namtaB Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 The lizard thing is certainly bizarre/ ridiculous. I've never heard David Icke on the subject. Is he perhaps saying something about DNA or somesuch, not that they're shape shifting lizards? As for a relatively small number of people controlling our planet - what's secret about that? I think most people would agree that with great wealth comes enormous power, and some of the heads of huge corporations have as much clout as governments. As for secret societies, well it's probably a man thing. There's no doubt they love this sort of thing, and the dressing up. (Bohemian Grove anybody...) Also, working on the 'power corrupts' principle, I think they probably try to push the boundaries of what's acceptable as far as possible, just because they can. This is probably why it's secret. Have a nosey on his facebook page or his forum. A finer collection of complete nutters you will never find. I think that he has a big gathering at Wembley stadium this weekend, let's see if the media pick up on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 The lizard thing is certainly bizarre/ ridiculous. I've never heard David Icke on the subject. Is he perhaps saying something about DNA or somesuch, not that they're shape shifting lizards? As for a relatively small number of people controlling our planet - what's secret about that? I think most people would agree that with great wealth comes enormous power, and some of the heads of huge corporations have as much clout as governments. As for secret societies, well it's probably a man thing. There's no doubt they love this sort of thing, and the dressing up. (Bohemian Grove anybody...) Also, working on the 'power corrupts' principle, I think they probably try to push the boundaries of what's acceptable as far as possible, just because they can. This is probably why it's secret. You're confusing me now. We started this discussion because I said it is silly to assume there is a world wide secret organisation controlling us that no one knows about except a few (like Icke) who claim to have 'inside' information. You countered that by saying you were originally skeptical, but now your opinion has changed, yet now you just seem to be saying that which many (and I) would agree with you on, that the priviledged few control the masses. That's not what I was saying (or what you appeared to disagree with), I was talking about this mythical world controlling organisation (be it with or without lizards of the shape shifting kind, which I have heard Icke mention). So just to clarify, which one are you on about. Are you a believer in the world wide secret organisation that has us all (allegedly) under its thumb (either with or without the lizard element) or are you just a believer (like the majority of us) that the few (including members of big organisations that we may or may not know all the ins and outs of) control the many? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 "They're" not that hands-on when it comes to manipulating and controlling us all, they dont have to be, they have made us police ourselves by setting conservative(with a small c) cultural norms which are then passed on through religions, teachers parents and peers. They dont of course adhere to these cultural norms themselves, they indulge themselves shamelessly in all sorts of debaurchery such as swapping their wives around and throwing nazi themed orgies etc, while the masses are supposed to live pious monogamous lives. This would mean they are thousands of years old and have controlled various (or all) wildely different cultures throughout their history. The 'that's what they want you to think' argument doesn't wash with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 You're confusing me now. We started this discussion because I said it is silly to assume there is a world wide secret organisation controlling us that no one knows about except a few (like Icke) who claim to have 'inside' information. You countered that by saying you were originally skeptical, but now your opinion has changed, yet now you just seem to be saying that which many (and I) would agree with you on, that the priviledged few control the masses. That's not what I was saying (or what you appeared to disagree with), I was talking about this mythical world controlling organisation (be it with or without lizards of the shape shifting kind, which I have heard Icke mention). So just to clarify, which one are you on about. Are you a believer in the world wide secret organisation that has us all (allegedly) under its thumb (either with or without the lizard element) or are you just a believer (like the majority of us) that the few (including members of big organisations that we may or may not know all the ins and outs of) control the many? I believe both. The few certainly control the many including members of big organisations. But I also think there are secret organisations, including the Illuminati. Must be. Nothing the rich and famous like more than celebrating their elitism. What level of control or influence they have is the real question, and that's debatable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lounge Jay Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Freemasons do control world affairs; the fact that its become a bit of a cliche of late thanks to Hollywood and lots of people are talking about it since the advent of the internet, doesn't make it any less true. Perhaps Hollywood is doing to Freemasonry what it did to the supernatural and life on other planets....making the idea of believing in it seem ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 I believe both. The few certainly control the many including members of big organisations. But I also think there are secret organisations, including the Illuminati. Must be. Nothing the rich and famous like more than celebrating their elitism. What level of control or influence they have is the real question, and that's debatable. Why must there be? Thanks for clarifying btw. How much control/influence do you think they have then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Freemasons do control world affairs; the fact that its become a bit of a cliche of late thanks to Hollywood and lots of people are talking about it since the advent of the internet, doesn't make it any less true[/Quote] We've yet to establish that it is true. There's certainly no evidence on this thread that suggests it is. And forgive me but your saying they do control world affairs is hardly likely to sway my opinion on the matter. Perhaps Hollywood is doing to Freemasonry what it did to the supernatural and life on other planets....making the idea of believing in it seem ridiculous. Hollywood didn't do anything to make the supernatural seem ridiculous. Those who believe will probably still believe regardless of whether a film is made about it or not, those who don't wont. A film is just likely to reinforce someones world view, I think its very rare that a 'Hollywood' film would influence that view either positively or negatively. Regarding life on other planets, I think most rational people believe that there is life somewhere 'out there'. Hollywood in that area hasn't made the idea seem ridiculous at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alteredgemed Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 I love all the people calling Icke a nutter when most of them will have no idea what he talks about, they are basing their opinion on a few newspaper stories or the infamous 'son of god' Wogan interview.... These are the same people who probably think there is a terrorist hiding under every bed in the UK with an Islamic ideology just waiting to blow them up when in actual fact they are far more likely to die from a bee sting. These are the same people who run screaming from the BNP calling them racists when Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron are responsible for the deaths of more brown people, including women and children, than the bigot Griffin could ever hope for. These are the same people that think supporting the troops means keeping them in the theatre of war with more and more coming back in boxes when common sense would suggest that bringing them all home is the ONLY real way of supporting them. These are the same people who think the troops are fighting for our country when in fact I don't think there has been a single attack on our nation by anyone from Afghanistan ever... These are the same people who think the US found Osama Bin Hiding in a house in Pakistan, then shot him and chucked him in the sea without a scrap of evidence. It's childlike, anyone with a modicum of intelligence can see we are being lied to and manipulated every single day but you all glibly call Icke a nutter. Priceless.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 I love all the people calling Icke a nutter when most of them will have no idea what he talks about, they are basing their opinion on a few newspaper stories or the infamous 'son of god' Wogan interview....[/Quote] I'm not, I'm basing it on the fact that I used to be 'into' these things when I was younger until I realised it had no bearing on real life at all. These are the same people who probably think there is a terrorist hiding under every bed in the UK with an Islamic ideology just waiting to blow them up when in actual fact they are far more likely to die from a bee sting[/Quote] I'm usually accused (wrongly) of being an Islam apologist so wrong again. These are the same people who run screaming from the BNP calling them racists when Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron are responsible for the deaths of more brown people, including women and children, than the bigot Griffin could ever hope for.[/Quote] The BNP are recognised as a legitimate political group, that doesn't stop their ideology from being at best questionable, if not racist. Being responsible for the deaths of 'brown' people doesn't make you racist. These are the same people that think supporting the troops means keeping them in the theatre of war with more and more coming back in boxes when common sense would suggest that bringing them all home is the ONLY real way of supporting them[/Quote] I think there is way too much of a rainbow of opinion within Britain to even make that suggestion. I support the troops but not the act of war, that is my personal stance, many others have many more. These are the same people who think the troops are fighting for our country when in fact I don't think there has been a single attack on our nation by anyone from Afghanistan ever...[/Quote] That doesn't make sense, fighting for your country doesn't mean your country is under attack, it means that your country (those that make the decisions, as elected by the people) has made a political decision to actively take part in a conflict. The reasons for that could be many. These are the same people who think the US found Osama Bin Hiding in a house in Pakistan, then shot him and chucked him in the sea without a scrap of evidence[/Quote] Have you any evidence they didn't, or that he is still alive? It's childlike, anyone with a modicum of intelligence can see we are being lied to and manipulated every single day but you all glibly call Icke a nutter. Priceless.... What is childlike is assuming we are all being lied to and that we're all too blind (apart from the few, like Mr Icke, who conveniently makes alot of money out of this) to realise this, controlled by an organisation that has apparently lived undetected for thousands of years while becoming impossibly powerful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alteredgemed Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Really? Can't link here (at work) but there is quite alot saying they did. Have you any evidence they didn't, or that he is still alive? SAYING they did is not evidence, how about some proof? They had no problem publishing pictures of a dead Gaddafi so why not Osama? I don't have any proof he's alive but I believe he died in 2002 or maybe even summer 2001. He was said to be having daily dialysis in 2001 and I don't think there are many caves in the Afghan mountains. You of course are entitled to your opinion, I'm just pointing out how deceived we are every single day and the people who take the mickey out of Icke are the ones who are falling for the rubbish a child wouldn't fall for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.