I dont agree with the different genetic empathy thing.

For one i think the law, the risk of consequence, being put in a cage is a big reason why more people who arent 'bloodline' do not behave in certain ways. It is in a lot of people, they just dont act out due to self preservation. Of course that doesnt apply to those who invade entire countries, they are above the 'law', they are the law, no getting put in a cage for them.

And what about the soldiers and so on, military personnel who actually carry out the tasks, iz they all bloodline too?

It does add credance to Mr Icke's "us and them" reptilian bloodline theory if he can sell that angle about 'them' being different though so i understand why he says it.

Icke does nothing but pull things out of his arse.
Never an ounce of empirical evidence for his theories.

If there is a genetic difference publish a peer reviewed paper demonstrating that.
Twitching your shoulder and muttering in a whiney brum accent is not enough to convince rational people.

feather wrote:
I think you are onto something there! But we need a gameplan.

Just brainstorming here to get the ball rolling....

Who was that guy who kept getting into Buckingham Palace? He has some skills, perhaps we can get him to get some hairs out of liz's shower drain.

Either that or we can get to the cleaners at EL Rothschilds offices, and see if they can safely scan Evelyns desk for a stray hair next time he has gone to India.

Because according to Mr. Icke, the 'Windsors' and Red Shields are reptilian (including of course Hitler, the most famous Rothschild)

novum wrote:
I remember this guy, A bit simple, kept getting into Buck house with possible ill intentions towards Mrs Queen but she kept him in check.
Charles Windsor I think his name is. (Windsor is of course an alias).

More to be pitied than scolded poor lad. Has a kid who's apparently a cuckoo in the nest as well.
Nae luck chuck.

novum wrote:
I'm curious to hear more peoples responses to this post.

feather wrote:
This.

They're psychos, simple as and there's plenty of them, far more than many ppl realise imho.
Psychos gravitate towards the authoritarian roles in society and are often recruited by other psychos too :p

This is the way the world works, the monetary paradigm is what allows it to happen and simply reinforces it.

There is nothing else to it. No mystery, no aliens, no lizards, just fuckwittery on a grand scale.

Anyone else with an opinion on the lizard/different DNA thing?

The lizard thing is intriguing, an interesting theory, other dimensions and that, but it's just a theory, I can come up with theories, anyone can, it doesn't mean they're facts, no matter how plausible they sound. The danger lies in people who treat theories as facts.

A word about the psychos... is psychopathy genetic? If the Royal families of the world are running the show, how can all of them be psychopaths?

Surely it's no longer just a matter of opinion.

The facilities now exist to demonstrate differences in genetics, if they are present.
If you confidently make a claim it's down to you to publish your evidence justifying that claim.

feather wrote:
True, however...

Icke would perhaps just claim the reptilians mask it somehow or something.

novum wrote: Then he would have to demonstrate just how he overcame that masking to reach his conclusion(s).

Evidence = a bit of an unforgiving bastard.

novum wrote:
He might say something like the men in the dark suits are like cars, and a dna test on the car would only prove the existence of the car, but if something else is in the driving seat from a different plane of reality, outside of our tiny frequency range etc etc.

feather wrote:
And when you request said evidence he may storm off a la Jesse Ventura interview.

Then diss you on his headlines page and say you dont get it.

novum wrote: To which I would respond that I don't get it because he can't supply it.

See also hollow moon/spaceship claim.
Supporting evidence is ..........?

In the Bestival interview, someone shouted "why lizards?" (or reptiles or whatever), to which Icke replied "why not?". He once said about the moon "why is it so big?", and I thought "why not?". Is there any scientific evidence that says the moon, any moon, can't be that size?

irrepressible wrote:
In regards to the reptile thing well his presentations draw from mythology and ancient cultures.

Thing is, the lizard/serpent/reptile/dragon is by far not the only creature portrayed in mythology.

So why not a lionoid, or eagle person, etc etc... i mean eagles can be sadistic fucks, ever seen them go at a snake for example

As for lions, well, i wouldnt want to be a gazelle.

I must admit the moon does have me a bit fucked though Being the same size as the sun as viewed from earth and all.

Fucking Canadians still under the Sceptre... ( Did oioioi ever live in )

novum wrote:
Interdimensional Eaglelions

As for the moon being the same size as the sun when viewed from the earth... that's probably just a nice bit of precision engineering by creation

irrepressible wrote:
Well the city of london features lions in its symbolism, and the lion features in many places also in things to do with the royal families.

And the eagle (and falcon) is prevalent too in egyptian/horus/ra symbolism that features on countries seals and company logos among other places.

So why not eaglelions.