• Well done David Icke - but why put a toad in the punch bowl?

    Letter to David Icke from Zahir Ebrahim
    21 January 2011


    The only person in the West today, it seems to me, who dares to go to the “WHY” of Palestine's plight accurately, and connects it properly to the agenda for world government, laying them both correctly at the doorstep of the bankster oligarchy controlling the world's governments from behind the scene, specifically the House of Rothschild, is this British fellow David Icke.

    And this gentleman too makes sure, in the same breadth, that he is not taken too seriously, by also uttering some outlandish and entertaining sci-fi on the Annunaki, global consciousness, vibrating frequencies, the moon matrix, etc., as the higher level “political truths” really running the world, of which the earthly bankster oligarchy, variously labeled as the lizard-shape-shifting bloodlines and such, themselves are just the errand boys and thus no need to focus on them!

    Instead, let's focus on the aliens and their agenda for the human race....

    Even Wikileaks has begun to lend credibility to the concept of extra-terrestrials poobah by making references to the UFO:

    But if one can shrewdly separate the chaff from the wheat, especially in David Icke's pitch, by understanding that:

    1. Machiavellian political science rather than sci-fi is running the world ;
    2. myths and mantras are necessary instruments of imperial mobilization ;
    3. coercing the public into accepting world government by hook or by crook for which, the new super Ali Baba++ global threat from outerspace may be the next hegelian mind-fck on the horizon, just like the mighty Ali Baba from the caves of Afghanistan seeded the first baby-step towards it ;
    4. the statecraft in which “deception is a state of mind and the mind of state” must rely as much on social engineering as on guns and butter ;
    5. a forensic detective will not throw the baby out with the bath water, and will instead extract the toad and all its residue from the punch bowl – sort of like signal processing to extract the signal from the surrounding noise ;

    then David Icke, like iconoclast Eustace Mullins before him, has demonstrated the singular Western guts to call a spade a spade!

    David Icke uttered more useful content in his singular speech of 1996 which prompted my following letter to him, submitted to his website and acknowledged back to me in receipt, than anything ever written about on contemporary matters by any insiders and whistleblowers, former and current, in the United States of America. Judge for yourself.

    Zahir Ebrahim's Letter to David Icke

    Date: Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:12 PM
    Subject: Well done David Icke - but why put a toad in the punch bowl?

    Thanks David Icke for this video:

    • Turning of the Tide - or What David Icke said in 1996 - recognise the world he was describing then?

    How is it that you are still living – and may you live long and prosper – if you have been exposing this secret for 15 years, what has enabled you to elude “sleep with the fishes”?

    Interestingly, Carroll Quigley in 1966 revealed some of it, but he deliberately downplayed the role of Rothschilds.

    You seem to be yelling that name out very loud lately.

    The fact that Quigley downplayed it, I attribute to the quid pro quo of being able to publish his ode to the oligarchy. Or, it was a message to be shared only with the elite, not meant for us, and they know what's being omitted already and why, so that the rest of the information can be disseminated as steganography!

    What is the quid pro quo for you?

    How are you able to take that name, narrate of their power, etc.?

    Not to be offensive, but I analyze the role of the Rothschilds myself, 0.02 cents only of course, and being an unknown I suspect is my quid pro quo.

    But what is yours David Icke? The world knows your name!

    Is it that you dilute your stellar analyses, with some other stuff which is at times outlandishly bizarre, like blood-drinking lizards,

    and in this video the speculative latter half of which, enables the incredibly accurate first half to be dismissed – so that your outlandish positions provide the “toad in a punch-bowl” effect, enabling throwing the baby out with the bath water if you succeed in getting too much hearing, too much believability, too much accuracy?

    Is that your quid pro quo?

    Here is the link to my essay on the Rothschilds, actually proving their power based on evidence – and I have no outlandish material in it:

    I hope David Icke you can stay on topic in your talks – because your uncanny insights of 1996 are actually coming true today as we speak.

    I wish more people had paid attention at that time, built movements to counter all this since then – and perhaps the public might have paid more attention had you not been easily dismissed by your detractors based on the outlandish!

    I wish you all the best Mr. Icke, and I hope more people will listen to your first half of the talk (and skip the portions they might find outlandish in the latter half if they are rubbed the wrong way by it). As for myself, I even see food for thought for me to ponder upon in your latter half as well!!