[Closed] David Icke at Wembley last Saturday

JHJ, why do you think the members of the purple circle are being so blatant about showing off their membership these days? It's almost as if being so obvious, that people miss it. Why not just stay secret? Are they foreshadowing something that is about to be revealed?

And it's everywhere isn't it. The H of Commons symbolism is so in your face it's incredible. Amazing stuff.

doubtless bore and confuse the uninitiated.

Your failure to comprehend is not my failure to provide information.

I don't think you do Mike...do some of you even get out on your bikes?

mikewsmith - Member 
I don't think you do Mike...do some of you even get out on your bikes?

Well your stalking is still a bit half arsed. I'm guessing this is another one of your clever jokes there Chris. As for posting a fair bit other side of the world and the timings are coinciding with me finished it project off and sitting in airports. Bike has to wait until Sunday next week.
POSTED 49 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

Stalking?? Eh....please don't flatter yourself sunshine..

thats fine then, I'll go back to my club sandwich and beer then. Not really sure what your running joke is but at least it's a change from JH's repetitive BS and referring it all back to the pyramid.

Cougar - Moderator

You haven't "given anyone any bricks", you've had someone on the Internet tell you what a brick looks like once, and in your head you've now got a mental image of a three foot high pineapple. You then claim to have the architect's design for the house, but won't show anyone because it's obvious.

Hurrah for this post!

Blimey, you lot have been busy.

Can't help but feel that this is the kind of groupthink that those who erroneously thought the earth was flat would've displayed when the clever dudes who had amassed sufficient reference points to declare the earth was round first presented their theory.

My apologies for challenging what you've been led to believe, but I haven't been the one telling fibs...

Seem to recall not so long ago there was a guy on here (not me) who said that some time before the Jimmy Savile story broke, he had presented similar 'conspiracy theories' surrounding 'Sir' Savile and received similar ridicule.

You may have noticed though, I'm a persistent bugger.

Whether or not I can be assed to amass sufficient information to shake your world view is very much going to depend on you, as individuals.

Whether or not I can be assed to amass sufficient information to shake your world view is very much going to depend on you, as individuals.

People keep asking for information to support your little stories.

And you've consistently failed to "be assed" to provide anything at all.

So I'm going to put my money on you shaking precisely zero world views. Ever.

You may have noticed though, I'm a persistent bugger.

My apologies for challenging what you've been led to believe, but I haven't been the one telling fibs...

So's herpese and shingles; and both are just as irritating.

What is the basis of your irritation?

Do you know why it is that this makes you tickle sooo bad?

You may have noticed though, I'm a persistent bugger.

Not at all - in fact I've noticed the complete opposite, ie, when you are asked to explain a point which you appear to be making you very often drop the point, never explain it, and never repeat it.

As an example two days ago I asked you to explain this comment which you had made :

Nicholas Fairbairn (who had an affair with Esther Rantzen of Childline Fame)

You never explained the significance of having an affair with Esther Rantzen of Childline fame, and you never repeated the comment, you just quickly dropped it when you realised that you couldn't explain what point you were trying to make.

I wouldn't call that being persistent, I would call it being inconsistent.

What is the basis of your irritation?

Do you know why it is that this makes you tickle sooo bad?

"My apologies for challenging what you've been led to believe, "
Problem is you haven't actually challenged anything . You present old news as if it is some secret you have discovered then try to randomly thread disparate facts into an overarching narrative with no actual use of logic or reason then refuse to show your working.
Why would mi5 seek to black mail MPs with pedophilia for example. If the mp needed to be controlled why not secure the election of a biddable candidate or remove the problem MP by broaching his sexual preference publicly . How fortunate for MI5 that the MPs they need to contoll are pedophiles a statistically small group. Do mi5 identify paedos and manipulate their lives and the democratic process to make them want to be MPs then get them elected so that they can then blackmail them and control Parliament?
Sorce for your mi5 badge seems odd that a secret dept that was not officially acknowledged to exist and had no name just known by it's old door number had an official badge.?

As an example two days ago I asked you to explain this comment which you had made :

Nicholas Fairbairn (who had an affair with Esther Rantzen of Childline Fame)

You never explained the significance of having an affair with Esther Rantzen of Childline fame, and you never repeated the comment, you just quickly dropped it when you realised that you couldn't explain what point you were trying to make.

I wouldn't call that being persistent, I would call it being inconsistent.

Strangely, many of my questions remain unanswered, perhaps you are electing yourself as the spokesperson for the groupthink?

Or are you acting as an individual?

Either way, let's lighten this up a bit;

I know, lets play tennis; that was a pretty aggressive serve, but I got ya...

There are allegations that Esther Rantzen is herself involved, having been named as participating in abuse, some say Childline is a front organization to ensure victims of any high ranking/well known figures are not seen by professionals outside the 'purple circle'.

Personally, I'm not convinced by these allegations by any stretch of the imagination at this point, but I keep it in mind should further information arise.

OK, here's my volley:

Why did the last pope resign?

Because he was 87 which is very old. Age is particualy a problem when trying to lead an internecine feuding mob with dark secrets . His replacement hardly fits with a lizard paedo conspiracy does he ? Or was he on Jim Will Fix It too?

Lizards!! ***king Lizards!!

Are you nuts?

I appreciate this is a David Icke thread, but maybe we have a major misunderstanding prevailing here.

I never said a damn thing about lizards, that is bonkers!!

Personally, I'm not convinced by these allegations

So when confronted by the obvious stupidity of this comment :

[i][b]Nicholas Fairbairn (who had an affair with Esther Rantzen of Childline Fame)[/i][/b]

You respond (after initially trying to completely ignore it) with :

[i]"Personally, I'm not convinced by these allegations"[/i]

And you want to be seen as a "persistent bugger" ?

You are weak and inconsistent.

So when confronted by the obvious stupidity of this comment :

Nicholas Fairbairn (who had an affair with Esther Rantzen of Childline Fame)

You respond (after initially trying to completely ignore it) with :

"Personally, I'm not convinced by these allegations"

And you want to be seen as a "persistent bugger" ?

You are weak and inconsistent.

You have not answered the question presented, do you want me to draw attention to the flaws that obviously highlights, or do you want to be a big brave boy and have a go at meeting your own standards?

I never said a damn thing about lizards, that is bonkers!!

How narrow minded of you, are you scared of the truth ? Open your mind and do the research.

Tell you what sweetie, be a doll and have a look into it yourself would you, I'm a bit tied up with the very real and extensive phenomenon of child abusers in positions of power if you hadn't noticed.

Thanks xxx

😛

Now, if you could live up to the expectations you have of others and answer the question I asked, you might regain my respect.

Gosh, you really are spectacularly immature.

Or possibly a very mature ten year old.

You have not answered the question presented,

Yeah, we're following your example.

Fire away Cougar, if you have a question, I'll do my best to answer it...

ernie is on the naughty step

Tell us what you were getting at with MKUltra, with reference to my earlier post.

Tell us why you believe the pope resigned.

Tell us about how "child abuse is central to the control structures of the political and religious elite" as you've been asked about repeatedly.

No skirting the issue, no "do your research," no "it's too complicated," no posing further unrelated questions. Tell us directly or I'm closing the thread.

You can do that, yes?

Chapeau Ernie

[img] [/img]

Have you not got it jivehoneyjive? We, here on this forum, are the controlling elite. You have been hoodwinked into contributing so we can learn about you. You will be receiving a visit shortly. Oh hang on, I almost believed myself then.

That's a lot of questions; you must think I'm some kind of Genie...

I have mentioned some of this information before, but since I have everyone's attention, I'll give it a go

Tell us directly or I'm closing the thread.

(cough) powertrip (cough)

Anyhooooo, jokes aside.

[b]MK-ULTRA[/b] Has been linked to several cases of severe child abuse in the U.S. most notably, the Franklin Scandal, which involved several prominent people, sourcing kids from Boystown, a community set up by a Catholic Priest to care for children. Some of the victims allege to have been taken into the Whitehouse, as well as to Bohemian Grove.

There is a huge amount of information to trawl through to try and find out just where the truth is, but the most telling points for me are that one of the victims, Paul Bonacci, was awarded $1,000,000 in damages. Nonetheless, no prosecutions were pursued in relation to abuse.

please take the time to watch this; a documentary which was produced by Yorkshire television in collaboration with Discovery Channel:

Conspiracy of Silence, a documentary listed for viewing in TV Guide Magazine was to be aired on the Discovery Channel, on May 3 1994. This documentary exposed a network of religious leaders and Washington politicians who flew children to Washington D.C. for sex orgies.

At the last minute before airing, unknown congressmen threatened the TV Cable industry with restrictive legislation if this documentary was aired. Almost immediately, the rights to the documentary were purchased by unknown persons who ordered all copies destroyed.

A copy of this videotape was furnished anonymously to former Nebraska state senator and attorney John De Camp who made it available.

As I've said though, this is an international phenomenon, both throughout mainland Europe, the U.S., Australia and Canada.

Mentioning Canada, we come to former Reverend Kevin Annett, who makes a good case for exposing industrial scale abuse:

I have to admit, given some of Rev Annett's more recent claims, I'm skeptical, but going by the testimonies in the video above, coupled with stories too extensive to include in this reply, I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

He alleges that the reason Pope Ratzinger quit is due to not only covering up, but also direct involvement in sadistic child abuse.

Coming back to the U.K. we all know momentum is growing ever since Tom Watson's speech in 2012:

2 inappropriate inquiry chairs so far suggest the current government may not be quite so eager to investigate as their PR would have you believe.

I do have a huge amount of information regarding the U.K. situation and have no doubt in my mind there has been (and very possibly still is) a very wide ranging nationwide network involving a number of prominent names.

For legal reasons, I can't divulge all my information at the moment, but I have been working with a number of parties, from victims, to careworkers, to MPs, to get to the bottom of matters.

Hopefully that goes some way to answering all the questions... obviously, you have to put the time in and judge for yourself.

For legal reasons, I can't divulge all my information at the moment, but I have been working with a number of parties, from victims, to careworkers, to MPs, to get to the bottom of matters.

For legal reasons, I can't divulge all my information at the moment, but I have been working with a number of parties, from victims, to careworkers, to MPs, to get to the bottom of matters.

Aye, that always happens

😆

Do you know why it is that this makes you tickle sooo bad?

Are we talking about the conspiracy theories or the herpes?

You may scoff but where do you think that herpes originates from ?

Yes that's right - reptiles. Herpes in rife among reptiles and having sex and breeding with them was always going to carry obvious risks.

Now I'm not going to tell you any more because I've probably already told you more than I should but do your own research and google "Iguanid Herpesvirus". Better still try googling "Jimmy Savile + Iguanid Herpesvirus". He was riddled with it. Probably.

I just looked at the first point,

MK-ULTRA Has been linked to several cases of severe child abuse in the U.S. most notably, the Franklin Scandal,

I'd not heard of this, so I googled it. Typing "franklin scandal" into Google auto-suggests "franklin scandal hoax" and "franklin scandal debunked" as alternative searches. This is what Wikipedia has to say,

After investigation, a grand jury in Douglas County (of which Omaha, Nebraska is the largest city and county seat) determined the abuse allegations were baseless, describing them as a "carefully crafted hoax" and indicted two of the accusers on perjury charges.[4] The grand jury also suggested that the abuse stories originated from a vindictive employee terminated by Boys Town, the famed refuge for troubled youths.[4] Later, a federal grand jury concluded that the abuse allegations were unfounded and indicted 21-year-old Alisha Owen, an alleged victim, on eight counts of perjury. The same grand jury also indicted multiple officers of the credit union, including King, for crimes related to the embezzlement of funds from the credit union.[4][5] Alisha Owen served 4-1/2 years in prison

So, that's bollocks for a start.

The next one I looked at was your Conspiracy of Silence. Wikipedia again, their first line is,

The Conspiracy of Silence is a documentary TV film that was broadcast three times on PBS in the United States in 1995 and 1996.

... which would seem inconsistent with your implication that it was pulled and the assertion that it was destroyed. I can find any number of sites [i]claiming [/i]it was pulled, but as far as I can gather (and I can't be certain), this is an urban myth.

This case brings together the CIA (MK-ULTRA), the Church and High Level Politicians

Assuming for a moment that the Franklin stuff is true, I'm not seeing any links anywhere to either MKUltra or the Church. Did you just make that up?

He alleges that the reason Pope Ratzinger quit is due to not only covering up, but also direct involvement in sadistic child abuse.

Hardly evidence is it, one person's allegations. Plenty of people allege things all the time - just look in a mirror - doesn't mean they're true. Doesn't mean they aren't either of course.

Further digging,

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/popebenedict.asp

The source of these rumors was uncorroborated material posted to the web site of International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State (ITCCS), which as far as we have been able to ascertain is not actually an international tribunal at all but simply a blog maintained maintained by a single person (Kevin D. Annett).
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/popebenedict.asp#i5fb2IKMS0uKHU3u.99

What else have we got? Ah,

Coming back to the U.K. we all know momentum is growing ever since Tom Watson's speech in 2012:

Well, I hold Tom Watson in high regard, so there may actually be some truth in this (assuming that you haven't completely misrepresented what's been said). I'm not about to watch an hour-long parliament feed when I'm at work though.

well they would say that cougar, thats how a cover up works (or something like that) once conspiracy is declared any evidence to disprove it is just proof it exists to some people.

Well, I hold Tom Watson in high regard, so there may actually be some truth in this (assuming that you haven't completely misrepresented what's been said). I'm not about to watch an hour-long parliament feed when I'm at work though.

You have immediately debunked yourself there I'm afraid... check the video and try again.

Let's take a look at this point:

The next one I looked at was your Conspiracy of Silence. Wikipedia again, their first line is,

The Conspiracy of Silence is a documentary TV film that was broadcast three times on PBS in the United States in 1995 and 1996.

... which would seem inconsistent with your implication that it was pulled and the assertion that it was destroyed. I can find any number of sites claiming it was pulled, but as far as I can gather (and I can't be certain), this is an urban myth.

Reading the wikipedia entry, the one screened on PBS is an entirely different documentary, into domestic violence:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conspiracy_of_Silence

So suddenly, your immediate knee jerk reaction to it being bollocks is in question; many parties have suggested there is a cover up, the likelihood of which is only intensified by the censoring of the documentary.

Disinfomation is an essential part of cover up, especially when we have the internet to give us access to a wealth of information...

As an example of that, do you honestly believe there is no evidence of Genocide in Canada? It's certainly not widely publicized and of course brushed under the carpet by the Church and Government, but that doesn't remove the facts.

Kevin Annett is certainly not acting alone: you only have to watch the video to see he is widely engaged with a large community of victims of horrendous abuse, but you didn't watch the video, did you? You leapt to conclusions.

As to where the CIA and the Church fit into the Franklin Scandal, a number of victims were involved in the MK-ULTRA experiments, including witnessing abuse and murder. Boystown, who was supplying children, was set up by the Catholic Church.

Of course, The Catholic church is also linked to Casa Pia and the Canadian residential schools, not to mention a vast catalogue of abuse the world over.

[i]Disinfomation is an essential part of cover up, especially when we have the internet to give us access to a wealth of information...[/i]

there you have it Ladies and Gentlemen, the conspiracy theorists' "get out of goal free card..."

You have immediately debunked yourself there I'm afraid

What, by being at work?

Reading the wikipedia entry, the one screened on PBS is an entirely different documentary

Fair enough. Point still stands though, as far as I can gather from the ten minutes research I had time for this morning, it appears to be widely debunked.

you didn't watch the video, did you?

No, of course I didn't, because I have neither the time nor the inclination right now to sit through four hours of video footage.

What, by being at work?

It's a minute long video... but you didn't take the time to look, because you'd already made your mind up.

it appears to be widely debunked.

By whom?

Do you know who is responsible for debunking it?

This is basically a David and Goliath scenario; as can be seen by the fact that they had the power to pull the documentary, given the people involved, do you believe there wouldn't be plenty of resources ploughed into discrediting the testimony of victims?

[quote=jivehoneyjive ]As to where the CIA and the Church fit into the Franklin Scandal, a number of victims were involved in the MK-ULTRA experiments, including witnessing abuse and murder. Boystown, who was supplying children, was set up by the Catholic Church.

Can I just check, is this the Franklin Scandal hoax MK-Ultra, the CIA and the Church were linked to, or is there some other Franklin Scandal? You see I'm a bit confused by you using a case where the supposed victim has been shown to be lying as proof of a conspiracy by anybody.

Or are you claiming that the successful prosecution for perjury was part of the conspiracy?

It's a minute long video

So it is. I misread the running time, mia culpa.

By whom?

Do you know who is responsible for debunking it?

given the people involved, do you believe there wouldn't be plenty of resources ploughed into discrediting the testimony of victims?

You mean, there might be a conspiracy?

It's possible I suppose, but then, many things are.

Pointless thread, conspiracy theorist shown to be....conspiracy theorist.

It doesn't matter, JHJ isn't interested in evidence or courts, or what's been proved, or what's just speculation. He's got a set of beliefs that he understands and makes sense to him, and they are irrefutable, he won't need proof from any source other than those [i]he[/i] feels back up his case, anything else will be dismissed as part of the cover up.

May as well close the thread, all he's got are insinuations, part truths, rumours, co-incidences, and logical fallacies, and more to the point, anything that refutes those just proves it more.

Classic case.

You know what's funny?

That you accept governments do stuff like MK-ULTRA, then do their damnedest to hide it from you, but you believe any old bullshit they tell you time and again, as they take money off you, to kill people in other countries, who's weapons were indirectly supplied by the government in the 1st place.

You see I'm a bit confused by you using a case where the supposed victim has been shown to be lying as proof of a conspiracy by anybody.

Or are you claiming that the successful prosecution for perjury was part of the conspiracy?

So you're telling me that a single victim being prosecuted for perjury, by an establishment riddled with Freemasons and perverts, means that the entire basis of a case involving several victims is flawed?

Wouldn't surprise me if Jimmy Savile was here today, you'd shake his hand if he told you the victims were lying...

JHJ, you kow what? your basic premise "People in posistions of power often abuse that power" isn't a conspiracy theory. It's a well know and understood. The difference bewtween you and the real world is that in the RW there has to be proof and courts and due process. Even worse than that some people do actually get away with it (see Sir Saville)

Conspiracy theories are just reductive thinking, like religion, it's a comfort blanket to help you cope with the fact that the world's a bit shit. It's the same as "God did it" only now it's "Shadowy elite did it"

Same thing.

So you're telling me that a single victim being prosecuted for perjury, by an establishment riddled with Freemasons and perverts, means that the entire basis of a case involving several victims is flawed?

The weird bit here for me is that I know quite a lot of members of "the establishment" from politicians to judges, Mayors to bishops - they never seem to let slip about their secret volcano lairs or their monthly "sodomise a schoolkid" coffee mornings. Mostly they just seem like people bumbling along doing the same sort of dull, mundane work as the rest of us.

Actually wait, does this make me a member of the establishment?

nickc, you know what?

Much as I would like to bow to your wisdom and air of superiority, the fact is, you are a coward.

The reality you refer to is manufactured.

You like the comforts afforded to you by having a government protecting you from 'terrorists' even though the government encourages huge arms deals with the countries who fund terrorists and fuel extremism.

You like not having to worry that vulnerable people are being horrifically abused, because someone else will take care of it.

So be it, it's your life, but don't you dare judge mine.

[i]That you accept governments do stuff like MK-ULTRA, then do their damnedest to hide it from you, but you believe any old bullshit they tell you time and again[/i]

[url= https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ ]know your logical fallacies[/url]

[quote=jivehoneyjive ]So you're telling me that a single victim being prosecuted for perjury, by an establishment riddled with Freemasons and perverts, means that the entire basis of a case involving several victims is flawed?

I'm telling you that the investigation into the case showed that the whole thing was a hoax and that they had enough evidence to actually prove one of them was lying (which requires quite a high burden of proof, hence is an extremely unusual thing to happen). The failure to find sufficient proof of lying by anybody else doesn't show they were telling the truth.

we have the internet to give us access to a wealth of information...

you believe any old bullshit they tell you time and again

Wouldn't surprise me if Jimmy Savile was here today, you'd shake his hand if he told you the victims were lying

The weird bit here for me is that I know quite a lot of members of "the establishment" from politicians to judges, Mayors to bishops - they never seem to let slip about their secret volcano lairs or their monthly "sodomise a schoolkid" coffee mornings. Mostly they just seem like people bumbling along doing the same sort of dull, mundane work as the rest of us.

Actually wait, does this make me a member of the establishment?

I'll reserve judgement, you seem cool enough and have a fair point; I'm not for one moment suggesting that everyone in positions of power and influence is bad, far from it, but that is not to say that a small group get up to some very shady acts and conceal it with all their influence.

So it is. I misread the running time, mia culpa.

Anyway, enough of this internet trivia. I'm waiting for jivehoneyjive's extensive dossier to be published when he's finished "working with a number of parties, from victims, to careworkers, to MPs, to get to the bottom of matters". It should be a blockbuster.

The reality you refer to is manufactured.

You are Lawrence Fishburn and I claim my €5 🙄

You are beyond ridiculous. Seriously. Just listen to yourself.

No we dont the problem is you not us.
Because we know they have lied to us you assume they are lying to us every time they speak or say anything and it is all a dark conspiracy and subterfuge.
Facts dont matter as you have the internet and , as this shows, it is full of loons.
We are doomed an investigation finds its false and it is part of the cover up or they find it true and you are right. Either outcome and the "facts" support your view.

That is hugely judgemental... I could come to the conclusion that you really like to argue on the internet and have armpits that smell like a warthogs nutsack, but it wouldn't necessarily be true (would it?)

Its frankly disgusting that you keep saying this about anyone who disagrees with you and the mods are being incredibly tolerant of your distasteful abuse.

It's frankly disgusting that that is the 1st time I've ever said that and you make a point of dramatized indignation to try and gain brownie points.

you are a coward.

The reality you refer to is manufactured.

You like the comforts afforded to you by having a government protecting you from 'terrorists' even though the government encourages huge arms deals with the countries who fund terrorists and fuel extremism.

You like not having to worry that vulnerable people are being horrifically abused, because someone else will take care of it.

So be it, it's your life, but don't you dare judge mine.

but you believe any old bullshit they tell you time and again

I don't know where you got that from, I think most politicians are full of shit. However, [i]specific [/i]allegations of wrongdoing require [i]specific [/i]evidence to back them up. Just because I think Callmedave is a lying weasel who seems hell bent on shifting even more money from the poor to the rich doesn't mean we can start adopting a 'guilty until proven innocent' approach.

I could come to the conclusion that you really like to argue on the internet and have armpits that smell like a warthogs nutsack, but it wouldn't necessarily be true (would it?

It's frankly disgusting that that is the 1st time I've ever said that and you make a point of dramatized indignation to try and gain brownie points.

I don't know where you got that from, I think most politicians are full of shit. However, specific allegations of wrongdoing require specific evidence to back them up. Just because I think Callmedave is a lying weasel who seems hell bent on shifting even more money from the poor to the rich doesn't mean we can start adopting a 'guilty until proven innocent' approach.

On principle, I agree

Makes you wonder just how much piss taking people will tolerate though:

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/goodness-gracious

What if similar happened to all the evidence surrounding abuse whilst they were fannying around appointing inappropriate chairs for the inquiry?

As for first time - I would be surprised if it is the first time this page and it is not the first time this thread

Sorry old chap, you are talking utter guff; read every post I've ever written and find anything similar?

Ooh you must watch it. Compelling evidence... that maybe something happened sometime.

To be fair, I'd say that's one of the few credible pieces he's linked to. Tom Watson is one of the good guys, he's not prone to making things up.

you are talking utter guff; read every post I've ever written and find anything similar?

Cougar - Moderator

Ooh you must watch it. Compelling evidence... that maybe something happened sometime.

To be fair, I'd say that's one of the few credible pieces he's linked to. Tom Watson is one of the good guys, he's not prone to making things up.

So, throughout 7 pages of waffle, he has posted 1 credible piece.

Mods please turn him off.

Do your research, JY

I have and apparently it was your fault you attention seeking not enough wheeled aggressive tosspot 😉

So, throughout 7 pages of waffle, he has posted 1 credible piece

Everything I've posted is credible, but obviously, you're not ready for it yet.

Going by what you are prepared to believe for the time being, watch this, it is but 2 minutes long and is a real life news report by the BBC!!

Do your research, JY

I have and apparently it was your fault you attention seeking not enough wheeled aggressive tosspot

Oh crap, don't tell me aracer is a unicyclist, didn't realize such dangerous perverts were lurking among us, I really need to do my research 😆

a real life news report by the BBC!!

Hang on, I thought the BBC were part of the conspiracy?

Everything I've posted is credible

Everyone agrees rings have and do exist but this fact does not mean that everyone you have claimed does exist.

Rushing to judgement there I'd say, the BBC employ thousands of people, the vast majority of whom are good. But as anywhere, there are bad eggs...

does this include the ones that resulted in the claimants being prosecuted in court for lying or just the ones where the courts did agree with you?

That's a misuse of language; as already stated a single claimant was prosecuted, which is not grounds to disregard all the others.

JHJ,

Thanks.

Like a lot of folk here, I know my western reality is manufactured, I've read my Noam, been to Robert Fisk lectures and Patrick Cockburn Lectures I'm part way through Jeremy Scahill's Dirty Wars, I've got any number of DVDs...

I understand that Govts (and the people in them) do shitty things, and as I said, the fact there are people in positions of power who have abused children and then covered that up...not a surprise, wouldn't bet on it not being true. However, that's a world away from "They're all at it, and they routinely abuse of kids to maintain power, covered up by shadowy govt. forces in league with the church and the Masons"

It seems I'm being a touch misunderstood; I don't for a moment think they're all at it, but there is no doubt that some are and that they are in sufficient positions of power to have it covered up.

David Icke, since the 90s he has been saying child abuse is central to the control structures of the political and religious elite.

This is what you said do you still maintain it is true?

Yep, David Icke has been saying that 😉

I tried so hard not to get involved in this but...

It seems I'm being a touch misunderstood; I don't for a moment think they're all at it,

Really? Because that seems like a pretty massive step away from your original tenet that [i]"child abuse is central to the control structures of the political and religious elite."[/i]

there is no doubt that some are and that they are in sufficient positions of power to have it covered up.

I don't think anyone has ever disputed that [i]some[/i] people have used positions of power to abuse children.

Almost every case of child abuse involves some kind of "abuse of power", be that parent, relation, babysitter, teacher, celebrity or MP. That's the nature of that particular evil.

But that's pretty far from saying it is a worldwide shadowy conspiracy involving tens of thousands of co-conspirators.

To be fair to David Icke, since the 90s he has been saying child abuse is central to the control structures of the political and religious elite.

Given that the Jersey cover up and the network surrounding it implicates multiple governments and the Monarchy, with links to several other countries as well, you have to wonder

OK, lets take another look at this diagram, which would fit in with some of David Icke's theories (and which many people all over the world have researched)

[img] [/img]

As you can see, the majority of the white bricks are mostly just getting on with their lives and probably don't have a clue what that bunch of purple nasties are up to.

In a similar way to how we all live on the surface of the planet, but no-one really knows what's at the centre...

Given the 5 pages of challenges to you on this it is interesting you change tact

Of course. It's Monday morning. The nurse will have been round with his meds. 😆

Edit: oh, looks like he spat them out again.

JHJ, i don't think anyone would disagree with you about the fact that there are people in power abusing that power, but to go back over ground you seem to want to ignore. You need to show how the routine abuse of children is part of a "central control structure"... (whatever that might be)

It seems I'm being a touch misunderstood; I don't for a moment think they're all at it

That's a misuse of language; as already stated a single claimant was prosecuted, which is not grounds to disregard all the others.

Well, that's not quite right is it....

Because they [b]were [/b]all disregarded weren't they.

Because the claims were all judged to be false, and all thrown out as a hoax.

Which resulted in one of the claimants being found guilty of perjury.

Because they were all disregarded weren't they.

What, like the victims of Jimmy Savile, Cyril Smith and Nicholas Fairbairn amongst others?

Yes, [i]that[/i] Jimmy Savile:

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Anyone remember 'The White March' ?
In 1996 over a quarter of a million Belgians took the streets of Brussels in protest of the Dutroux paedophile scandal .. It would be pretty hard to argue that the state wasn't complicit in some sort of cover up .. Folk can engage in back and forth mudslinging all day but that won't make the elephant in the room disappear ..

What, like the victims of Jimmy Savile, Cyril Smith and Nicholas Fairbairn amongst others?

Nope.

Because those would be entirely different cases wouldn't they.

As in, not the one that was being discussed.

You know, the one that you brought up, where it was found to be a massive hoax and the claimant got found guilty of perjury.

You brought it up, we just looked at some facts and found out it wasn't true.

Do try and keep up.

Well, thank goodness there is the "Martial Arts Council for the protection of children against government child abuse". Where would we be without them?