Headlines - defined for David Icke

Anybody visiting the 'headlines' page on David Icke's website might well wonder where exactly they are - despite the helpful instruction - directly below the words 'Latest Headlines' it states, 'Scroll down to view headlines'.

Headlines, by definition, are lines which appear at the head of the page - hence the word, 'headline'. Couldn't be simpler.

So, following the advice to scroll down, just how far does a visitor need to go? It's very likely that David Icke does not want readers to think too much about that question as it is necessary to scroll past 14 feet (4.5 meters) of advertisements and notices (the same advertisements and notices which adorn his front page) before the first headline is reached. Even if the world's tallest man was standing upon the shoulders of the second tallest man, the so-called headlines would be below the feet of the man standing on the ground.

Once readers have arrived at the headlines they are invited to 'Refresh Frequently' as they are 'Updated throughout the day'. Is that a fact? I've been back quite regularly and never have the headlines been updated after their initial daily post.

What is even more irritating is that the page is so stuffed full of junk that embedded videos will virtually never play correctly - the video's original source having to be found in order to watch them.

It has to be the most laborious page to load - and wasting so much bandwidth loading the same array of self-publicising images every day can be extremely tedious. Someone once said that less is more. I wish somebody could get it through to David Icke that in the case of his 'headlines' page, more is quite definitely less.

David Icke's Headlines

Zeitgeist and the Venus Project

I stumbled upon the Zeitgeist Movement's Z-Day website a couple of weeks ago and discovered that there was to be an event which coincided with a visit to Perth in Scotland.

I had watched Zeitgeist and found it very interesting as would all but the die-hard fundamentalists of all religions. Earlier this year, I watched Zeitgeist: Addendum and was going along with it until it reached the part about the Venus Project. Something felt very technocratic and sterile about it.

Anyway, I watched the Activists' Orientation Video (the title gave me the creeps) and had deep reservations about it but felt that I ought to go to the event anyway - to get a measure of what other people felt. As it happened the event was merely a showing of the AOV again. On second hearing I can only say that my reaction was one of horror. Most people simply disappeared at the end but I stayed to share my concerns with the organiser who seemed to share at least a few of my reservations.

Since then I have been expecting to see the usual suspects denouncing the Zeitgeist Movement/Venus Project as a New World Order psy-op - after all, it presents Huxley's Brave New World as a utopia rather than the dystopia which Huxley attempted to portray. Incidentally, anybody who believes that Aldous Huxley was a pro-NWO eugenicist has not read his 1958 book, Brave New World Revisited.

It wasn't until a couple of days later that I found a video of the 'sold out' event in New York. I skipped to the end of the presentation of the AOV at which point there was rapturous applause (I assume that the flock were on their feet too).

Surely this can't be real? Surely these people who are apparently 'open' to the notion that humankind has been manipulated for centuries cannot seriously fall for this thinly veiled New World Order propaganda.

And then, as if any further proof were needed that something wasn't right with this picture, I found this in the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/17/nyregion/17zeitgeist.html

The tenth paragraph says:

'The former [Zeitgeist: The Movie] may be most famous for alleging that the attacks of Sept. 11 were an 'inside job' perpetrated by a power-hungry government on its witless population, a point of view that Mr. Joseph said he has recently 'moved away from.' Indeed, the second film, the focus of the event, was all but empty of such conspiratorial notions, directing its rhetoric and high production values toward posing a replacement for the evils of the banking system and a perilous economy of scarcity and debt.

Do the libertarians who oppose the New World Order really want to surrender their decision making to computers? In the AOV, this is compared to using a pocket calculator to make decisions - except that pocket calculators don't make decisions - they -er calculate.

After stating that the Earth's soil is eroding at a rate of 1% per annum earlier in the film, it later says that food will be grown by hydroponics - no irony there?

Everything will be plugged into a central computer which will monitor all resources - is there any reason to believe that people will not be regarded as resources in this context?

In summary, there was nothing in the Activists' Orientation Video which made me feel comfortable and I am deeply concerned that anybody who has had their eyes opened will think that this is the solution.

Zeitgeist: The Movie:


Zeitgeist: Addendum:


Zeitgeist Movement: Activists' Orientation Video:

The BBC and the Gaza appeal

The BBC made a controversial decision not to show the appeal by The Disasters Emergency Committee for aid to Gaza following the Israeli attacks. The BBC’s Director General, Mark Thompson stated that broadcasting the appeal ‘might jeopardise the public's confidence in the BBC's impartiality’:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7848614.stm

Well, how about this for an idea? How about the BBC produce an appeal for aid for the Israeli victims of the conflict? Broadcast both appeals in the name of ‘impartiality’. Let’s see where the public’s sympathy is.