David Icke, Love Not Fear is The Answer |460|

Alex

Administrator
Probably because of my respect for you and your intellectual and intuitive record, I am wide open minded. In fact, I follow the Math+ prophylaxis regimen primarily so that I might better avoid, if I "get the virus" giving it to those who live in my home, other loved ones/friends and others I may not know but might come in contact with... and ultimately, yes, myself.

But also, I know David Icke quite well and anyone who does knows you have to take some of his views as simply and only his current opinion or his current "wish that it be true." I never throw the baby out with the bath water and Icke has presented plenty of "real baby" since he hit the scene almost 30 years ago. In fact, his main messages from those early days and throughout look incredibly predictive. Sadly so.

Considering Kaufman's information, I put his info in the fuller basket of info which I listed several sources above, some who believe there's a virus.

If I had a gun to my head and were asked what I believe, I would say, I believe there is something that is causing a new illness to emerge.

Sadly then, I open up to the various possibilities as to whether some particular "cause" for this was something that naturally occurred or was "man-manipulated or man-made." I am then just as open to the possibility that if it were man-manipulated or man-made, it's "release" was an accident or possibly intentional.

This last paragraph is why I incorporate "Plan" into my term COVID-19(84) PlanScamDEMic™ as my label for this illness, its possible cause(s) and how it has been used to impose potential agendas (one of them being political).
agreed... I'm of the same mind. Does really seem to make sense to conclude ( as I do... and strangely as I think david icke does) that we're dealing with an engineered bio-weapon ( leaving aside for now whether it was accidentally or intentionally released) and at the same time claimed that the"virus hasn't been isolated."

again, this kind of flat earth style goofy conspiracy stuff makes it easier for"them" to advance their agenda.
 

Alex

Administrator
The core issue is that apparently nowadays they are willing to work with a mixture that contains a lot of virus but where the virus has never been fully separated from body tissue. I guess you would need to search for a paper claiming to have isolated CV19.

The situation with AIDS seems to be similar - and it is also a retrovirus - RNA rather than DNA. The next step is to smash open the virus and search the RNA to be found, but until you get the virus totally pure, you might be looking at human RNA.

From what I have read, the whole issue is a murkier area of science than one might expect.

David
yes... and I think we'd need to un-murk-ify it as much as possible
 
L

lonevoice

https://www.amazon.com/Dirty-Scienc...&keywords=Dirty+Science&qid=1599073631&sr=8-1
Dirty Science: How Unscientific Methods Are Blocking Our Cultural Advancement Paperback – March 22, 2019
by Bob Gebelein (Author)

Be sure to look at the essay-long review there by Michael Tymn, a towering intellect.

See also Tymn's blog about the harrowing academic physicalist terrorism against Prof. Staffo4rd Betty. There be heroes. http://whitecrowbooks.com/michaeltymn/entry/professor_of_religious_studies_survives_career_in_exile
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The core issue is that apparently nowadays they are willing to work with a mixture that contains a lot of virus but where the virus has never been fully separated from body tissue. I guess you would need to search for a paper claiming to have isolated CV19.

The situation with AIDS seems to be similar - and it is also a retrovirus - RNA rather than DNA. The next step is to smash open the virus and search the RNA to be found, but until you get the virus totally pure, you might be looking at human RNA.

From what I have read, the whole issue is a murkier area of science than one might expect.

David
https://theconversation.com/i-study...ronavirus-to-fight-the-global-pandemic-133675

How our team isolated the new coronavirus to fight the global pandemic
 

Alex

Administrator
https://www.amazon.com/Dirty-Scienc...&keywords=Dirty+Science&qid=1599073631&sr=8-1
Dirty Science: How Unscientific Methods Are Blocking Our Cultural Advancement Paperback – March 22, 2019
by Bob Gebelein (Author)

Be sure to look at the essay-long review there by Michael Tymn, a towering intellect.

See also Tymn's blog about the harrowing academic physicalist terrorism against Prof. Staffo4rd Betty. There be heroes. http://whitecrowbooks.com/michaeltymn/entry/professor_of_religious_studies_survives_career_in_exile
Tymn is great... and so is his review... but at some point we have to start looking as a psyop.
 
Alex, here is an interesting book that opens some of the murky corners of the virus chasing business.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Virus-Mania-Continually-Epidemics-Billion-Dollar/dp/1425114679

I am reading it now, and while it clearly has some shortcomings, it is anchored in a pretty good set of links to the medical literature. Its thesis is not that viral diseases do not exist, but that if you go trawling for new viral diseases, you will 'find' them, but they often do not exist.

One example of a shortcoming in that book, is that there is a theory that the disease of polio was caused by the widespread use of certain toxic pesticides. The book supports that viewpoint, but then reports the early attempts to get a vaccine that actually ended up giving people polio - complete with paralysis. This is clearly not consistent with the theory that the virus does not cause paralysis symptoms, and they don't even seem to discuss this discrepancy. Nevertheless, "Virus Mania" does point to a lot of the truth about modern virus research - you won't go away not understanding how a virus might not exist and yet create a panic like CV19 - or indeed AIDS. One example of this is the fact that AIDS symptoms are very similar to AIDS drug side effects!

Malf (above) has linked to a page which claims to have isolated the CV19 virus (I think we have been there before). However, I have suggested he try to find the actual research paper making this claim. From what I have read, there is no such paper - but as I have said before, I may be wrong, this is not my field.

I think this is likely to be true because the Nobel Prize winning chemist, Karry Mullis, pointed out that the AIDS virus has similarly never been isolated, and indeed that there is no paper claiming that AIDS is caused by HIV. Think about that for a moment - if Robert Gallo has evidence sufficient to claim a scientific proof, why wouldn't he have a corresponding paper?

Henry Bauer is getting very old by now, but he has finally begun to write about CV19:

https://scimedskeptic.wordpress.com/

I have yet to read his new thoughts.

An NHS doctor in the UK, Malcolm Kendrick, has written a lot about CV19 in his blog - mainly about the extreme difficulty in obtaining any reliable facts about the death rate, the transmissibility, etc, etc. He is certainly not ruling out the more extreme ideas - such as that the CV19 virus does dot exist!

David
 
OK great - now notice that that article is not a scientific paper, and nor does it reference one. See if you can find the actual paper that claims to have isolated CV19.

David
Are you looking for any scientific papers which claim to have isolated Covid19?
here's one
here's another

those were just the first 2 I came across (the second side-linked from the first, as I'm damned lazy at times:D)

Edit: ah, here's the paper.
 
Last edited:
Are you looking for any scientific papers which claim to have isolated Covid19?
here's one
here's another

those were just the first 2 I came across (the second side-linked from the first, as I'm damned lazy at times:D)

Edit: ah, here's the paper.
Great - let's deal with your first link first.

What dissenting scientists are complaining, about is that the virus is not isolated from the cellular matter used to culture them. You can clearly see that the electron micrographs in that paper contain virus particles embedded in a matrix of other material.

This is crucial - you have to get the virus isolated - free of human or animal material - because the next step is to break open the virus particles to extract RNA. The problem is that the surrounding material will also contain RNA, so how do you know what you end up sequencing?

This is particularly tricky for RNA viruses, because some RNA is only expressed in certain situations - such as when the body is fighting an infection.

I want to stress, this is all second hand knowledge, but there really does seem to be a problem.

Compare this for a moment with what happens with bacteria. You can generally purify them on a petri dish containing a sterile nutrient broth or whatever. Viruses can only be grown inside living cells.

Despite the difficulties,some viruses have been isolated, but it is much harder to do.

Not completely isolating the supposed pathogen violates Koch's postulates for proving that a pathgen causes a specific disease:

  1. The microorganism must be found in abundance in all organisms suffering from the disease, but should not be found in healthy organisms.
  2. The microorganism must be isolated from a diseased organism and grown in pure culture.
  3. The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism.
  4. The microorganism must be re-isolated from the inoculated, diseased experimental host and identified as being identical to the original specific causative agent.

David
 
Great - let's deal with your first link first.

What dissenting scientists are complaining, about is that the virus is not isolated from the cellular matter used to culture them. You can clearly see that the electron micrographs in that paper contain virus particles embedded in a matrix of other material.

This is crucial - you have to get the virus isolated - free of human or animal material - because the next step is to break open the virus particles to extract RNA. The problem is that the surrounding material will also contain RNA, so how do you know what you end up sequencing?

This is particularly tricky for RNA viruses, because some RNA is only expressed in certain situations - such as when the body is fighting an infection.

I want to stress, this is all second hand knowledge, but there really does seem to be a problem.

Compare this for a moment with what happens with bacteria. You can generally purify them on a petri dish containing a sterile nutrient broth or whatever. Viruses can only be grown inside living cells.

Despite the difficulties,some viruses have been isolated, but it is much harder to do.

Not completely isolating the supposed pathogen violates Koch's postulates for proving that a pathgen causes a specific disease:

  1. The microorganism must be found in abundance in all organisms suffering from the disease, but should not be found in healthy organisms.
  2. The microorganism must be isolated from a diseased organism and grown in pure culture.
  3. The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism.
  4. The microorganism must be re-isolated from the inoculated, diseased experimental host and identified as being identical to the original specific causative agent.

David
Why are you fixated on criteria formulated in the 1880s? Things have moved on.

These postulates were generated before modern concepts in microbial pathogenesis that cannot be examined using Koch's postulates, including
viruses (which are obligate cellular parasites) and asymptomatic carriers. They have largely been supplanted by other criteria... Even in Koch's time, it was recognized that some infectious agents were clearly responsible for disease even though they did not fulfill all of the postulates.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch's_postulates
 
Why are you fixated on criteria formulated in the 1880s? Things have moved on.
Well the important issue is that you end up opening the virus particles in the presence of other biological material, so you don't know whether the RNA that you are going to use to build a test, actually comes from the virus.

Think what it means to drop postulate 3: "The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism. "
I read that they don't have an animal model for CV19 - meaning they simply can't satisfy postulate 3.

David
 
Hello everyone, thank you for the interview Alex, it was timely for me as it’s approaching twenty years since I first encountered David Icke (and alternative views in general) and I’ve been trying for some time to collect my thoughts. For anyone who’s interested I’m going to copy in a draft of an essay I’m working on, perhaps the first in a series, exploring the different aspects of conspiracy theory.


Even our most basic assumptions
Our most solid beliefs
Our most conclusive arguments

Can be changed
Improved
Defused
Or shown to be irrelevant

By a comparison
With what at first looks like undiluted madness
Quote adapted from Farewell to Reason, by Paul Feyerabend


I first encountered David Icke when I was eighteen and had just left school. I’d also just become interested in spirituality and was in that section of a bookshop. The title The Biggest Secret leapt out at me—’What is ‘the biggest secret?’ I thought. Faces of world leaders adorned the cover in a way that suggested a deeper reality was concealed behind them—that the world we occupied was but a covering of that. I picked it off the shelf and flipped over to the back cover; within one paragraph I’d been initiated into the knowledge of the Babylonian Brotherhood, the secret force behind all the empires that have risen and fallen through the centuries and millennia.

I was intrigued. Was it possible to write an alternative account of history that would both hold up to scrutiny and have explanatory power? Or would it fall down at the first hurdle. I also instantly had a sense of paranoia, were agents of this Babylonian Brotherhood already aware that I knew of them?

Looking back now I think all this spoke to my sense that the world as it had been presented to me didn’t make sense. My trust in received wisdom had been breaking down for a while. I’d gone all the way through the schooling system only to find the emperor had no clothes. Then, George W. Bush was elected the leader of the free world—that was the final nail in the coffin.

I have a few standout memories from reading the book. There were outrageous claims, like the one about the CIA being involved in global narcotics trafficking. There was a critique of the absurdities of religion—standard stuff—but what really caught my attention was the chapter on science. I was expecting Mr. Icke to be a materialist and talk about the wonders of the scientific revolution. Instead he pointed out that materialist science was another kind of a trap, which like religion suppressed our spiritual identity. After being a true believer I was only just coming to see the emptiness of materialism, to hear somebody else express it was incredible.

Beyond conspiracies; Mr. Icke finished the book with two chapters on a kind of gnositc/non-dual spirituality. The way out of global enslavement was not stockpiling weapons and forming militias, it was to recognise our essential nature as an infinite ocean of love, dreaming the cosmos into existence. I cannot convey how radical this was to me as an eighteen year old who had never been exposed to an alternative view—in fact up until that point I didn’t even know alternative views existed.

Then, two months later, 9/11 happened.

Had it only a little bit earlier I would have been completely absorbed in the conventional narrative. Without question. Now however, in addition to that, I also had an alternative point of view and could ask ‘what am I seeing here?’ The same day David Icke posted this quote to his website, it became more prophetic as the months went on:

‘Don’t be surprised if the U.S. finds itself in another manipulated war during this administration. You will see monsters being created in the public mind to justify such action.’
David Icke, January 2001

I found I lacked the knowledge and research abilities to verify any of Mr. Icke’s conspiracy claims. The internet was in a much earlier phase then (no videos) and after much effort I found I was floundering. I also realised that absolutely no one around me found any of this information in the least bit interesting or worthy of any consideration. It took me quite some time to accept that—and far longer to understand it.

I set conspiracy research aside for a number of years, until being drawn back in at the end of the decade by a series of synchronicities. In those few short years the internet had become a different place, more information was available (in a digestible form) than could be consumed in a lifetime. After a brief period of floundering, I opted to begin by reading about events indisputable in the historical record. It’s hard for me to convey the shock I felt in learning that Iran had been a secularizing democracy in the 1950s, before the CIA initiated a coup to install a dictator that ultimately paved the way for today’s Islamic State. The most shocking aspect was finding that this wasn’t even a disputed event, it was a matter of historical record. More shocking again—neither was it an anomaly, but rather standard practice. The CIA had succeeded in destroying democracy in favour of compliant dictatorships the world over. The real conspiracy—this drive for global hegemony—was right out in the open, the media just refuses to acknowledge it or join the dots.

In time it became abundantly clear to me that events from the Kennedy assassination (either of them) to 9/11 have deeper and concealed aspects to them. To say the very least, they are never what meets the eye. I would conclude David Icke is then broadly correct—as compared to news outlets that do not report from this perspective. Where I perhaps start to part from him is in that the more deeply I look into this darkness, the greater sense of mystery I find. It seems to me David Icke simplifies the world to create a kind of gnostic model of a grand conspiracy. Complex data is then made to fit this model. All the diverse motives of those who occupy positions of power are reduced to a reptilian plot to control the world. This strikes me as a kind of reductionism, a movement away from acknowledging the complexity of the world we inhabit.

By contrast, the deeper down the rabbit hole I delve the more mystery I find. I don’t know who, if anyone, is really pulling the strings. I see a movement towards global hegemonic dominance, but I don’t know who, if anyone, is driving that train. In researching this, I am stepping into a mixture of both increased knowledge and an increased sense of mystery.

David Icke’s work was a sledge hammer that cracked open my existing world view. It was the red pill that took me down the rabbit hole into Wonderland. A gnostic mythos for our age. That’s not to say it’s true, the red pill doesn’t necessarily give truth, rather it opens up another world. That world is perhaps just as wrong as the blue pill, but in the opposite direction. From there we can maybe start to find a real world, one rooted more in a sense of mystery than certainty and dogma. To quote the philosopher Paul Feyerabend again:

‘We need a dream-world in order to discover the features of the real world we think we inhabit (and which may actually be just another dream-world).’

There’s a lot that I feel can be legitimately criticised about conspiracy theory and David Icke. I must say, it’s very hard to see how all the people who have come into contact with the royal families of Europe over the centuries could have missed the fact they are shape-shifting reptiles. I went on to read many books by very sensible critics of state power like John Pilger and Stephen Kinzer. The question I have wrestled with is; would the likes of their work have broken my conceptual prison? I don’t think it would. I think it took something as power and crazy and all encompassing as the meta-conspiracy of The Biggest Secret to achieve that.

David Icke is in this sense a kind of magician, who breaks one spell by casting another—and ultimately perhaps allows us to step into an awareness of and freedom from our conceptual prisons.
 
Tymn is great... and so is his review... but at some point we have to start looking as a psyop.
Do you mean Tymn is wittingly (or not) part of the psyop? Or that this "mainstream science blockade" that imprisons true scientific research within the confines of physicalism might be a psyop? (I already bet on "YES" that it is, among many things, a psyop).
 
L

lonevoice

[QUOTE="Alex, post: 146015, member: 1"Tymn is great... and so is his review... but at some point we have to start looking as a psyop.[/QUOTE]

Well we already are seeing the psyop, in a very general way. Gebelin's book and Tymn's post are pointing to the success of the op's end game. And to the lengths the Academy went to "terrorize" Betty in implementing the op in Betty's case. But Tymn and Betty themselves have no clue it has been a psyop. To them it seemed like age-old Realpolitik. So the need is to get the word out, Alex, and your show is doing that. P.S. We could perhaps deconstruct exactly how things went operationally as a psyop in this case. After all, Larry Summers was once President of Harvard. But our time is better spent right now on "the reality of powerful cabals operating without oversight in plain view of the whole world"--a chilling phrase from Gordon White. Where were we when this shut down op was announced as a drill ? --there is a mind blowing correlation between drills for an op and the actual op in so many past cases. And where are we now? So many thought leaders are trying to roll this plain view horror into their proven memes of just going through a collective dark night, of remaining in a state of grace in the darkness, and the like: they need the money, just like the other victims who haven't yet starved to death (has anyone seen the numbers in India)?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Alex

Administrator
Hello everyone, thank you for the interview Alex, it was timely for me as it’s approaching twenty years since I first encountered David Icke (and alternative views in general) and I’ve been trying for some time to collect my thoughts. For anyone who’s interested I’m going to copy in a draft of an essay I’m working on, perhaps the first in a series, exploring the different aspects of conspiracy theory.


Even our most basic assumptions
Our most solid beliefs
Our most conclusive arguments

Can be changed
Improved
Defused
Or shown to be irrelevant

By a comparison
With what at first looks like undiluted madness
Quote adapted from Farewell to Reason, by Paul Feyerabend


I first encountered David Icke when I was eighteen and had just left school. I’d also just become interested in spirituality and was in that section of a bookshop. The title The Biggest Secret leapt out at me—’What is ‘the biggest secret?’ I thought. Faces of world leaders adorned the cover in a way that suggested a deeper reality was concealed behind them—that the world we occupied was but a covering of that. I picked it off the shelf and flipped over to the back cover; within one paragraph I’d been initiated into the knowledge of the Babylonian Brotherhood, the secret force behind all the empires that have risen and fallen through the centuries and millennia.

I was intrigued. Was it possible to write an alternative account of history that would both hold up to scrutiny and have explanatory power? Or would it fall down at the first hurdle. I also instantly had a sense of paranoia, were agents of this Babylonian Brotherhood already aware that I knew of them?

Looking back now I think all this spoke to my sense that the world as it had been presented to me didn’t make sense. My trust in received wisdom had been breaking down for a while. I’d gone all the way through the schooling system only to find the emperor had no clothes. Then, George W. Bush was elected the leader of the free world—that was the final nail in the coffin.

I have a few standout memories from reading the book. There were outrageous claims, like the one about the CIA being involved in global narcotics trafficking. There was a critique of the absurdities of religion—standard stuff—but what really caught my attention was the chapter on science. I was expecting Mr. Icke to be a materialist and talk about the wonders of the scientific revolution. Instead he pointed out that materialist science was another kind of a trap, which like religion suppressed our spiritual identity. After being a true believer I was only just coming to see the emptiness of materialism, to hear somebody else express it was incredible.

Beyond conspiracies; Mr. Icke finished the book with two chapters on a kind of gnositc/non-dual spirituality. The way out of global enslavement was not stockpiling weapons and forming militias, it was to recognise our essential nature as an infinite ocean of love, dreaming the cosmos into existence. I cannot convey how radical this was to me as an eighteen year old who had never been exposed to an alternative view—in fact up until that point I didn’t even know alternative views existed.

Then, two months later, 9/11 happened.

Had it only a little bit earlier I would have been completely absorbed in the conventional narrative. Without question. Now however, in addition to that, I also had an alternative point of view and could ask ‘what am I seeing here?’ The same day David Icke posted this quote to his website, it became more prophetic as the months went on:

‘Don’t be surprised if the U.S. finds itself in another manipulated war during this administration. You will see monsters being created in the public mind to justify such action.’
David Icke, January 2001

I found I lacked the knowledge and research abilities to verify any of Mr. Icke’s conspiracy claims. The internet was in a much earlier phase then (no videos) and after much effort I found I was floundering. I also realised that absolutely no one around me found any of this information in the least bit interesting or worthy of any consideration. It took me quite some time to accept that—and far longer to understand it.

I set conspiracy research aside for a number of years, until being drawn back in at the end of the decade by a series of synchronicities. In those few short years the internet had become a different place, more information was available (in a digestible form) than could be consumed in a lifetime. After a brief period of floundering, I opted to begin by reading about events indisputable in the historical record. It’s hard for me to convey the shock I felt in learning that Iran had been a secularizing democracy in the 1950s, before the CIA initiated a coup to install a dictator that ultimately paved the way for today’s Islamic State. The most shocking aspect was finding that this wasn’t even a disputed event, it was a matter of historical record. More shocking again—neither was it an anomaly, but rather standard practice. The CIA had succeeded in destroying democracy in favour of compliant dictatorships the world over. The real conspiracy—this drive for global hegemony—was right out in the open, the media just refuses to acknowledge it or join the dots.

In time it became abundantly clear to me that events from the Kennedy assassination (either of them) to 9/11 have deeper and concealed aspects to them. To say the very least, they are never what meets the eye. I would conclude David Icke is then broadly correct—as compared to news outlets that do not report from this perspective. Where I perhaps start to part from him is in that the more deeply I look into this darkness, the greater sense of mystery I find. It seems to me David Icke simplifies the world to create a kind of gnostic model of a grand conspiracy. Complex data is then made to fit this model. All the diverse motives of those who occupy positions of power are reduced to a reptilian plot to control the world. This strikes me as a kind of reductionism, a movement away from acknowledging the complexity of the world we inhabit.

By contrast, the deeper down the rabbit hole I delve the more mystery I find. I don’t know who, if anyone, is really pulling the strings. I see a movement towards global hegemonic dominance, but I don’t know who, if anyone, is driving that train. In researching this, I am stepping into a mixture of both increased knowledge and an increased sense of mystery.

David Icke’s work was a sledge hammer that cracked open my existing world view.
funny... I've done a couple of interviews since this where I play people clips from the david icke interview. always start by asking people do you know who david icke is because I know the response that I will get " he's the lizard guy" they say. did ike is one of those characters who becomes a litmus test... you get it or you don't.
 
Well the important issue is that you end up opening the virus particles in the presence of other biological material, so you don't know whether the RNA that you are going to use to build a test, actually comes from the virus.



David
The labs are actually monitoring the spread of different strains by their genomic signatures. They are actively recording mutations the virus makes.

They can then make predictions on the spread, based on the test results.

When NZ was symptomatically Covid-free, despite widespread testing, no positive tests were recorded in the community for over 100 days. Positive tests were consistently found in incoming overseas travellers to NZ in quarantine. That doesn’t jive with your model.
 
L

lonevoice

no. I think he's a part of the psyop anymore than I was part of the psyop first 5-7 years I did skeptiko. the plandemic has actually been somewhat of a gift terms of removing any last vestiges of doubt about the game at hand.
You have gifted me, Alex, with a good cry. I have felt so alone for so long.
 
Top