Underground Knowledge — A discussion group discussion
This topic is about
The Biggest Secret
MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS
>
The reptilian shapeshifting elite theory (debunk, consider or believe? Or just plain laugh at it? Or...)
The reptile theory is one of the dumbest out there. Oh well, if you can make a buck, write it. Somebody will buy it. (Perhaps read too many Conan stories as a kid?)
2.2 billion Christians believe that Satan shapeshifted into a snake.1.6 billion Muslims believe in shapeshifting jinn.
488 million Buddhists believe in shapeshifting demons.
Why don't they get the flack that Icke does.....? :)
Not a bad point you make, Harry. So you're saying you're open to this theory being true?
If so, can you tell me if you know of any other authors before Icke writing about a reptilian shapeshifting elite in power?
I'm open to the idea and have never got why Icke's view has always been lambasted with so much ridicule (although, O.K - I do get it, 'cos people automatically think of 1950s B Movies and their like).What he writes about it from a spiritual perspective makes a lot of sense - i.e - there are lower frequencies of this version of Earth where alien/demons of reptile form operate.
He also mentions Carl Sagan's 'reptile brain theory': http://www.bizint.com/stoa_del_sol/co...
And Icke also mentions a lot about shamanism and how there have always been reptilian entities associated with that. Specifically, his correspondences with respected Zulu shaman Credo Mutwa:
http://www.metatech.org/wp/aliens/rep...
The thing that got everyone really riled about Icke's claims was when he said that the royals were reptilians. This came from reports from Arizona Wilder, who declared she had performed satanic like rituals for the queen and had seen them change into reptilian forms. Wilder has since renounced her statements.
Can I tell you if any other authors before Icke have written about shapeshifting reptilians? Not specifically, but the history of mythology is full of shapeshifting - often reptilian (think 'serpent') - beings, who could be said to be 'in power' in the same way that the Christian Satan is.
James wrote: "Not a bad point you make, Harry. "
Not bad? I thought it was a brilliant point I made! Heehee. ;)
The name Harry Whitewolf sounds like a shapeshifter
With regards to reptiles not being evil, Heidi, I don't think one can compare the temperament of Earthly reptile animals with 'alien intelligent reptilian humanoids' which Icke talks about. The two are not the same (if Icke's exist).And why does he think they're evil? Well, you only have to look at all the crap the world leaders (in their human form) have dumped on us! Look at the threads in this group and you'll see most powerful people are greedy and up to no good! :)
Heidi wrote: "James, I am curious why you rated the book 4 stars but said, "Unfortunately, there is no compelling evidence whatsoever to support the reptilian theory (in my opinion)." Did you give it such a high rating just because you thought it was entertaining?..."Because if I recall correctly the reptilian elite theory was only a very small part of that book. And like I said, besides that theory, I agree with quite a few other points Icke makes. The book also covered conspiracies about Diana having been killed by the elite of the UK or even the Royals, and he provided a lot more evidence to at least support that theory.
Heidi wrote: "Harry, if you read my post--you will see that most of it was offering another, and in my view, more plausible explanation as to why our rulers are so evil. You have created a straw man. You have mi..."Of course I respect your views, and yes, I read your post.
I was simply replying to: "the biggest flaw in his theory, aside from lack of evidence, is that it is based on the assumption that reptiles are evil--and I can find nothing at all to support this theory either."
I haven't misstated what you wrote. I was just saying geckos are different to alien-demon reptilian beings. Icke's opinion is not that geckos are 'evil' but that his reptilian-demons are.
Heidi, I don't really get why you think we're crossing wires here.You said: "I never asked why Icke thinks our rulers are evil. You implied that I asked that, and then you told me why."
You asked why Icke thought reptilian alien beings (who he believes are our world leaders) were evil. I responded to that. That's all. Nothing more. :)
James wrote: "Heidi wrote: "James, I am curious why you rated the book 4 stars but said, "Unfortunately, there is no compelling evidence whatsoever to support the reptilian theory (in my opinion)." Did you give ..."Yes, that makes sense--thanks for explaining. I also said that I agree with many things Icke says. He seems like a knowledgeable and intelligent guy. I think it's a shame that he's fixated on this alien reptile business because it tends to make one question his judgment about everything else he writes, when probably a LOT of it is spot on. From what little I know about it, I tend to believe that Diana's death was intentional, but I haven't done enough research to say for sure. I will say that, the more research I do on our US leaders, the more morally depraved I realize they are.
James wrote: "The name Harry Whitewolf sounds like a shapeshifter"Very funny. It does.
Heidi wrote: "James wrote: "The name Harry Whitewolf sounds like a shapeshifter"Very funny. It does."
Who knows... maybe I am....
:)
Heidi,You wrote: "Icke veers way off course by blaming avarice and greed on reptiles. Because if we study actual reptiles--the ones with reptilian DNA--we see no avarice or greed whatsoever! People have given reptiles a bum rap, but I find reptiles to be quite noble."
You wrote: "The biggest flaw in his theory, aside from lack of evidence, is that it is based on the assumption that reptiles are evil--and I can find nothing at all to support this theory either."
So I'm really not getting you in the slightest if you're not getting my very simple responses.
To repeat and summarise: Reptiles on Earth are not the same as Icke's reptilians. Icke's reptilians are bad - he thinks they're clandestinely running the show. End of.
I'm outta here.
What i don't like about Icke is some of his statements concerning Jews,that and some of the people like Jeff Rense he associates with.I think the reptile angle is ridiculous.
Lee wrote: "What i don't like about Icke is some of his statements concerning Jews,that and some of the people like Jeff Rense he associates with.I think the reptile angle is ridiculous."
What statements about Jews?
Lee wrote: "What i don't like about Icke is some of his statements concerning Jews,that and some of the people like Jeff Rense he associates with.I think the reptile angle is ridiculous."
Icke has subscribed to some of the ludicrous conspiracies about Jews that wouldn't be out of place in Nazi propaganda.Even Joseph Goebbels admitted the Protocols of the Elders of Zion were fake yet Icke accepts its tenets concerning a Jewish conspiracy.
Lee wrote: "Lee wrote: "What i don't like about Icke is some of his statements concerning Jews,that and some of the people like Jeff Rense he associates with.I think the reptile angle is ridiculous."
Icke ha..."
I've read most of Icke's books and have followed him for years. You're right that he has mentioned the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (which do seem to be bullshit), but he has NEVER ever said that there is a Jewish conspiracy.
I mean...this thread is about him believing that Reptilians actually run the show! It's one thing for him to mention Jews amongst a plethora of other types of people in his writing, but he has never once been derogatory or anti-Semitical.
I've heard plenty of allegations about Icke being an anti-Semite over the years, and they are never anything more than that: allegations. (And propaganda.) Like someone decided to claim he had a coke habit a few years back, and it became a popular myth, just because someone had said it.
One can knock Icke all they like, but he's never made any anti-Semitical statements whatsoever.
A good friend of mine once said to me: "If people hear of an old man living in a cave in India is a great guru, they'll believe it, but if they hear the same about a spotty kid called Kevin working at the local McDonalds, they'll laugh at him."And so, most people will respect and maybe believe in a Native American or an African shaman claiming that there are reptilian shapeshifters, but if David Icke says it...........
Never read or heard anything about Icke saying anything about the Jews, but am surprised he fell for the Protocols of the Elders of Zion hoaxed document - a document that's been repeatedly proven to be a fabrication created by anti-Semites since about 1921.But what has Icke specifically said that's anti-Semitic. If he has stated such a thing, then there should be quotes available. Please supply if you have them.
I know very little about Icke and/or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (allegedly hoaxed) documents. However it seems to me, one of the most successful tactics a confabulator could use is to eschew disdain upon the ideas he most wants people to avoid looking into...
So if Goebbels said that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is 'fake' ... and he was SUCH a RELIABLE informant, one that would NEVER lie about secret societies or groups or agendas... then of course, we must believe him.
As for Icke - someone is running the show and it certainly isn't the likes of Hillary, Obama or G.W. If we can believe that there is a vast conspiracy running the government, if we can believe that there are secret space programs, then is it really such a stretch to say that there's more than one type of alien involved and at least one of those types are reptilian in nature? Folklore and mythology from *every* major ancient culture supports the idea.
Shannon wrote: "I know very little about Icke and/or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (allegedly hoaxed) documents. ..."Every mainstream historian since 1921 has said the Protocols are fabricated and the only people saying otherwise are those with an agenda (i.e. an anti-Semitic agenda). So allegedly is perhaps not the best way to describe expert analysis and the universal consensus (outside of fascist groups) about this document.
Check this out from Wikipedia:
The Protocols is a fabricated document purporting to be factual. Textual evidence shows that it could not have been produced prior to 1901. It is notable that the title of Sergei Nilus's widely distributed edition contains the dates "1902–1903", and it is likely that the document was actually written at this time in Russia, despite Nilus' attempt to cover this up by inserting French-sounding words into his edition.[2] Cesare G. De Michelis argues that it was manufactured in the months after a Russian Zionist congress in September 1902, and that it was originally a parody of Jewish idealism meant for internal circulation among antisemites until it was decided to clean it up and publish it as if it were real. Self-contradictions in various testimonies show that the individuals involved—including the text's initial publisher, Pavel Krushevan—purposefully obscured the origins of the text and lied about it in the decades afterwards.[3]
If the placement of the forgery in 1902–1903 Russia is correct, then it was written at the beginning of the anti-Jewish pogroms in the Russian Empire, in which thousands of Jews died or fled the country. Many of the people whom De Michelis suspects of involvement in the forgery were directly responsible for inciting the pogroms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pro...
alas, the poor lizard folks get buried in more minutia. The concept of Lizard Control most likely should be put to bed.
David wrote: "alas, the poor lizard folks get buried in more minutia. The concept of Lizard Control most likely should be put to bed."But think of all the humor that can be generated out of this concept, David!
I mean, the term The Lizard Elite is hilarious, you must admit :)
I mean, if humanity is subservient to lizards, then we are in even more trouble than we first thought, don't you think?!
I have known some real snakes in the grass in my time
David wrote: "I have known some real snakes in the grass in my time"Ha!
David wrote: "I have known some real snakes in the grass in my time"Very good. :)
With regards to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, if memory serves correct, I seem to remember Icke talking about it as part of the wider conspiracy. Yes, the Protocols are fake, but the reason for them being faked in the first place can be seen as part of a wider conspiracy. I seem to remember Icke referenced the publication in terms of it coming out of the long line of face-changing secret societies.I must have read dozens of books that mention the Protocols (by non-anti-Semitic authors) alongside such things as Freemasonry secrets and all that jazz - most notably in the renowned Holy Blood Holy Grail book. (The authors of which, incidentally, I seem to remember being contacted by someone who claimed to work for the Priory of Sion.)
It is popularly believed that Abbe Barruel who originally formed the Freemasons was a major force behind publishing the Protocols.
What everyone can agree on is that the Protocols are anti-Semitic writings targetting Jews, and that the idea of a Jewish conspiracy is utter tosh.
But anyway, back to those geckos....
James wrote: "Never read or heard anything about Icke saying anything about the Jews, but am surprised he fell for the Protocols of the Elders of Zion hoaxed document - a document that's been repeatedly proven t..."Here are some quotes from his work at this link
http://www.publiceye.org/Icke/Ickequo...
"I strongly believe that a small Jewish clique which has contempt for the mass of Jewish people worked with non-Jews to create the First World War, the Russian Revolution, and the Second World War. This Jewish/non-Jewish Elite used the First World War to secure the Balfour Declaration and the principle of the Jewish State of Israel (for which, given the genetic history of most Jewish people, there is absolutely no justification on historical grounds or any other). They then dominated the Versailles Peace Conference and created the circumstances which made the Second World War inevitable. They financed Hitler to power in 1933 and made the funds available for his rearmament."
"...Why do we play a part in suppressing alternative information to the official line of the Second World War? How is it right that while this fierce suppression goes on, free copies of the Spielberg film, Schindler's List, are given to schools to indoctrinate children with the unchallenged version of events. And why do we, who say we oppose tyranny and demand freedom of speech, allow people to go to prison and be vilified, and magazines to be closed down on the spot, for suggesting another version of history."
Speaking for myself and judging by his support for Ernst Zundel,his appearance on the Jeff Rense show (a man who put a birthday tribute to Adolf Hitler on his website and supports David Duke) I think Icke is a very twisted individual
Lee, Those are disturbing comments by Icke.I read some of his books in the 90s, but never realized he believed in idiotic "jooz control the world" conspiracy theories.
And why on Earth say that about Schindler's List?? A film that basically only shows the Holocaust. Worrying that Icke calls that film "indoctrination".
To be honest I always dismissed Icke as a bit of a crank due to the reptilian stuff but he has drifted into accepting some of the same ideology of the various neo nazi and holocaust denier community.I am very uncomfortable on some of the positions he is taking and people who he supports.
And also from that same page of Icke quotes you linked:"In the very late 1800's, a controversial document came to light called the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion". I call them the Illuminati Protocols, and I quote many extracts from them in The Robots' Rebellion. Some say they were a forgery made public only to discredit Jews, and I use the term "Illuminati Protocols" to get away from the Jewish emphasis. If they were a forgery, something that is quite possible, what were they a forgery of, and by whom?"
"My use of extracts from the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" was too much for political purity to take. It didn't matter that I had emphasised, as I do in this book, that this is not a plot by Jewish people; it didn't matter that I renamed them the "Illuminati Protocols" for the specific reason of getting away from their association with Jewish people; it didn't matter that these Protocols, which came to light in the late 1800's, contain details of the very plan of manipulation which has provably unfolded through the twentieth century."
Having said that, I can see why some of the quotes on that site could be seen as worrying to some, and I (genuinely) thank you for posting them Lee. But I still don't think that just 'cos someone says 'There are some Jews involved in this conspiracy' it doesn't mean that they are an anti-Semite, as Icke goes to pains to explain that his mention of a few Jewish individuals is not the same as a big Jewish Conspiracy. It's simply in context of the wider conspiracy. (And he was wrong to put so much emphasis on the Protocols, just as many other conspiracy investigators did in the '70s/'80s/'90s.)
But I won't bang on about this sensitive issue any more.
Icke talks of love not hate.
Re Icke, it's pretty simple: A) If you have a notorious anti-Semitic forgery that's been used by some of the worst criminals in history to support some of the worst genocides in history to manipulate paranoid, conspiratorial and racist minds, then obviously the answer is to not start using that book to support any other theories. At the very least, it's just plain strange. But note I'm not saying Icke is definitely an anti-Semite as I haven't read enough of his material...just saying it's very weird that he'd even talk about that very obvious forgery and historically painful book.
B) When you have a historical movie like Schindler's List, that's documentary-like on the Holocaust, you do not usually call that propaganda or imply it's brainwashing unless you are a Holocaust denier. Now again, note I'm not saying Icke is one, but it is very odd to make such a statement about that film. At the very least, he is extremely insensitive and unaware, at worst he does perhaps seem to be secretly harboring anti-Semitic beliefs (even if he doesn't view them as such) or else revisionist ideas about WW2 history...
Anyway, this topic is getting a bit derailed off-topic with anti-Semitism, so let's get back to the reptiles and whether you guys have seen any human-lizards lately :)
Meanwhile, feel free to check out this section of the group if you want to post more on WW2 and the Holocaust/anti-Semitism: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/group...
I'm in Krakow in December & will visit Auschwitz & walk the Schindler's area of the city.Appropriate, my birthdate is Holocaust Memorial Day too.
You know, all this talk about 'shape shifting lizards' adopting the form of humans to control the population really is the biggest load of hogwash. Mind you, having said that, you never see Donald Trump and a crocodile in the same room at the same time.....makes you think.......
To get back to the reptilian theory once again.has Icke ever produced any hard evidence for any of it?
James wrote: "Shannon wrote: "I know very little about Icke and/or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (allegedly hoaxed) documents. ..."Every mainstream historian since 1921 has said the Protocols are fabrica..."
You do realize that Wikipedia will let almost anyone modify pages, right? It's not an unbiased source of information for anything. I am sure most people do their best to update pages with information that is correct to their knowledge but let's be honest... if you are an elite member of a secret society that wants to keep said secret society's agendas hidden or at least obscured, would you let the 'truth' be known in an unbiased way on any website, much less Wikipedia? No, you wouldn't, and neither would I. Instead, to defend my position and that of my faction I would register for Wikipedia myself and obfuscate, obfuscate, obfuscate.
So that being said, I love Wikipedia and read it often. I just take what I read there with the same dose of salt I use anywhere else.
It's interesting though that the only part of my argument you quoted was in regards to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion...perhaps you are a secret society member yourself? ;-) It seems like the discussion was supposed to be focusing on whether or not Reptilian Elite exist. I think we are getting off track!
Um, yeah I realize that, and I thought everyone knew that about Wikipedia.In this instance, what Wiki is reporting about The Protocols is the view of every historian and expert (besides fascist or anti-Semitic ones) since about 1921.
Sorry, but the Protocols are a very obvious forgery inclusive of all the usual anti-Semitic claptrap (the Jooz control the world etc) that were floating around in the early 20th Century...
I am not an authority on Icke, but, from what little I have read of his work, through the years--I agree that MOST of what he says seems to be very well researched, and either true, mostly true, probably true, or contains more than a kernel of truth. He seems to be an intelligent guy who wants the truth exposed--who wants the world to be a better place. But, for some reason, he went off-course with this bizarre reptile theory. No one who believes it has ever supplied me with a scintilla of evidence, or even a decent argument. They always say that if you don't believe the reptile theory it is because you don't know how truly evil these people are. (That is, they create a straw man.) That is complete nonsense--and they have nothing to back that up. Millions of people are totally aware of the extent of the evil--hundreds of thousands of people are researching, discussing, exposing, and reporting on it every single day--they just aren't blaming it on alien lizards. The reptile-people theorists need to stop blaming imaginary monsters and admit the cold hard truth--that sadly, tragically OUR own species is capable of atrocious and truly barbaric and degenerate evil. In order to prove that an alien species is always the cause of this extreme evil, they would first need to prove that HUMANS cannot be that evil. The fact that our rulers are often extremely evil no more proves they are alien reptiles than it proves that they are shapeshifting panda bears. It may be FUN to think of these creeps as giant lizards, and it IS hard to believe that such soul-less creatures are human, but, as I said before, it makes no sense anyway, since reptiles are no more evil than panda bears. The counterargument is, "Well, our earthly reptiles are not evil at all, but these shapeshifting reptiles ARE a DIFFERENT kind of reptile--the evil kind." And what do we know about evil alien reptiles? Is there ANY proof that such a species exists, let alone they are shapeshifters among us? In my experience, and from all my years of research, the only evil animal in existence, throughout earth's history, is and has only ever been homo sapiens--and there seems to be no depth of evil that we cannot sink to. ALL other animals are not motivated by vengeance or greed--they don't kill or hurt others for pleasure. (The prerogative to follow God and be MORE than human guarantees the free will to reject God and be less than human.) Believing that these evil rulers MUST be from a reptilian non-human race--because they are so evil makes much less sense than saying, "Because they are SO evil, they MUST be human." If there were ANY evidence AT ALL to support their being alien reptiles--for example, if we found out that they had reptilian DNA--or that they were cold-blooded . . . or we caught the Queen on film--with a very long tongue catching flies---then I would take this seriously. (Miley Cyrus MAY have an alien-lizard tongue.) But, as some of us have already said--it's a real shame, because Icke has the courage to research and expose highly controversial--politically incorrect facts and views--he goes into territory that few others dare to enter. I tend to think that most of what he says should be considered very seriously--far more seriously than anything you read on Wikipedia or anything written by mainstream researchers or historians--most of whom have been drinking the Cool-aid, from what I can see. But it's just so hard to even read what he writes--due to his ludicrous lizard-leanings.
I have trouble with David Icke's views. A lot of what he says rings true but there is an equal amount of stuff that sounds crazy.If you take the reptilian thing as metaphorical or symbolic, I might go along. There's a lot of stuff in our collective unconscious about reptiles. In the west it's largely negative but in the east it's the opposite. Dragons bring luck and nagas are teachers.
Since someone mentioned Holy Blood, Holy Grail, I have to give my two cents. It's a fascinating read but the authors were not terribly rigorous about checking their sources. Once they latched on to their story, it seems confirmation bias took over. Sadly, many books in the underground knowledge area suffer from the same failing.
Shannon wrote: "James wrote: "Shannon wrote: "I know very little about Icke and/or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (allegedly hoaxed) documents. ..."Every mainstream historian since 1921 has said the Protoco..."
Many topics are closed on wiki so only special people (gov) an change them..
On the topic of lizards.. consider the egyptian tales of one of their gods, same in sumeria.. and what have the elite been up to.. meticulous searching out toms and sites, closed of for every one else, acquiring artefacts and tablets. Add to that their cloning and gmo created organisms that started in the seventies. They have a way of applying the devine rule of fair notice by making a obscure or exaggerated movie so people think it's just bogus. But look back to when it started to be a topic.. it was with the series V. What hapened prior to that?there was a retrieval from antarctica, claimed to be a highly dangerous pathogen that had defrosted,it was brought to Dulche airbase..the president was flewn in, that says to me, it wasnt a pathogen.. no way they would have exposed a president in that way...
Every single one on the retrieval team died within a year from "accidents"..
These might be not connected but it stands to be weighted in..
Harry wrote: "And also from that same page of Icke quotes you linked:"In the very late 1800's, a controversial document came to light called the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion". I call them the Illuminati Pr..."
What gives them merit is that Rothschild was one of the named ones, and there were serious attempts to prevent it from being printed
Harry wrote: "I'm open to the idea and have never got why Icke's view has always been lambasted with so much ridicule (although, O.K - I do get it, 'cos people automatically think of 1950s B Movies and their lik..."Go search on putin shaking hands with the queen... 😉
That's totally incorrect re the conclusively-proven-to-be forged Protocols, Anna B.They were printed/published extensively throughout the Middle East/Europe/America in the early-mid 20th Century. They were almost bestselling books (such was the popularity of hating/fearing Jews during that time).
The highly anti-Semitic American industrialist Henry Ford, for example, also published the Protocols. The Germans published the Protocols and sold the crap throughout Europe and even made them compulsory reading at schools to brainwash German school children.
I was refering to the original manuscript not the later one..
Its a forgery on a forgery but behind it..The direct predecessor of the Protocols can be found in the pamphlet "Dialogues in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu," published by the non-Jewish French satirist Maurice Joly in 1864
which make no mention of the Jews, Joly attacked the political ambitions of the emperor Napoleon III using the imagery of a diabolical plot in Hell. The "Dialogues" were caught by the French authorities soon after their publication and Joly was tried and sentenced to prison for his pamphlet.
Joly's "Dialogues," while intended as a political satire, soon fell into the hands of a German antisemite named Hermann Goedsche writing under the name os Sir John Retcliffe. Goedsche was a postal clerk and a spy for the Prussian secret police. He had been forced to leave the postal work due to his part in forging evidence in the prosecution against the Democratic leader Benedict Waldeck in 1849. Goedsche adapted Joly's "Dialogues" into a mythical tale of a Jewish conspiracy as part of a series of novels entitled "Biarritz," which appeared in 1868. In a chapter called "The Jewish Cemetery in Prague and the Council of Representatives of the Twelve Tribes of Israel," he spins the fantasy of a secret centennial rabbinical conference which meets at midnight and whose purpose is to review the past hundred years and to make plans for the next century.
Goedsche's plagiary of Joly's "Dialogues" soon found its way to Russia. It was translated into Russian in 1872, and a consolidation
of the "council of representatives" under the name "Rabbi's Speech" appeared in Russian in 1891. These works no doubt furnished the Russian secret police (Okhrana) with a means with which to strengthen the position of the weak Czar Nicholas II and discredit the reforms of
the liberals who sympathized with the Jews. During the Dreyfus case of 1893-1895, agents of the Okhrana in Paris redacted the earlier works
of Joly and Goedsche into a new edition which they called the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion". The manuscript of the Protocols was brought
to Russia in 1895 and was printed privately in 1897.
The Protocols did not become public until 1905, when Russia's
defeat in the Russo-Japanese War was followed by the Revolution in the same year, leading to the promulgation of a constitution and institution of the Duma. In the wake of these events, the reactionary "Union of
the Russian Nation" or Black Hundreds organization sought to incite popular feeling against the Jews, who they blamed for the Revolution
and the Constitution. To this end they used the Protocols, which
was first published in a public edition by the mystic priest Sergius Nilus in 1905. The Protocols were part of propaganda campaign which accompanied the pogroms of 1905 inspired by the Okhrana. A variant
text of the Protocols was published by George Butmi in 1906 and again
in 1907. The edition of 1906 was found among the Czar's collection,
even though he had already recognized the work as a forgery. In his later editions, Nilus claimed that the Protocols had been read
secretly at the First Zionist Congress at Basle in 1897, while
Butmi in his edition wrote that they had no connection with the
new Zionist movement, but rather were part of the Masonic conspiracy.
In the civil war following the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917,
the reactionary White Armies made extensive use of the Protocols
to incite widespread slaughters of Jews. At the same time, Russian emigrants brought the Protocols to western Europe, where the Nilus edition served as the basis for many translations, starting in 1920. Just after its appearance in London in 1920, Lucien Wolf exposed the Protocols as a plagiary of the earlier work of Joly and Goedsche, in
a pamphlet of the Jewish Board of Deputies. The following year, in 1921, the story of the forgery was published in a series of articles
in the London Times by Philip Grave, the paper's correspondent in Constantinople. A whole book documenting the forgery was also published in the same year in America by Herman Bernstein. Nevertheless, the Protocols continued to circulate widely. They were even sponsored by Henry Ford in the United States until 1927, and formed an important part of the Nazis' justification of genocide of the Jews in World
War II.
Prior to that.. and change jewish to kazarian, cause that was the original topic, and it was rgeir world domination plans..
The proven forgeries relate to all versions and all versions were published widely from the get-go.They have been debunked beyond all reasonable doubt since 1921. Period.
Sometimes it is really good to research alternative theories, but when it comes to certain ideas (e.g. The history of the Jews), it can be very misleading and even dangerous to read alternative theories without first familiarising oneself with mainstream historians.
Underground Knowledge — A discussion group
Books mentioned in this topic
Acupuncture of The Mind (other topics)Acupuncture of The Mind (other topics)
Acupuncture of The Mind (other topics)
The Biggest Secret: The book that will change the World (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
Billy Corgan (other topics)Howard Stern (other topics)
Joe Rogan (other topics)
David Icke (other topics)
Icke's book The Biggest Secret: The book that will change the World was the one that brought this theory into the mainstream, albeit due to ridicule of Icke.
If nothing else, this theory is good for a laugh.
Unfortunately, there is no compelling evidence whatsoever to support the reptilian theory (in my opinion). I actually think Icke is right about some other theories, but in this instance I suspect he's done some shoddy research or has been mislead by others claiming to know about reptilian lizard people amongst us...
But what do others think?
Am I wrong?
I guess if nothing else, we can probably all agree the world's politicians don't seem to act like humans...or that humane!