From: Dylan Sunter (dylan.sunter@fisystem.com)
Date: Mon Feb 11 2002 - 06:20:10 MST
LOL. Have you trimmed your wings today Richard?
Appreciated what you are saying. Actually, on the subject of Globalisation,
I have not read the books you suggest, although I have taken interest in
Thomas Friedman work (especially his book "the lexus and the olive tree"
which although packed full of colourful but seemingly pointless terms such
as the "golden straighjacket" and "the electronic herd", is a bloody
fascinating read).
Yes, I agree that Icke is making a career for himself based in a large sense
on unsubstantiated evidence. And I also accept that some of his points are
trite and intellectually substandard in part. But will that stop interest in
certain principles brought up? Perhaps in his way he is making a
single-handed stand against capitalism, the world economy, and most
definately western "democracy" and this isnt new. His tactics are not new,
and his manner of delivery is not new. Certainly, his website looks like its
been stuck together with superglue, and some of his contributors have the
most dubious credentials. I think I got interested in him when I first read
the books of Whitley Streiber, a US hack who claims he has been visited by
and experimented on by aliens for the best part of his life.
People like these certainly make an interesting show of it all, but can you
believe it? THe analogy of the X-files I made earlier stands, and remember
fox Mulders poster "I WANT TO BELIEVE" ? I think this sums it up, and
perhaps appeals to my anti-government views...I know I am like many
incapable of finding a great deal the government (most governments, not
necessarily just the UK govt.) does to be positive, so perhaps in this way,
to believe in the great conspiracy is as much a dogma as any other.
But, I still feel loathed to dismiss out of hand that which cannot be any
more disproved than proven. In my personal opinion, there is a lot more to
the heirarchy of the world than meets the eye. Neither Icke, nor anyone else
has created this, only my own feelings and understandings, but certainly
they provide food for thought and interesting topics to research. Perhaps in
the future, Oxford will churn out Graduates in Conspiracy Theory but they
will probably only go on to work for the BBC.
Dylan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------
Advice to systems administrators number 21:
When users say "no I didn't do anything like that", they actually mean "Yes,
I broke it and I want you to fix it."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com]On Behalf
Of Richard Ridge
Sent: 08 February 2002 17:32
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: RE: virus: Response to Joe Dees. "Is the US a Rogue Nation?"
> naturally it was a tenous link....but one which certainly some
> people regard
> as not just the benign ravings of a complete loony: apparently he was
> recently attacked by ADL members with eggs at a book-signing in the US (I
> cant confirm this as anything other than heresay evidence, can anyone
> else?).
There was a documentary on the subject, which followed all of said
proceedings in considerable detail. He was indeed attacked in that manner by
an ADL member dressed up as a giant lizard (in Canada though). It was
probably one of the funniest things I have ever seen, though the faces of
two conspiracy theorists when confronted with a set of bilderberg minutes
runs it close (said minutes showed a set of tedious economics seminars
presented by people like the CEO of Tescos).
> However, David Icke, whilst he might be regarded as a nutter for his
> theories on 9 foot shapeshifting extraterrestrial reptiles,
> certainly raises
> an awful lot of interesting points about Globalisation,
They are not interesting in any way - trite and cliched would be more
accurate descriptions. If you want to read about globalisation I suggest On
the Edge, by Will Hutton and Anthony Giddens, both of whom have the
advantage of not being mad.
> world domination by
> a group (or groups) who are referred to as the Illuminati, Bloodline
> connections between world leaders and prominent figures in government and
> commerce and Secret societies & conspiracy theories.
I would respectfully suggest that the one area the ADL were correct was the
Nazis did create prejudice through conspiracy theory - suggesting that jews
controlled business, government and so on. The same does apply to most
conspiracy theories, though it is more usual now to see corporations as the
power behind the throne. The problem is that both variants cited the same
sort of 'evidence' which was equally convincing in either case.
> However, I do think that the notion of a global illuminati
> which has persisted in at least one form throughout many ages is
> very much a possibility, especially when one begins to examine the roles
of secret
> societies in history, from La Prieure Du Sion to modern Masonic Lodges.
This conversation begins to remind me of a Doctor Who episode, where a
fanatical druid has just informed the doctor that the wrath of the goddess
is to be visited upon him. The Doctor replies that he rather doubts the
antiquity of the druids and had always presumed that John Aubrey had made it
all up as a joke. He loved a good joke, did old John... With that in mind I
would suggest you read Serendipities: Language and Lunacy, by Umberto Eco,
for an explanation of who it was cracking the joke in this case.
>And he may well be
> right...the question is, how do you prove it?
You do not prove it, as indeed, you cannot prove it. The 'theories' he
presents are no more capable of substantiation than the existence of the
gods, which means that all he has to offer is Pascal's wager without the
attendant benefits of a possible afterlife. If we refuse to accept that gods
exist without some form of evidence to demonstrate that to be the case,
might I ask why we should pay any more attention to Icke? It is possible,
but then so are leprechauns. As such, the only reason to entertain it, even
as a possibility, is because we wish to believe it ("even a technologist
such as myself likes to believe that the world is a little stranger than it
appears"). Which is far from ideal.
Above all, given that the hypothesis is that of Mr Icke, is to has to be
observed that the onus is on him to provide evidence for his assertions, not
supposition and speculation.
> My view is that david Icke is not a complete nutter.
I would refer you to the article wherein he asserted that anyone who had
ever attended Oxbridge was a lizard. On that basis, you are currently
engaged in a conversation with a very large komodo dragon typing at a
keyboard.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:42 MDT