Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Sept. 15, 2017 - David Icke

34:54

Cracks In The Wall: The World Wakes Up - The David Icke Dot-Connector Videocast

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	♪♪♪ ♪♪♪
	♪♪♪ Hello and welcome to this Dot Connector video cast for
	subscribers to DavidIke.com.
	Well, there's a war, clearly, on freedom of speech and there's a simple reason why that is.
	When you are engaged in a perception deception, which is what the conspiracy to direct human society into a very dark and dangerous direction is all about, it's perception deception.
	You can't control people physically in terms of 7.5 billion currently because there's not enough of you.
	So what you do is you control their perceptions of reality and thus they see the world and see themselves in the way that suits what you want to do.
	And to achieve that you have to control the information they receive.
	Because people make their perceptions from information.
	Information in the form of a personal experience or the 10 o'clock news.
	And of course it's the 10 o'clock news symbolically where most people get their information from, from which they come to their conclusions and develop their perceptions of reality and what the hell's going on.
	And what's happened over the last decade, 20 years, particularly the last five, is that more and more people have looked at other ways of seeing world events.
	Thanks to the alternative media, the genuine alternative media, there's much of it that isn't.
	But the genuine alternative media.
	And they've begun to see that these other ways of looking at world events make far more sense than the official fairy tales and narratives.
	And so to deal with this, we have Google, Facebook, And endless other expressions of this suppression of the free flow of information.
	Suppressing these other ways, these other angles, in terms of explaining what is happening in the world.
	But I've said many times recently, for good reason, We live in a post-fact society where facts don't matter, just emotion, slogans and everyone must say and believe what I do otherwise you're a Nazi or whatever other abuse I can come up with.
	Whether you are factually accurate It's irrelevant to all that.
	It's a post-fact society.
	But those of us who are challenging official narratives, and yes, fairy tales, most of them, must do it by refusing to bow to the post-fact society and just put facts in front of people for them to And there has been some encouragement this week with two stories.
	One, the 16th anniversary of 9-11.
	And the other, the latest developments in the investigation into the former Prime Minister of Britain, Edward Heath, who I named in a book, The Biggest Secret, in 1998 as a Satanist and child abuser.
	And all these years later, nearly 20 years on, there is a police investigation now, apparently concluding very soon, into the alleged child abuse activities, and I can tell you they are legion and legendary, of Edward Heath.
	And it just shows you that if you can keep going and keep dealing in challenging the official narratives, whatever the consequences for you, then eventually the cracks start to appear in the war.
	I'll mention Edward Heath more later, but There was a story in the Mail newspapers, the Daily Mail, in regard to the 16th anniversary of 9-11.
	And what was nice about it is, here it is, the conspiracies that won't go away.
	What was nice about it, and it's all you really ask, Is that it was a balanced assessment and reporting of some of the things that are said that challenge the official narrative of 9-11.
	It's written by a journalist called Sue Reid.
	And it's easy, and most of the time absolutely right, to dismiss mainstream journalism as just a mouthpiece for the system in all its forms, which it is. But Sue Reid is an investigative journalist who's done some absolutely superb Exposures of, for instance, the state stealing of children through deeply corrupt social services.
	Stealing of children from loving families for spurious reasons and excuses.
	And it's all being played and manipulated through the so-called family, in truth, secret court system, where all the game is rigged against the parents.
	I owe my hand up to Sue Reid for that excellent journalism.
	And to be fair again, she is fair in this two-page article about 9-11.
	The sub-headline says, what few know is that 9-11, or on 9-11, a third tower collapsed, officially due to fire.
	But a new academic study says that was impossible.
	Fueling the wild claims, the US orchestrated the whole atrocity.
	Well, yes, it did. And it wasn't only the US either.
	It was a web of people and organizations representing this hidden hand that I've been exposing for 30 years.
	Now, Wild claims.
	Well, Sue Reid, the writer, would not have written that sub-edding.
	That would have been done by someone else.
	But it's amazing that wild claims, it's based on fact.
	And again, to be fair, Sue Reid then goes through a series of facts that make no sense in terms of the official narrative.
	It's based around a guy called Matt Campbell.
	Now, Matt Campbell is the brother of Jeff Campbell, who died on 9-11 in the World Trade Center.
	And Matt Campbell has, to this day, never given up campaigning for the truth to come out because, of course, He doesn't believe the official story, nor should he, nor should anyone else. And Reid goes on to look at various
	aspects of the 9-11 story that make no sense, which I'll come to in a second, but it's
	worth making this point.
	One of the biggest scandals of the whole 9-11 story is that the mainstream media has not
	investigated, unbiasedly investigated, or challenged the official story of 9-11 in the
	now 16 years since it happened.
	And here's a sobering thought.
	The same people, people, not agencies, not government, same people, that told us there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when they knew they weren't to justify mass slaughter of the innocent and all that's followed in catastrophic consequences, all of which they knew would come.
	The same people that told us the lies about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq are the same people that told us the official story of 9-11.
	And yet, the media now accept, because they've got no choice, even though they didn't challenge it at the time, that they were lied to about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
	But for 16 years have not challenged, questioned or unbiasedly investigated.
	The story from the same people about 9-11.
	It's extraordinary.
	That's happened by accident.
	Anyway. The Sue Reid article goes on to...
	Point out that there are many, many questions being asked about what happened on 9-11.
	And she also points out that in a US magazine poll, 53% of Americans believe the US government has concealed and continues to conceal vital information about the 9-11 attacks.
	53% is good.
	It should be 100% if anyone looks at the background in R11 and the tissue of absolute bloody nonsense that we're told to believe about it.
	Things, for instance, like Islamic terrorists, quote, who couldn't fly one-engine Cessnas at flying schools.
	Somehow manifested, what was it, the Matrix?
	Was it a download? What was that?
	Somehow manifested the ability to fly wide-body jets in ways that a Lufthansa pilot of wide-body jets of 28 years standing told me he could never have done.
	A 9-11 story that includes the claims That a passport from one of the hijackers was found near the Twin Towers, a place called Vessie Street, that had somehow, paper passport, had somehow survived and floated down out of the fireball.
	I watched a BBC Newsreader a few days after 9-11.
	Tell me that without laughing.
	I was waiting. She's got to laugh in a minute.
	She never did.
	And when you have a media that ludicrously unquestioning, that's how these people get away with it.
	But Another thing that this article mentions, briefly, but at least it mentions it, is something called Operation Northwoods.
	Now, how many people among the general public have ever heard of that?
	And yet it's fundamentally important to 9-11.
	In the 1960s, during the Kennedy assassination, apparently Kennedy put an end to it.
	But anyway, this is what was planned.
	And this is from the official record.
	This is not a conspiracy theory.
	This is from the official record.
	The Joint Chiefs of Staff that officially run the Pentagon put together this plan to justify an invasion of Cuba to To remove Castro.
	And what it planned.
	Was terrorist attacks.
	In America. Which they would do.
	The Pentagon.
	And then blame them on Castro.
	And here's the big.
	And of course that's what's happening now.
	All over in Europe and wherever.
	To justify outcomes.
	And push the world in a certain direction, more and more control, more and more surveillance, more and more police, military state.
	But the big connection from Operation Northwoods to 9-11 was the plan to have aircraft Painted in the colours, CIA, Pentagon aircraft, painted in the colours of an airline that had a flight path across Cuba.
	They would then, and this is the wording of their documents, they would then Put carefully selected passengers onto the plane of an airline and it would take off.
	It would then fly over Florida and a drone aircraft unmanned drone aircraft of the same type painted in the same colors Would take off from Elgin Air Force Base and would then close in on the official flight aircraft.
	Take over its place on the radar.
	The plane that took off from the airport with the passengers on would then be landed at Elgin Air Force Base and the passengers would be dispersed because they were all in on it.
	How long they would live after it is another thing.
	And the drone aircraft, now apparently the real plane, would be flown over Cuban airspace.
	And would be destroyed by radio signal.
	And a bomb on the plane would blow it up.
	And it would be blamed on Cuba to justify an invasion to remove Castro.
	Now, that was in 1962.
	What technology do they have today?
	And this is why there are so many questions and so many things that don't add up in terms of the planes that took off being the planes that hit the buildings.
	You have a tissue, an absolute library Of lies.
	One after the other.
	None of which add up.
	If that's true, that can't be true.
	If that's true, that can't be true.
	And 16 years later, we're still waiting for a mainstream investigation to expose those very easily exposed lies.
	The article also talks about the Twin Towers, how they came down, because again the official story makes no sense.
	And it talks about firefighters who described how they heard explosions, bang bang bang bang bang bang bang, as
	the buildings were coming down.
	And the idea they came down with fire makes no sense through the laws of physics.
	techniques.
	And now we have, because this other building that is mentioned here, Building 7, was a much smaller building, but within the World Trade Center complex.
	And it was not hit by a plane.
	It came down hours later, after the others did, in the afternoon.
	And it came down quite blatantly as a controlled demolition, just like the other two did.
	And in the version of this videocast that's on davidike.com, I put with it a comparison of this Building 7 coming down and a controlled demolition that you see all the time when these big buildings are brought down to fall on the ground that they're standing on.
	And they're mirrors of each other.
	It's a controlled demolition. And as this story points out, we now have the Alaskan University engineers Led by a guy called Dr.
	Leroy Holsey, Chair of the University's Civil and Environmental Engineering Department.
	They've done, I think it's a two-year study, and it's ongoing, into Building 7, and looking at the official story that FIRE brought it down, brackets, ludicrous, And they've concluded, quoting him, fire did not and could not have caused the failure of this building.
	So on that basis alone, never mind all the other explosion of lies that can be easily explained, I did.
	A long time ago, this book, Alice in Wonderland in the World Trade Center, Disaster, Why the Official Story of 9-11 is a Monumental Lie, came out in September 2002, at the first anniversary of 9-11.
	Not the 16th, the first.
	Demolishing the official story of 9-11.
	And another book, The Davidite Guide to the Global Conspiracy, took it even further a little later on.
	And so you have this one area alone, Building 7.
	That is...
	A blatant provable now with this study lie from those that told us the whole official story of 9-11.
	The same people that told us the idea there was weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
	I mean, hello!
	No wonder the system And its arms like Google, Facebook, et cetera, et cetera, want to are now systematically suppressing information that challenges the official stories.
	YouTube, too, owned by Google.
	Same thing. And it's also kind of Worth mentioning that this Building 7 was reported by the BBC in a live interview with a reporter in New York to have fallen when it was still standing behind her.
	And, you know, people say, well, you know, are you saying the BBC made it up and it was a conspiracy by the BBC? Someone Got the script in the wrong order.
	And something was released before it should have been.
	And therefore it was reported that Building 7 had collapsed when it was still standing behind her.
	And collapsed shortly afterwards.
	The script just got a little bit out of sync there.
	Not to do with her.
	She's reporting what she was told was happening.
	She just didn't understand the skyline of New York.
	But this is what you're dealing with.
	Why did the BBC, when that happened, not go back and say, hold on a minute.
	How come we reported a building came down when he was standing behind it?
	What was going on? Where did you get the information from about the building had come down?
	No, none of that. Of course, they're not journalists.
	They're repeaters of the official story of everything.
	But that was a very...
	Encouraging article by Sue Reid there because she didn't trash the whole thing and just dismiss it like they usually do in their arrogance and ignorance but actually gave people a fair hearing to put their point of view and let the reader reach their conclusions.
	You know, this is a This is a revolutionary thing, isn't it?
	How will we survive?
	A revolution of journalism where people's opinions are unbiasedly reported and the reader or the viewer or the listener then makes up their own mind what they make of it.
	But that's not what you get and this is one of the big things That the alternative media has contributed to changing public perception to the point where they're willing in ever greater numbers to look at another way of seeing the world.
	It's not the pictures or the images, moving or still, That direct your perception.
	It is the voiceover and it is the caption.
	But what's happening is the voiceover and the caption are telling you what to make of the images you're looking at.
	And this repetition of here's the images, this is what is happening, this is what it means, this is who did it, Become a programming operation through pure repetition, the greatest forms of programming, repetition.
	And what the alternative media has done is basically say, hey, same pictures, there's another way of looking at this.
	What if you look at it from this angle or from this background?
	And people are going, actually, actually, that does make more sense.
	And hence, you've got The desperate effort, not least in terms of me at the moment, to silence us.
	Best of luck on that one.
	So, this other story this week is about Edward Heath and a story that I've been talking about now for, well, virtually nearly 20 years.
	So, this headline says, Sex Abuse Inquiry to Probe Ted Heath.
	Probing Ted Heath, I'd rather not.
	A bombshell as police claims ex- To be evidence for VIP pedophile ring report.
	Now, the significance of this story is it's in the Mail on Sunday, which is a paper that has a record of A, trashing or trying to trash B, Big political paedophile stories.
	And also has tried to trash on a number of occasions the inquiry into Ted Heath.
	But now it's reporting that the controversial investigation, why controversial?
	If there are allegations that need to be investigated, what's controversial about that?
	The controversial investigation into allegations that Sir Edward Heath was a paedophile has dramatically widened.
	Officials at Britain's biggest ever public inquiry confirmed that they are to study the findings of an explosive police report into claims that the former Prime Minister was a child abuser.
	And this story is basically that...
	There's been an inquiry by Wiltshire Police and the Wiltshire Police have a chief constable who I hope continues to the line like this who seems to be a man of integrity who's determined to get to the truth about this.
	A man called Mike Veal.
	He's had a lot of abuse from people that just don't want this story out.
	And the Mail on Sunday says it revealed earlier this year how Mr Veal defied pressure, a lot of it from the Mail on Sunday by the way, to call off his investigations because he believes some claims were 120% genuine and a Conservative MP has actually come out and said leave Veal alone and let him do his job, quite rightly. And what this story is saying is that this police report is being handed to the overall investigation into political paedophile activity and other areas of child abuse,
	which is being led by A lady called Alexis Jay, who I have more confidence in than the previous ones.
	The previous ones have been Baroness Butler Sloss, Dame Fiona Wolfe, and then someone from New Zealand called Judge Dame Lowell Goddard, all of which were either completely Unacceptable because of their connections to people who would be involved in the inquiry.
	And lo Goddard because it seems that she was next to useless.
	But now we have Alexis Jay and at least she's speaking my language.
	She's saying look there's a lot of people that don't want this Inquiry to work and to be effective.
	Absolutely true.
	And there's been so many efforts to undermine this inquiry.
	But here we are again, it would seem, and there'll be many more efforts yet to put a lid on it.
	But it would seem that we're actually starting to get somewhere here in terms of not just Ted Heath, but the whole Network that he was part of, the Westminster pedophile ring, which involved many, many politicians, and this is the point, still does, because it still exists.
	And the mainstream media and the mainstream establishment, bracket same thing basically, Has worked so hard to destroy the uncovering of this political paedophilia since the story started to really break, although it was in The Biggest Secret in 1998, or this Westminster Ring.
	It's tried its best to Destroy it coming out since the Jimmy Savile scandal.
	This record-breaking BBC employed pedophile who was a close friend of the royal family and a close friend of Margaret Thatcher, the British Prime Minister in the 1980s.
	So despite all the efforts To suppress the free flow of information challenging the system, challenging the official narratives.
	Things are still moving, still coming out.
	And we need to keep going.
	The efforts to silence people like me are going to go on getting more hysterical and more extreme.
	We just need to laugh in the face and carry on.

▲