Dubstepforum.com

Pedro Sánchez wrote:

kingldub wrote:

Pedro Sánchez wrote:Everyone who donates should receive a free psychiatric evaluation to assess their mental stability...

As opposed to those that willingly support the BBC by paying the TV license?

Is that the only alternative to Ikes view?

Did I say it was then?

kingldub wrote:

Pedro Sánchez wrote:

kingldub wrote:

Pedro Sánchez wrote:Everyone who donates should receive a free psychiatric evaluation to assess their mental stability...

As opposed to those that willingly support the BBC by paying the TV license?

Is that the only alternative to Ikes view?

Did I say it was then?

Ignore, I read it wrong mate

appealing to 'common sense 'deserves a slap at the best of times

Pistonsbeneath wrote:Magma

Don't you think lots of people welcome the opportunity to help?

Absolutely; the same way lots of people welcome the opportunity to donate to missionaries and political parties. There are varying levels of waste when it comes to money, but the idea that a profit-making venture like a commercial TV station should appeal to people for donations as if it's a charity is a bit offensive to me, yeah.

If they were offering any kind of profit-share I wouldn't have a problem in the slightest; but this strikes me as passing the collection plate around the cheap seats. The people that generally buy into Icke's schtick are young, poor and likely to already feel alienated from society - giving them something to believe to make them feel better about having no stake in society, I don't really have a problem with - it's just the same as church religion which I hold a veiled respect for - what I do have a problem with is encouraging them to spend money on feeling better.

David Icke's TV Channel won't achieve anyone's "freedom" just like putting a tenner in the collection plate won't cure anyone's cancer. Even if all the conspiracy theories he promotes are true, setting David Icke up as an Alternative TV Mogul (I imagine his dream since he was a disaffected BBC presenter) will only truly benefit... David Icke. Rupert Murdoch could espouse exactly the same motivations for wanting to spread information to the people - I wouldn't believe him either though.

In the day and age of Freedom of Information across the Internet, the idea that Icke (or anyone) want to go onto broadcast television for anything other than profit is pretty laughable - he can currently reach a global audience of people that don't need to own a TV License and is already known about by just about anyone even vaguely likely to be interested (so much so he's a running joke on many forums) - the only thing he's missing is being able to sell advert breaks to the people he claims to hate.... and to break into a more mainstream level of fame, something he hasn't really been afforded since he appeared on Terry Wogan and told the country he was the Son of God.

Obama did the same thing and he's the president

Yep, I agree. Personally I think the tax payer should cover a set allowance for political campaigns; most UK Labour donors see absolutely no benefit for their outlay and, especially in America, the ability of lobbyists to effectively buy elections is deeply disturbing.

Two wrongs don't make a right. If Icke wants to be seen as different to the Politricksters then he needs to actually be different.

I think your views are extremely presumptuous and based on your dislike of what he has to say...why must he be just doing it for the money?

For the reasons I stated above. I do dislike the way Icke takes advantage of the disaffected, but I'd never want him shut down. If he was truly in it for the spread of information he'd approach it on a non-profit basis like Julian Assange or Jimmy Wales. For a man that's obsessed with following trails of money, he's created an extremely damning one for himself.

If you think that basing my views off everything I've written here is "presumptuous" then I'm not quite sure what presumptuous means. I've done a LOT of research into Icke since I was a wide-eyed 15 year old conspiracy theorist.

Surely the reasons he has had to do what he does throughout his life can't automatically be thought of doing it for the money...he above all else wants to get a message out that you do not agree with...there are more convenient ways to make money than hold very controversial views and be hated by lots of people

So let's have a look at what he's been up to then...

Goalkeeper for Sheffield Wednesday (or whoever it was) - mainstream fame and money

Reporter for various newspapers, radio stations and finally the BBC - mainstream fame, money, influence

Conspiracy theory author - cult fame, money, spread of information

Conspiracy theory webmaster - cult fame, spread of information

Wembley Stadium Sellout Speaker - cult fame, money, spread of information

TV Mogul - mainstream fame, money, spread of information

I can't think of a single thing he's done since he embarked on becoming a celebrity that haven't involved trying to become a household name and line his own pockets with the lint from yours.

"Follow the money" - why does this apply to everyone but himself?

Pedro Sánchez wrote:David Icke may have credible points to make but even a broken clock appears correct twice a day.

imami wrote:where's hackman

lol

Magma killed it

NiGHTS-24 wrote:Magma killed it

He's a member of the One Direction fan club though, not to be trusted.

Continue to mock, I stand by my views regardless & i'll leave you to yours...

Magma is extremely well educated and can articulate probably better than anyone here but this doesn't mean what he is saying is necessarily correct...it just means he is able to articulate it well...

Maybe If I was more articulate than I am I would be able to sway you Nights-24.

To me, your argument/viewpoint lost all credibility when you said that one direction was some kind of government conspiracy loool

Didn't specifically say government conspiracy and also you slated me before I posted that so really you just wanted another excuse to mention it.

It's cool I get the need people have to vent...use me as your conspiracy theorist to vent upon by all means.

How much have you donated to Icke?

Nothing, I am unemployed and saving as much money as possible.

I am prepping for interviews most of the time I'm on here

With the whole 1D thing, surely that name was given to them before they were HUGE, would of been a bit of a gamble on the goverment's behalf if they never achived the success that they now have

justin beiber
justin beib
justin be
justin
just
ju
j
9
91
911

Hibbie wrote:With the whole 1D thing, surely that name was given to them before they were HUGE, would of been a bit of a gamble on the goverment's behalf if they never achived the success that they now have

Their success was entirely engineered, you don't believe that?

They are the biggest thing ever I think now...why? there is no good reason why they should be that much bigger than tons of other guff aimed at little girls...engineered

My girlfriend works in that industry, they have a list at the beginning of the year about bands/singers who are going to blow up big, with the month its going to happen. Its all orchestrated to the nth degree.


Disclosure are on that list for this year btw.

Disclosure's success has been off key to me...

anyway I believe these things stand by them and do not wish to argue further...I was foolish to think snh wouldn't react in this way to this thread

Pistonsbeneath wrote:

Hibbie wrote:With the whole 1D thing, surely that name was given to them before they were HUGE, would of been a bit of a gamble on the goverment's behalf if they never achived the success that they now have

Their success was entirely engineered, you don't believe that?

They are the biggest thing ever I think now...why? there is no good reason why they should be that much bigger than tons of other guff aimed at little girls...engineered

I went into a bookstore and noticed they have at least 10 biographies already too. I'm with you here. Its kinda like the Party Posse

Lye Form wrote:My girlfriend works in that industry, they have a list at the beginning of the year about bands/singers who are going to blow up big, with the month its going to happen. Its all orchestrated to the nth degree.


Disclosure are on that list for this year btw.

I can also confirm this, one example I can give, a vocalist I used to work with was approached by a management firm that was shopping acts to Simon Cowell (well his A&R team) and promised her a fast track onto the show, she received the contract and it basically waived all her performing rights, the ability to sell her music until they had decided they to release her from contract and insisted she removed all her social network accounts so they could be replaced by the management.

i have no doubt they are a completely engineered success, but i don't see what that has to do with the government wanting to introduce I.D cards and microchips or whatever pistons was saying