Jewish people are seriously misguided; similarly, for Jewish organisations to deny that any Jewish person is working for the New World Order conspiracy is equally naive.. ...[it] goes across all races"
I think the ADL etc are far too trigger happy with the term anti-semitism for political reasons, and its overuse merely adds legitimacy to genuinely anti-semitic individuals.
David Icke: "The way the Nazis treated many Jewish people is unspeakable. There are no words adequate to describe it. The pain, as we see in the commemorations, appears undiminished for those who lived through it. What an isult it would be, to those people who suffered so, if it were established that their pain and unimaginable horror is also is also being used without their knowledge, to promote and protect a long term plan. It would qualify, perhaps, as one of the ultimate inhumanities. Are people who did not suffer under the Nazis using the emotions of those who did to manipulate events for their own diabolical ends? We can only establish if that is true by allowing all information about that period to be made public without vilification or condemnation."
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
(from Wikpedia)
David Vaughan Icke, pronounced /a?k/ (born April 29, 1952) is a former professional football player, reporter, television sports presenter, and British Green Party national spokesperson. Since 1990, he has been what he calls a "full-time investigator into who and what is really controlling the world." [1] |
16 years of full time investigation is a long time. Whatever his agenda, he's not some armchair "expert". He's done a lot of research, and makes very detailed claims
| Quote: |
| The Green Party distanced itself from him in 1991 after he announced that he was "the son of God," [2] (video) and a "channel for the Christ spirit." [3] He began to dress only in turquoise |
He's had his ups and downs! But seriously: Son of God? whatever he meant at that moment, he doesn't consider himself as anything other than a human being whose inherant spiritual nature is perhaps more fully realised at this point in time.
Channel for the christ spirit? Central to his view of human spirituality is the idea that many different dimensions coexist in the same space, operating on different frequencies, much like a television set with different channels on different frequencies. For some quantum physicists' explanations of a similar idea, check out the movie "What the *bleep*[sic] do we know?". It's good science-meets-spirituality stuff.
Icke claims certain indiviuals' brains can access these other frequencies and communicate with other entites, be they essentially good (Christ-concsiousness), or evil ("Prison Warder" consciousness). The catholic church takes possession by the "devil" seriously, and I think it does at least appear to happen in certain cases - this might be a way to account for it outside of their flawed dogma.
I like this idea. On the one hand, it is compatible with advanced and speculative quantum physics, on the other it gives a better explanation for what I believe to be observable phenomena as described by the Catholic Church (possession).
| Quote: |
| and maintained that the world was ruled by a secret group called "The Elite", or "Illuminati", which he linked to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an anti-Semitic tract. [4] [5] |
The protocols present a paradigm, a blueprint for the covert control of a population. The Jewish element only goes as deep as the labels attached to the opressors (Elders of Zion) and the opressees (goyim). The Jewish aspect is pure smokescreen. Change those labels and you have it in a more pure form. It's often discredited as a "forgery", but that's completely irrelevant. It could be a work of fiction - it's value is in the ideas therin.
Example, Protocol 12
"All our newspapers will be of all possible complexions - aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarchical... Like the Indian idol, Vishnu, they will have a hundred hands, and every one of them willhave a finger on any one of the public opinions required. When a pulse quickens these hand will lead opinion in the direction of our aims, for an excited patient loses all power of judgement and easily yeilds to suggestion. Those fools who think they are repeating the opinion of a newspaper of their own camp will be repeating our opinion or any opinion that seems desirable to us. In the vain belief that they are following the organof the party, they will in fact follow the flag which we hang out for them"
Whew, strong stuff. It needs to be brought into the light and debated, not marginalised. That merely increases it's potential for the abuse by anti-semites.
| Quote: |
| In 1999, he published The Biggest Secret, in which he wrote that the secret world government consists of a race of reptilian humanoids known as the Babylonian Brotherhood, and that many prominent figures are, in fact, reptilian, including George W. Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, and Kris Kristofferson. [4] |
The reptilian thing appears to be tied to the ideas of negative extra-dimensional influence, and the bloodline of the ruling elite.
Bloodlines: Essentially, the same bloodlines that control the world today have done so continuously since the days of Ancient Babylon and beyond. Why is this so? Some might say power and money are kept in the family, others, including Icke say it's a result of some genetic fiddling or interbreeding with another race, which means this bloodline is unusually susceptible to negative extradimensional influence, control or direct possession. The reptilian race is purported to be one such extra dimensional race seeking to influence affairs in this dimension, even to the extent of having individual members in human form in this dimensional reality. True or not? i don't know. This is a pretty out there aspect of his worldview. I'm thoroughly convinced of his genuine desire to help the human race by making the unknown known. Most of his opponents are far more self interested. I'm sure he has his reasons for making these claims, but me, I'll leave it alone.
| Quote: |
| Icke has further claimed that a small group of Jews, namely the Rothschild family, also a "reptilian bloodline," financed Adolf Hitler and supported the Holocaust. [6] |
According to Icke: (in brief)
1. Impossible conditions were placed on Germany at the Treaty of Versailles, including colossal debt, 75% of its iron, 68% of its zinc, 26% of its coal.
2. Shortly afterwards, France accused Germany of defaulting on it's payments (turned out to be a minor shortfall) and French troops occupied the Ruhr, which produces 80% of Germany's coal, iron and steel.
3. The German mark goes into freefall, plunging to 4200 billion to the dollar in Nov 1923.
4. The Dawes plan followed. It consisted of a series of short term loans to the german govt which put them even further into debt, and delayed the inevitable collapse, (which put Hitler into power when it came)
Who instigated the Dawes Plan? Lloyd George, the British PM told New York's Journal Americanof June 24th, 1924, which Icke quotes:
"The international bankers dictated the Dawes settlement. The protocol... is the triumph of the international banker. Agreement would never have been reached without the brusque and brutal intervention of the international bankers. They swept statesmen, politicians, and journalists to one side, and issued their orders with the imperiousness of absolute monarchs, who knew there was no appeal from their ruthless decrees. The orders of the German financiers to their political representatives were just as peremptory as those of the allied bankers to their political representatives."
Icke comments:
"The short term loans issued under the Dawes plan went into specific german companies vital to rearmament. It was this money that expanded the pharmaceutical company known as I. G. Farben which was, in reality, Hitlers War machine... The rest of the money went to other german cartels or the german subsidiaries of American companies. These included A. E. G (the German General Electric), United Steelworks, and American I. G., the wholly owned subsidiary of I. G. Farben. These loans, which included some from Morgan and Rothschilds companies, and the technology transfers from America to the German cartels, made the second world war possible. Without that help, there could have been no war."
Icke quotes from a communication from the American Ambassador to Germany to President Franklin D. Roosevelt on October 19th 1936:
"At the present moment more than a hundred American corporations have subsidiaries here of co-operative understanding. The DuPonts have three allies in Germany that are aiding the armament business. Their chief ally is the I. G. Farben company, a part of the Government which gives 200,000 marks a year to one propaganda organisation operating on American opinion. Standard Oil Company (New York sub-company) sent $2,000,000 here in December 1933 and has made $500,000 a year helping Germans make Ersatz gas for war purposes;... I mention these facts because they complicate things and add to war dangers."
5. The Dawes plan came to an end with the German Govt owing an extra 16 billion. The Young plan was institued. Owen D Young was one of FDRs main financial backers, a JP Morgan executive and head of Morgan owned General Electric (ie he was a representative of the international bankers). Young demanded payment from Germany in cash not goods. Hmm. The German economy collapsed, unemployment hit 1 million, and Hitler rose to power.
| Quote: |
| As a result, Icke's speaking tours at one time attracted the interest of British neo-Nazis such as Combat 18, [5] |
Doesn't mean HE agrees with THEM. Maybe their understanding of his work is as poor as the Jewish organisations that love to persecute him.
| Quote: |
| and he continues to face opposition from Jewish and anti-racist groups such as the Anti-Defamation League in Canada. |
Either ill informed opposition, or deliberate obfuscation of the issues.
| Quote: |
| Icke has strongly denied that he is an anti-Semite, stressing that the Rothschilds are reptiles, not Jews. [2] |
Come on! That a false representation. This is in reference to his defence to allegations that "reptiles" was a code word for "jews". His defence - no, I really do mean reptiles. I think the etnicity of the Rothschilds is a matter of public record.
Here's another issue he takes up, one that is intuitively and mathematical comprehensible, and doesn't rely on external experts or testimony to verify:
Premise: banks can lend out, say, 10 times the amount of money that they have in their possession.
Argument: banks can create money out of thin air, lend out this imaginary money, and charge interest on it, which is repaid with real money earned by hard work. The banks can use this real money to lend out even larger amounts of imaginary money, collecting yet more real money.
Conclusion: This is essentially why the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. There is a net flow of wealth from the hands of the people into the hand of the bankers.
Is this an inhererntly injust system which enslaves people to the debt they have to service? What do you think? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 1:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Banks and lending: People need and sometimes like to borrow money. Banks arguably don't force people to borrow money. Banks are meeting a need. If banks could only loan out one dollar for every dollar they had in the safe, demand would outstrip supply. So either interest rates would be incredibly high (denying most people the ability to afford a house) or the government would have to get into the business of making loans.
Most people would agree it's a bad thing for the government to be in the business of loaning to the public. The government wouldn't be very circumspect about who they lend to. A cheap easy loan translates to votes. A bank with a profit motive would be much more likely to ensure it was loaning money to a good risk. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 2:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Quote:
As a result, Icke's speaking tours at one time attracted the interest of British neo-Nazis such as Combat 18, [5]
Doesn't mean HE agrees with THEM. Maybe their understanding of his work is as poor as the Jewish organisations that love to persecute him.
|
Well ya know, if you go around saying that the world is run by lizards, and that the Protocols Of Zion had some merit to them, you gotta expect that you're gonna attract freaks and weirdos. And if some of those freaks and weirdos turn out to be neo-Nazis who give you an undeserved reputation for anti-semitism, well boo hoo hoo. Shoulda thought about that before you decided to make "public wackjob No. 1" your career description.
Deadman:
We already have one poster here who regularly preaches a literal reading of the X-Files. Attitudes toward him vary, from those who find him somewhat entertaining and occasioanlly thought-provoking, to those who consider him an irredemable blight on the forum. However, I think it's safe to say that he has had very little success in convining the rest of us to adopt his worldview, and that the board's tolerance would be pushed to the limit with the addition of another conspiracy-monger. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deadman
Joined: 27 May 2006
Location: Suwon
|
| Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 2:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fair enough. I'll try and keep my comments relevant and my specualtions to myself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| We already have one poster here who regularly preaches a literal reading of the X-Files... |
Only one? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deadman
Joined: 27 May 2006
Location: Suwon
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 5:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
|
I guess the same tactic works with books too - discredit the cover, discredit the content. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 6:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Again why in the world is there any reason to believe him.
IF you were sick and a bum of the street gave you very unusual medical advice would you take it?
From what we know of him Icke one would probably get more honest advice from a bum off the street than Icke.
By the way it might be Icke makes the disclaimers he does just to cover up his real agenda. I mean he goes around with David Irving.
Why don't you tell us why we all should trust Icke? This is sure to be interesting.
How about a snake oil saleman would you buy it? I got a bridge to sell you, oh I think you are in that business already. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Why don't you tell us why we all should trust Icke? This is sure to be interesting. |
Umm, Joo.
It seems to me that deadman has already agreed to hold back on his more "out there" speculations. What, then, can you possibly hope to gain from engaging him in any further discussion on the pros and cons of David Icke? Do you secretly get your kicks from reading all this conspiracy stuff? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It seems to me that deadman has already agreed to hold back on his more "out there" speculations |
Apperently not see the post by him above. Anyway it would be fun to hear why we ought to believe ICKE |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deadman
Joined: 27 May 2006
Location: Suwon
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
| It seems to me that deadman has already agreed to hold back on his more "out there" speculations |
Apperently not see the post by him above. Anyway it would be fun to hear why we ought to believe ICKE |
It's not an "out there" speculation to suggest you rely on discrediting the person, and therefore whatever they say. It's a statement of the obvious. It has been pointed out numerous times that that argument is a logical fallacy, but you seem not to understand or care. Are reason and logic tools of enemy propaganda?
You don't ought to believe anything, Joo. You're the only one INSISTING everyone adopt your point of view, and ridiculing those who don't. (edit) - add: The point of the initial post was to provide background to the Wikipedia entry you posted and correct some of its incorrect assumptions. I wasn't insisting you believe it (end edit)
All I can say is "There's more going on than meets the eye". Would you agree? If so, aren't you curious what?
Why take it on yourself to police other people's speculations? Fair enough pointing out things that are demonstrably false, but you take it way beyond that. You're a crusader for the official point of view. Fox News is your gospel, right? Any people with divergent opinions are heretics (" the enemy") with an agenda to befoul the sanctity of the Bush administration.
You're not trying to reason with anyone, you're trying to forcibly convert everyone to the same point of view. That's why sometimes people don't bother responding. Sometimes your posts aren't worth responding to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It's not an "out there" speculation to suggest you rely on discrediting the person, and therefore whatever they say. It's a statement of the obvious. It has been pointed out numerous times that that argument is a logical fallacy, but you seem not to understand or care. Are reason and logic tools of enemy propaganda? |
well based on what I have read about him the guy is a whacko and probably a jerk and probably he is worse than that.
| Quote: |
| You don't ought to believe anything, Joo. You're the only one INSISTING everyone adopt your point of view, and ridiculing those who don't. (edit) - add: The point of the initial post was to provide background to the Wikipedia entry you posted and correct some of its incorrect assumptions. I wasn't insisting you believe it. |
Well if you don't mind I will go with the Wikipedia reporting than yours. Just cause you make a claim or try to spin it isn't enough for it to be worth believing it.
The conspraicy theorists are just about all worth comtempt. They are not funny or cute they are just plain sinister.
| Quote: |
| All I can say is "There's more going on than meets the eye". Would you agree? If so, aren't you curious what? |
I am sure there is though there is nothing out there to for anyone to think that Icke is anything but a creep.
| Quote: |
| Why take it on yourself to police other people's speculations? |
I' m tired of all the nonsense of the conspiray theorists and I have a pretty good idea why they do what they.
| Quote: |
| Fair enough pointing out things that are demonstrably false, but you take it way beyond that. You're a crusader for the official point of view. |
the disinformation by the conspiracy theorists is creepy.
| Quote: |
| Fox News is your gospel, right? |
Nope, Fox news for the most part is just an editorial , it is a source but not a Gospel by any means . I don't even watch it that much. I do like Fox sports NFL though.
Though better any Fox show than Rense or Ickey.
| Quote: |
| Any people with divergent opinions are heretics (" the enemy") with an agenda to befoul the sanctity of the Bush administration. |
no spreading and putting conspiracy theories for political and social objectives is just sinister.
You see the conspraicy theorist are not there to inform people they are there to misinform people and slander in for their poltical goals and also to go after groups of people they don't like. and well it is not a bad thing at all to shine a light on them for what they truely are.
By the way I didn't even vote for Bush in 2000
about the conspiracy theorists - well I am pretty certain.
| Quote: |
| You're not trying to reason with anyone, you're trying to forcibly convert everyone to the same point of view |
.
That is ok as long as I refute the conspiracy theorists and the far right and the far left and the combo of the two
| Quote: |
| That's why sometimes people don't bother responding. Sometimes your posts aren't worth responding to. |
cause you say they are not worth responding to. Perhaps many of them aren't who knows but in the end .
but at any rate now there are posts that directly challege the conspiracy theorists and now the info is up that shines a light on those like Rense and Ickey and that is not a bad thing. Though I bet you would prefer that info not be available that way you could tap into your conspiracy sites to ambush others. Well now it is going to be more difficult for you and Igothisguitar and the rest to do that. And that is not a bad thing.
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Sun Jun 04, 2006 4:51 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flint
Joined: 11 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| You don't ought to believe anything, Joo. You're the only one INSISTING everyone adopt your point of view, and ridiculing those who don't. (edit) - add: The point of the initial post was to provide background to the Wikipedia entry you posted and correct some of its incorrect assumptions. I wasn't insisting you believe it. |
Well if you don't mind I will go with the Wikipedia reporting than yours. Just cause you make a claim or try to spin it isn't enough for it to be worth believing it.
...........
Why take it on yourself to police other people's speculations? Fair enough pointing out things that are demonstrably false, but you take it way beyond that. You're a crusader for the official point of view. Fox News is your gospel, right? Any people with divergent opinions are heretics (" the enemy") with an agenda to befoul the sanctity of the Bush administration.
You're not trying to reason with anyone, you're trying to forcibly convert everyone to the same point of view. That's why sometimes people don't bother responding. Sometimes your posts aren't worth responding to. |
|
Pot meet Kettle.
It sounds like Joo is describing his own posts. Now if only he listens to his own advice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flint wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| You don't ought to believe anything, Joo. You're the only one INSISTING everyone adopt your point of view, and ridiculing those who don't. (edit) - add: The point of the initial post was to provide background to the Wikipedia entry you posted and correct some of its incorrect assumptions. I wasn't insisting you believe it. |
Well if you don't mind I will go with the Wikipedia reporting than yours. Just cause you make a claim or try to spin it isn't enough for it to be worth believing it.
...........
Why take it on yourself to police other people's speculations? Fair enough pointing out things that are demonstrably false, but you take it way beyond that. You're a crusader for the official point of view. Fox News is your gospel, right? Any people with divergent opinions are heretics (" the enemy") with an agenda to befoul the sanctity of the Bush administration.
You're not trying to reason with anyone, you're trying to forcibly convert everyone to the same point of view. That's why sometimes people don't bother responding. Sometimes your posts aren't worth responding to. |
|
Pot meet Kettle.
It sounds like Joo is describing his own posts. Now if only he listens to his own advice. |
Yeah which posts?
You are still mad well that is not a bad thing at all.
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Sun Jun 04, 2006 4:29 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
