The Unexplained - Howard Hughes - Edition 256 - David Icke

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 10, 2016 - The Unexplained - Howard Hughes

59:42

Edition 256 - David Icke

As he prepares for a new book and a major Tour David Icke returns to the show...

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Across the UK, across continental North America and around the world, on the internet, by webcast and by podcast, my name is Howard Hughes and this is The Unexplained.
	Thanks for keeping the faith with the show.
	Also for keeping the emails coming.
	I'm going to do more shout-outs in the next edition.
	I'll do a couple of your communications in this edition and then we'll get to the special guest on this edition, David Icke.
	Now, this man is controversial.
	I think we know that.
	He is much derided by members of the mainstream media, some of them anyway, and he always elicits very differing but very polarized views.
	So I would be very keen to get your views on the conversation I'm about to have with David Icke.
	You might recall that he was recently on one of the biggest political television shows in this country, Andrew Neal's show on the BBC.
	And if you haven't seen that confrontation, conversation, if you want to be kind to it, then you probably find it on YouTube, Andrew Neal and David Icke.
	Within the last month here, I played a little bit of it on my radio show, and I'll be interested to ask David about his thoughts on how he believes that all went.
	So, special guest on this edition, David Icke.
	Thanks for your continuing emails.
	If you want to contact me and give me feedback about the show, suggest guests, then please do.
	Go to the website, theunexplained.tv, and it's a one-stop shop, really.
	You follow the link there for emails and send them to me through the website.
	If you'd like to make a donation to the show, gratefully received to help this work continue.
	Thank you very much to Adam Cornwell, my webmaster, by the way, at Creative Hotspot in Liverpool for soldiering on and doing a great job with the website and the show.
	Just a couple of your emails.
	Adam Andrews says that he loves the show.
	Thanks, Adam.
	I've been a listener for about five years.
	Usually listen at work through headphones and my Bluetooth speaker on my mobile phone.
	Usually listen through Stitcher and sometimes on the website.
	This is all useful stuff.
	So if you get in touch with me, please tell me who you are, where you are, how you listen, and the way that you use the show, what you're doing.
	Adam is in West Sussex.
	Pleased to hear from him.
	Try to listen, he says, as much as I can to you on the radio and through my Android mobile phone, but don't obviously have as much opportunity to listen as I want, because with podcasts, I can listen when I want.
	That's the difference, I guess, between radio and podcasts.
	You know, the online stuff gives you the choice to listen when you want to, I guess.
	And Adam is saying that point.
	Dear Howard, only recently started listening to podcasts.
	I enjoy The Unexplained.
	It fascinates me.
	Your interview techniques and your unbiased and balanced perspective, second and on.
	That's very kind.
	Very, very kind of you, Steve, for getting in touch.
	Approximately, Steve says, 30 years ago, my family and I were driving home after visiting some relatives.
	We were traveling along a gravel road, which was a shortcut to our house and a road that we'd been on once a month or so.
	Off to our right, we noticed these bright orange lights.
	Too many of them to count, but I'd estimate between 30 and 50.
	My father stopped the car so we could see what at first we thought were fireworks.
	Late afternoon, but still daylight, and only about 50 meters off the road in an open field and paddock, with quite a large hill about 100 meters behind these glowing lights.
	As we looked closer, we saw that there was nobody in the field to light any fireworks, and the nearest house was several kilometers away.
	These lights appeared to be the size of small balloons were glowing like balls of fire, taking off from the ground.
	Some of them hovered at various distances from the ground.
	Others shot either straight up or disappeared behind the hill.
	This is a fairly common account of these things moving at great speed.
	The ones that hovered moved from side to side and up and down at variable speeds.
	The speed at which they traveled was incredible.
	They moved so fast, in many ways we lost sight of them.
	We, that's my mum, my dad, my sister and I, talked about it all the way home.
	But then my mother, who was a school teacher at the local school, made us promise not to tell anyone, as only crazy people reported such events.
	That, of course, is how things were seen back in those days.
	I remember it well.
	This occurred in Tasmania, Australia's smallest island state.
	The area where we witnessed this is 20 kilometers from the nearest airport and 30 Ks from the capital city.
	There's no RAAF, the Royal Australian Air Force base in the state, and it was on farmland.
	As I said earlier, I'm new to podcasts and I've only listened to about 50 episodes of your show so far, so you've got more than 200 to go.
	I didn't know if you covered a story like this before.
	I've heard a few, but this is very graphic and very good.
	Steve Rumbley, thank you very much from Australia for getting in touch and telling us about that.
	If you want to come on my radio show, by the way, 10pm UK Sunday nights, then I'd love to talk with you about that story.
	And if you have a story, please get in touch.
	Theunexplained.tv is the website.
	You can send an email from there.
	Okay, I'm not going to keep you waiting any longer.
	Always a big name guest, always fascinating, always controversial.
	I've known him for years.
	David Icke, thank you very much for coming back on The Unexplained.
	Pleasure, mate.
	What's been going on in your life then, David, in the year or so since we last spoke?
	Well, I've produced my lady's book called Phantom Self, which has been massively well received around the world.
	And I'm just about to start a world tour.
	In fact, I started it last weekend on the Isle of Wight, a warm-up event.
	People came even from all over the world for that.
	And then I'm at the Brixton Academy on the 18th.
	What is it?
	A couple of weeks now, or not very many days anyway.
	And I'm then going on a world tour.
	I'm going around Australia, four cities in Australia and Auckland.
	Then I'm going to America and New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
	And then I'm coming back and going all over Europe, having a little break over Christmas, and then off we go again.
	I've got an event in Manchester, in Ireland, and I'm going to Canada.
	And the interest is amazing because, as you know, mate, we've had many chats over the years.
	And what's making people look at my work more than anything else is that what was said in books and talks years ago, decades ago in some cases, is actually now being read on the television news.
	And this is one reason why I'm fascinated by this whole Brexit debate, because I've been Writing and exposing the European Union since what, 1991?
	Okay, I want to get into that.
	I've been watching your videos and reading what you've been saying and some of the pieces written about you to do with the EU and Brexit.
	I want to get into that in a little while.
	Just to start, though, a couple of general points here.
	You're talking about how well it's all going, and it certainly seems to be.
	And one thing that you and I discussed last time, which I think, and I don't know whether anybody else has clocked this, but I have, things that you say are now being retailed by people who call phone-in shows.
	You know, I listen to the radio because I'm in radio, so I'm very interested.
	And I now hear points that you've been making for years being retailed by callers to phone-in shows.
	And occasionally, if the phone-in host is knowledgeable, they will know.
	And it's not often this happens, they'll know it's come from you originally, and they will say, yes, but that's a David Icke point.
	And of course, they will use that as a reason for shooting the caller down in flames.
	Yeah, I mean, what happened, Howard, is 26 years ago now, I started out on this journey of uncovering this stuff.
	And in the early days, there was no alternative media.
	There just wasn't.
	It was so sparse and sporadic that you had to create your own means of communicating this information outside, absolutely outside of the mainstream.
	And that's why in, for instance, as relatively recently as 1996, I tramped around America for three months talking to nobody or next to nobody.
	And then you go back the next time and word has got around and there's a few more and then it's a few more and so it builds.
	And then after 9-11, it built again massively.
	After no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, I saw another big leap.
	And in this period, this alternative media, as it's called, although that's not just one thing, that's a vast spectrum of opinion as well, has emerged to allow people like me to communicate to ever larger numbers of people.
	And there's two things going on.
	First of all, there is, as I've been writing and talking about all this time, there is a hidden hand pushing the world in a particular direction that Orwell would have been familiar with, and then some beyond Orwell.
	And secondly, it's efforts to suppress knowledge of that coming into the public arena.
	And for a long time, that was successful, but it's less successful now because of this alternative media.
	And it's far less successful in getting people just to dismiss it when they do hear about it, because suddenly world events, well, not even suddenly, but people are seeing that world events, happenings in the world, the direction that human society is being taken, actually are a mirror of what, you know, people like me have been saying all this time is the agenda.
	And the reason that my books are now in effect being read on the television news in changes in society is very simple.
	It's not because I sit here in a darkened room pulling it out the ether.
	It's very simple.
	If there is an agenda to take the world in a particular direction and you uncover that and then you communicate that, unless there is some intervention to stop that agenda unfolding, and so far there has not been on any major scale, that's the whole point of what I do, then you can predict the future because the agenda is designed to be the future.
	Thus, unless something intervenes to head it off, that will be the future.
	All right.
	Isn't there a sizable downside, though, David, about this?
	And we've touched on this before, but never really gone into it.
	In that now everybody is an expert, everybody's a conspiracy theorist, and everybody is, no, I won't say everybody, but an awful lot of people are doing things that never happened when you and I were kids.
	They're actively challenging and distrusting everything that politicians say.
	And sometimes, you know, not everything politicians say can be a big lie.
	Isn't that creating a world of instability?
	Well, no, it's creating a world of intelligence.
	All people are doing now, hallelujah, brother and sister, is not taking things on face value.
	I call it the blank sheet of paper technique.
	If you want what you're claiming to be on my sheet of paper of acceptance that that is how things are, then I want to see the background.
	I want to see the evidence.
	And when you say this is happening or that's happening, Mr. Politician, Mr. corporate head, Mr. Banker, Mr. Journalist, I'm not just going to take it on face value.
	I'm going to check it out and I'm going to see if there are other explanations for what's going on.
	And this is basic intelligence.
	If we had been doing this all this time, we would live in a different world now.
	We would not, well, I say we, some of us didn't, but there wouldn't have been this large acceptance that Tony Blair and George Bush were telling us the truth about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
	If we had a media that was doing this, that war would never have taken place because it could not have been justified.
	But at the same time, not just the same agencies, but the same people told us the official story of 9-11.
	But the mainstream media accepts the official story of 9-11 without question from people who blatantly lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
	All we are saying to people is question, don't take things on face value, because history shows one thing.
	No, not everything that comes out of a politician's mouth is a lie.
	But what history shows us over and over again is those in power and those in authority lie on a massive, massive scale.
	And thus to take it without question, to take it at face value is insane.
	And it's not destabilizing.
	It's actually making the system, as I call it, justify what it claims rather than just being accepted on face value.
	So, David, do we need governments then?
	You know, governments surely help to keep civil society reasonably stable.
	But from what you're saying, if we can't trust anybody and if there's a great big agenda, then ultimately you don't want us to have any kind of government.
	Is that so?
	Well, no, we can have a government which represent the people's interests instead of representing the interests of a hidden hand, which manifest through corporations, through the banking system, et cetera, et cetera.
	You see, we have a political system which is so easy to control, it's laughable.
	In most countries, you have two parties who have any chance of forming a government.
	The odd time, it's three, but not often.
	And so what we call political choice is a choice in terms of government between those two parties.
	So you vote for party A, they get into government and they do things you don't like and they push the world in a certain direction.
	You then have this election and you say, I'm going to give the others a go now because they don't like what they've done.
	And they get in and largely, I mean, Obama following Bush is the most extreme example of it, they actually do the same as the ones they've replaced.
	And so you have another election.
	And now the only way of removing the second party that you don't like and what they've done in government is to go back to the first one you didn't like what they did in government.
	We have a political system, both sides of the Atlantic, and in almost every country now, where you have politicians standing on the same postage stamp, what I call the postage stamp consensus.
	And vast, vast numbers of views and opinions in Britain and every other country simply have been disenfranchised.
	They have no representation.
	I mean, let's look at this EU from that point of view, this debate.
	You have clearly from the opinion polls, vast numbers of people in this country who want to vote to come out.
	Who are they represented by in terms of the radical parties?
	You've got the Cameron wing center of the Conservative Party supporting staying in.
	You've got their apparent opposition, the Labour Party, doing the same.
	You've got the Green Party doing the same.
	You've got the Liberal Democrats doing the same.
	You've got the Unions doing the same.
	It's not as simple as that, is it?
	There's a widespread of opinion, even within the ruling Conservative Party here.
	We see Boris Johnson on the outside, David Cameron, the Prime Minister, and his Chancellor of the Exchequer on the inside.
	It's not as black and white as that, is it?
	This is democracy.
	Wait a minute.
	First of all, let's look at the point you're making here.
	And you rightly pick up there are elements in the Conservative Party who are campaigning to come out.
	There is UKIP.
	Okay.
	And then you have the great body of the Conservative Party that answers to the Prime Minister.
	You've got the civil service that should be non-political, that is being used to press the stay-in case.
	You've got almost the entirety of the Labour Party doing the same.
	You've got the unions doing the same.
	You've got the entirety of the Greens, the entirety of the Liberal Democrats.
	That's not a level playing field in terms of people being represented.
	But if it was all so skewed, David, how come a student on their representation in the Labour Party?
	Cool.
	And they include activists.
	But let me just ask this then.
	If it is all so skewed, how come that in this democracy that we have here in the UK, it was possible for a student, and you will have seen this as well, to do something I've never seen in my lifetime before, and that is on a debate program to accuse the Prime Minister himself of waffling.
	If it was fixed, if it was skewed, if it was not right, that wouldn't have happened, would it?
	No, no, that's not the way it works.
	You look at the theme, the body of information that is being received by people.
	And the body of the information is to stay in.
	Look at who's come out to stay in.
	All the people and organizations who are attached to this global web that I talk about.
	First of all, you've got the body of the Conservative Party.
	They want to stay in, led by Cameron and Osborne.
	So then you have the IMF coming out saying how terrible it will be.
	You have all these other organizations and world leaders like Merkel this week saying how terrible it would be.
	You have Obama coming over, absolutely nothing to do with him whatsoever, to sing from the same song sheet.
	So the body of pressure, the body of information and opinion has been to press people to stay in by trying to frighten them with the consequences of coming out.
	But the other side, David, the other side is trying to frighten people as well, isn't it?
	There's a point to make here.
	And that is it shows how more aware people are now that despite that tidal wave of pressure and fear-mongering, that the opinion polls are as close as they are.
	Okay, well, haven't you just argued against yourself?
	What you said is that democracy is working.
	Every side of opinion is now being considered.
	People are quizzing and questioning the politicians.
	And if that's the case, then our democratic system is doing a good job, isn't it?
	Look, I haven't made up my view about this at all.
	So I'm coming to this straight down the middle.
	But isn't what you've just said the greatest argument for the fact that our democracy, in this case, is working?
	Howard, those opinion polls are not as close as they are because we've had a fair debate.
	They are as close as they are because of the life experience of vast numbers of people of the interference in their lives, their jobs, everything by the European Union decade after decade after decade.
	And let's not forget in this democracy, we have a government in power with 37% of the vote.
	This is turning out to be close because people have A, got informed in greater numbers about the EU and B, their own experience of how it impacts upon their lives.
	Okay, I've had some questions and some comments about this.
	Alison has been in touch.
	She's a regular listener of the show.
	She said you asked for questions for David Ike.
	He is mine.
	And I'm only going to give you a few of these, but she says, I'm wondering what your opinion and David's opinion is on Brexit.
	Well, Alison, I don't have one yet.
	David, as you've heard, has got his opinion.
	Alison says, I'm thinking better the devil you know, but I think it's a con to get us to vote out.
	And then we turn into America with no rights, no NHS, and no workers' protection, i.e.
	unions, etc.
	So she is, you know, she thinks that we're being led to vote out, but better the devil you know, if you know what I'm saying.
	Well, I don't think I could have disagree with that more.
	I understand the thought process, but I've been investigating, looking at the history of and tracking the European Union for decades.
	And I've been able to pick the way it's gone at stage after stage after stage, because of what I said earlier, when you know where it's designed to go, predicting where it's going to go unless there's intervention is a piece of cake.
	And from the start, this European Union, as it's become, was designed to be what it is now, but only what it is now as it is now.
	We've not seen anything yet in terms of centralization of power, the destruction of national democracies and national parliaments and governments to turn it into a fully fledged, bureaucratic, centrally controlled dictatorship imposing its will over the fine detail, the very fine detail of people's lives.
	The selling point early on, because of course Europe had just fought a war to stop the Nazis having a pan-European situation.
	And so they would never have sold it then for what it has become.
	So it's the technique that I call the totalitarian tiptoe.
	You start at A, but you know you're going to Z. You just don't tell the people you're about to scam that is the case.
	Otherwise, they'd resist.
	And then you go from A to B to C. And what we've seen is since we signed into a, quote, free trade area, and we now know, gave away our fishing industry, gave away our mining industry, gave away much of our manufacturing industry as part of the deal, because Ted Heath agreed in the negotiations, we now know, that Britain would specialize in finance and service industries overwhelmingly.
	Because the long-term plan for the European Union has always been to treat it as a country with different, what we now call nations, then called regions, when they get there, specializing in different things to serve the whole.
	But we have a big aerospace industry and that's linked in with Europe.
	That's not finance or service sector, is it?
	No, but I'm saying what's happened in terms of what we had before.
	This is not me talking.
	This has come out in documents, government documents, under the 30-year rule.
	When Ted Heath, when they came out and Ted Heath was asked on the BBC, did you know when you were negotiating that it was going to involve political union?
	His reply, yes, of course.
	But he never told anyone else at the time.
	And so what we've had across Europe since this began is selling a free trade area and then more and more centralization of power until we've got this bureaucratic dictatorship, which is only, like I say, where it is now.
	It's not where it's meant to go.
	And so when I hear people like Jeremy Corbyn, who has spent his political career opposing the EU, as did his friend Tony Benn, when you hear him say that we can reform it from within, it is beyond ludicrous to suggest that.
	This project is not to give power away and be reformed.
	It's to grab more and more power.
	That's what it's there for.
	And it's not to let countries out unless it's kicking and screaming doing so, because the idea is to pick off more and more countries, more and more countries with free movement within the European Union.
	So where we are now is not where we meant to go.
	Now, in reply to that point about, you know, it's protecting us from the extremes of the Tory Party, well, I wonder if the people of Greece will agree with that.
	Greece has been destroyed and asset stripped and brought to its knees by the actions of the European Union, the European Central Bank and other connected organizations like the IMF.
	And the plan is to bring an end to countries and turn them into regions.
	Okay, well, those organizations would all say that they've helped to keep Greece going.
	Oh, yeah, by putting them into vast amounts of debt they can never pay back and then going to them and saying, in response for us giving you credit, i.e.
	figures on a screen, you must sell your state-owned industries to corporations for far less than they're worth.
	And these corporations have gone in and asset strip the place.
	Do you know, if you look around, and there's a very good video on YouTube about this, a documentary about corporate lobbying at the European Commission, where the bureaucrats are, not anything like as much around Where the parliament is and the politicians,
	because they have no bloody power in Europe, but where the dark suits are, where the power is and the decisions are made, the number of lobbying organizations, lobbying offices representing giant corporations in that area around the Commission is staggering.
	We also have at the moment a so-called trade agreement called TTIP, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, which is being negotiated in secret between the bureaucrats of the European Union and the corporations involved, not least with America.
	But as part of our democratic process, David, there are people in this country raising very loud concerns about that.
	Isn't that how it should be?
	That there is democracy at work.
	People are opposing TTIP, whatever proposals will finally emerge.
	Howard!
	Why isn't it being negotiated in public with public oversight?
	You say there are loud voices against TTIP.
	Yes, there are.
	There are by people who know it exists and what it is.
	Not everyone goes around in your circles.
	This is what the media and journalists need to understand.
	Vast numbers out there, the vast majority, if you stop them in the street and you said, do you know what TTIP is?
	They would look at you.
	As my mother used to say, they would look at you gone out.
	They wouldn't have a clue.
	Why?
	Because the mainstream media is hardly talking about it.
	Okay, all right.
	Let me ask you this, and this may be the world's most stupid point, but it did occur to me before we started recording this conversation.
	The line I expected you to take about all of this, and you're plugging the out case, you're very passionate about that.
	I expected you to say plague on all of your houses and not to get involved in all of this.
	Why?
	Because what you're saying is out.
	Well, out means that we continue with what we have and what we have you've already criticized.
	So, you know, where's the benefit?
	Well, there are many benefits.
	You have to deal with the world as it is, you know.
	You can't sit in a bubble saying, I want utopia now.
	You have to deal with situations as they are.
	We would be swapping, having decisions made about our lives, fine detail, by bureaucrats no one has ever heard of, no one can name, in meetings that are never reported for having those decisions made within the borders of this country,
	where we can look these people in the eye and we can say, well, that politician's made that decision, that person's made that decision, this party's made that decision, and we can see it.
	It's actually at least much better in the open.
	Of yes, there's still things go on behind the scenes trying to manipulate certain things happening.
	Of course, that is true and goes on being true.
	But at least it's within our borders where we have some kind of influence over it, not least by exposing it.
	I mean, the bureaucrats in Brussels, they have no elections to win.
	They don't have to look at the public and say, well, we can't do this because the public don't want it and we'll be out.
	Okay, but at least it may be argued by those who might argue it.
	And again, it's not me putting this point, but it has to be put, I think.
	At least we can see the EU.
	We know it exists.
	If we are a collection of nations all supposedly, and this is using your own logic here, David, if we're a collection of nations all supposedly free and democratic, but actually controlled by powers behind the scenes, isn't that worse?
	How can it be worse to have a hidden hand have to manipulate through endless points of government instead of having a one-stop shop where they can go through the bureaucrats in Brussels and have the same laws imposed upon every country at the same time?
	This is why the EU is a corporation, a giant corporation orgasm.
	They don't have to manipulate government after government and send their lobbyists in to try to get the changes in policy that suit them.
	They only have to go through a one-stop shop in Brussels and everyone has to do the same.
	This is what's happening with TTIP.
	We're having a situation where in secret, what's being negotiated is that a corporation that claims that a government, apparently democratically elected government decision for the benefit of the country or the benefit of the people or the benefit of the environment,
	if they decide that whatever it is, good for people, good for the environment, it can have an impact on that corporation's future profits, then they can take that government to a corporate court and have the policy overturned or some massive fine imposed.
	Well, here I agree with you.
	I think that needs to be investigated.
	We need to know more about that aspect because I have heard that discussed.
	Listen, I want to get to an email that I've had from Stephen.
	All right, well, let me get to this email from Stephen.
	Regular listener, he's read two of your books and from what he's written sounds very impressed with them.
	He's in Scotland, is Stephen.
	And he talks beyond the EU and this referendum about other organizations like the United Nations, the World Health Organization, and the thought that has been expressed, of course, by yourself, that their goal may be to achieve total world domination, one army, one government, a very sinister and malevolent threat to our freedom and democracy, it is claimed.
	Well, it's all connected.
	You see, we're already now seeing coming out, I've been writing about this and predicting this since the 1990s, of a European army.
	And they're desperately trying to keep the lid on it until this vote takes place.
	But they want a European army and they're bringing it into place all the time, step by step.
	Let me just explain to people how this kind of works.
	You have a web.
	You have a spider at the center of the web.
	That's the hidden hand deep in the shadows.
	And as you come out from the spider, the strands in the web symbolically, closest to the spider are the most exclusive, the most hidden, and the most secretive.
	As you come further out, you come through these secret societies that we do know about: Freemasons, Knights of Malta, Opus Day, and Knights Temper, etc.
	And then eventually you reach a point coming out in this web of what I call cusp organizations.
	These are organizations like the Bilderberg Group, which is meeting very soon in Germany.
	And will you be there this time?
	No, I won't.
	I've got things to do.
	I'm going to be speaking at Brixton.
	But then you've got the Council on Foreign Relations in America, which drives to a very large extent American foreign policy and has done since it was formed by the Rockefeller family in 1921.
	You've got the Trilateral Commission created by David Rockefeller in 72, 73, the Club of Rome that uses the environment to transform society and so on.
	And then once you go through those cusp organizations, you are into the organizations, but still connected to the spider, of organizations that we can see.
	And these include the IMF, the World Bank, the European Central Bank, the European Union, the United Nations.
	These are not random dots.
	They are pixels in a picture.
	And when you do the research, and I've been doing it for 26 years, then you can see how it all works.
	And so when one pixel of the web, i.e.
	David Cameron, is in trouble because he never thought he'd get this far with his referendum, then other pixels from the web or other strands from the web, like the IMF, the American president, Germany's chancellor, et cetera, the Bank of England, they come out to try to frighten people so that they'll vote the way Cameron wants and what this web wants.
	Because the last thing this web wants when it wants to centralize power more and more and more and more is for a country to come out of a web it's already in, the European Union.
	They're terrified.
	And let me say this, by the way, if we do vote to come out, that's not the end.
	That's only the start.
	You watch them running around like headless chickens trying to make things as bad as possible to try to get us back in.
	And people have to decide whether they want just to lay down and be walked all over and have even what's left of their freedom taken away by this edifice of tyranny of the EU, or whether they're going to have some backbone and even if we do vote out, still stand up against every effort to get us back in.
	And what do you say, David, to the small business people?
	And another referendum, where public votes have voted against what the European Union bureaucracy wanted, they've waited and then they've had another referendum and overturned the vote.
	They won't take no for an answer and we won't.
	What do you say to the small business?
	The small business people, not all of them, some small business people I've heard interviewed have said that they want out.
	But those who say it's a nightmare.
	If we leave the EU, we're going to be faced with possible tariffs, loads of bureaucracy that we don't have now because we can export easily within the EU and we need to do that.
	What do you say to them?
	Well, very simple.
	Small business and medium-sized business is not supposed to survive this global transformation.
	Everything is designed to come through corporations and also groupings in various subject areas.
	I think one of the questioners mentioned, like the World Trade Organization and the World Health Organization and others that will follow.
	The reason that small businesses and medium-sized businesses these days are always complaining about the tidal wave of bureaucratic must-dos coming out of Brussels is because the idea is to so tie up businesses that are not major corporations in terms of bureaucracy and all the things they need to do and all the paperwork.
	all the stuff they have to do that they simply cannot survive.
	And I've seen many interviews in this period of this referendum campaign from people who ran small businesses and said the EU eventually made it impossible.
	We just couldn't cope with the bureaucracy that was demanded of us.
	And so, you know, if small businesses and medium-sized businesses are going to support staying in, the only analogy I can think of is Turkey's voting for Christmas.
	had a feeling you were going to say that.
	Listen, I want to get to another question from This is another point.
	It's very important.
	There's a lot being held back at the moment, so it won't influence the vote to come out.
	Once this thing is over, if we stay in, then you're going to see a lot of stuff hit us very, very quickly afterwards, because then they can do what they like, because this is going to be the last time that people have got a chance to take their freedom back, at least this part of their freedom back.
	All right.
	Moving away from this for just a moment, Tom in Gloucester sent an email.
	Another regular listener says he's loving the shows.
	Thanks, Tom.
	When David is on, could you ask him this?
	And this is, I think, this part of his question.
	He sent two parts to this question, and they're both good.
	This first one is a little tongue-in-cheek, I think.
	But Tom asks, how would you cope, David, if you were locked in a lift with the Queen of England for an afternoon?
	Bearing in mind your pronouncements on the subject of the royal family?
	I would love it.
	I would be questioning her on every aspect of what she does and the bloodlines and where they've come from.
	And I would ask her to justify, as we now head substantially into 2016, how she could possibly justify and have the barefaced cheek to think it was acceptable for someone to become head of state of an alleged democracy purely because she had sex with someone at a certain time and
	her parents had sex at a certain time in a certain order before they had sex to produce another child.
	Thus she was the one that was top of the list to succeed.
	How that nonsense could possibly be justified in an adult society that claims to be a mature democracy, and how her children have the right to follow her purely because she had sex at a certain time and produced children in a certain order.
	It's absolute madness.
	And of course, she'd never be able to justify it.
	But then again, those questions are never put because you can't criticize the Queen.
	Actually, you can.
	Well, yes, and you did.
	Andrew Neal, you were on his BBC Television Politics show, very prestigious show.
	And this guy is, I used to work with him on a radio station.
	He's a very big hitter.
	He asked you, and you must have known this might have been coming, about the reptile question.
	Right.
	And you haven't said a whole lot about that, as far as I'm aware.
	I might well be wrong about that in recent years.
	And you answered the question.
	He said, do you still believe, this is paraphrasing him, do you still believe that the royal family are reptiles?
	And you said, paraphrasing you, yes, I do.
	Yeah.
	And when you're on an interview of seven minutes long talking about the concept of conspiracy and you get thrown a question like that, it's impossible to respond any more than I did.
	No, I've not stopped talking about it.
	I still talk about it.
	I'll be talking about it at Brixton and I talk about it and put it in my books as the dots are put together.
	However, you know, when I talk at Brixton, I'm going to be starting at 10 o'clock in the morning and I'm going to be finished just before 10 o'clock at night in four sections, each of which are going to be about two and a half hours long.
	And the reason is that there are so many dots to connect.
	There's so many explanations about the illusory nature of physical reality, which is what the cutting edge of even mainstream science is now holding its hand up and realizing that this world is not physical, even though we experience it as such.
	And thus, if the world is not physical as we perceive it, then things that appear impossible, if you think the world is solid, suddenly become possible.
	And I was listening to an interview the other night with a guy, I think it was called Elon Musk, the guy who started eBay and is an entrepreneur.
	He's also into private space exploration, all that stuff.
	And he made an interesting point.
	He said, if you take the Earth against the size of the perceived size of the universe by mainstream science, then the Earth compared with the universe, even in this tiny band of frequency that we can actually see, represents one billionth of a pinhead compared with the size of the universe.
	So the idea that we humans on this one billionth of the head of a pin are the only life forms is so ludicrous, so insane, so stupid, it's breathtaking.
	And when you start from that point of view, having non-human manipulation of our society from the hidden through certain bloodlines representing that hidden force becomes suddenly, well, let's look more into this.
	But the scale of programming, and this is the point, this is the real foundation of human control, the scale of perception programming, the programming of the alleged normal, what I call the postage stamp consensus,
	is so fierce and so total in so many people that they laugh by reflex action that some non-human influence could be happening when we're on a planet, and there's a lot to be said even about the nature of that, that's a billionth of the size of a pinhead compared with the universe.
	I mean, what?
	But you say this week is prestigious.
	Well, I suppose it is for people who think it's prestigious.
	Passandra Neal Show, yeah.
	Yeah, but what it does and takes as its point of reference is the postage stamp consensus of normal.
	Therefore, it's not going to go anywhere.
	It's just going to keep reporting same old, same old.
	It's not going to take us anywhere.
	When you came away from that interview, David, were you happy with how you'd responded to Andrew Neal's question?
	Well, I don't do things like that.
	What I do is someone asks me a question and I respond.
	And then when it's over, I go and have a cup of tea or a glass of wine and go to bed.
	You know, I don't get caught up in that, oh, you know, all that stuff.
	You just answer a question and what happens, what happens.
	But what I've seen over the years, despite all the ridicule, I have this phrase I've used for a long, long time.
	You can't unhear something.
	And it doesn't matter if they laugh at you.
	It doesn't matter if they dismiss you.
	It doesn't matter if they stick their nose in the air and topple over backwards like some of them threaten to do.
	There are people listening who do have a mind of their own, who do not just download a lifetime version of postage stamp normal.
	And every time you do something, no matter how you're received or how you're treated, there are people out there who are listening and saying, hold on a minute, I'm going to look more into this.
	And it all builds.
	You know, this is what's been going on all these years.
	This is how you do it.
	The only way you can do it when the mainstream is all again you.
	Okay.
	So the answer to my question was that you are happy with that because no matter how you're treated by mainstream media interviews, you're going to let that message of yours leak out.
	And I think that's a theory that Alex Jones tends to use, I think, when he does interviews.
	If you've seen Alex.
	By the way, are you allied with Alex Jones?
	Is he a fan of yours?
	Are you a fan of his?
	Well, I've been on his show one or two times, maybe a couple of times a year, but Obviously, there are areas of agreement, but there are areas of disagreement because too, in the sense of disagreement, but I go into large, large areas that the mainstream of the alternative media does not go into.
	And so, therefore, I'm, if you like, painting a, what's another way of putting it?
	I'm going much deeper in the rabbit hole.
	But, you know, those that are in the mainstream of the alternative media are doing a great job telling people about the world that they can see.
	And that's very, very important.
	I do that myself.
	I mean, the whole first two and a half hours of my talks, like at Brixton next week, is all about the here, here, now that people will immediately relate to and see on the news.
	And then I go deeper and deeper and deeper the longer the day goes on to put that first section of this is the world we see in a completely different context.
	And that's when, you know, the postage stamp consensus calls an ambulance, gets on a life support machine and looks for help because it's so far away from that that I go into that it's funny.
	I want to get to the second part of Tom's question.
	He sent me a very short email, but I love the two parts of his question.
	The other part of his question is this, and I've sometimes wondered about this.
	I'm sure a lot of people have.
	Essentially, Tom is saying that a lot of people who whistleblow or speak beyond the mainstream view of things get, and this is Tom's word on this, this is a quote from him, this isn't me, some of those people get, quote, taken care of.
	And given that he preaches his views to thousands of people exposing the crimes of the world's ruling elite, 26 years on, he's still doing it.
	In other words, you haven't been stopped, says Tom.
	Well, I've not been stopped by having a bullet in the head, but I've had my life made incredibly difficult and I've been banned from countries for periods of time.
	But I mean, let's look at it this way.
	Let's look at it from their point of view.
	In 1991, I couldn't walk down any road in this country without being laughed at by most of the people, often all of the people.
	Going into a pub was uproar.
	And I was portrayed as the crazy man.
	Very few people, even in history, could have gone through the intensity and mercilessness of the ridicule that I underwent.
	I then started uncovering all this stuff and communicating it.
	If you were the people I was communicating about, you would not have any problem with that whatsoever.
	In fact, you might think, well, this is good because they're laughing at him.
	They're going to laugh at the truth that he's actually telling.
	And then I started producing books.
	I started going out.
	And then suddenly there was this increasing change of perception of me.
	By the time that change happened, all the books are out there.
	I have a high profile now for doing what I'm doing.
	And it's happened pretty quickly.
	What benefit would there be in taking me out now, except to give what I'm saying fantastic credibility and a massive, massive library of information written and on video, it will be available for people to say, well, hold on a minute, what was this bloke saying?
	So, you know, there's just no benefit really.
	I mean, I've been saying for years that ridicule was so good for me in so many ways.
	A, it made me let go of the fear of what other people think, which is such a freedom.
	And thus I open my mouth and say what I think is the situation.
	I don't do mental gymnastics and censor myself because what will they think if I say this?
	If I think it's true, I'll say it.
	And the other thing is it's given me this period of getting this stuff out and, you know, appearing to be no threat to that which I'm exposing.
	But now suddenly I am.
	But it's too late now.
	And also, you know, this is much, much deeper.
	You know, there are other forces at work, you know.
	Do you know that according to mainstream science, the electromagnetic spectrum is 0.005% of what they think exists in matter and energy.
	And the frequency range that we can actually see, which they call visible light, is a fraction of that 0.005%.
	We can see basically nothing.
	And even within that tiny frequency range that we call the world that we can see, the planet that we are on is one billionth of a pinhead compared with the universe that we can see, even within that tiny frequency range.
	Do you know, I think there is more to know about the world than the postage stamp consensus wants us to believe.
	And so there are other forces at work.
	It's not a matter of coming into this world and then you do something this elite doesn't want and it goes bang, bang, thank you.
	Where's the next one?
	There are other forces at work here.
	And it's not as easy as just taking someone out.
	It's not.
	I promise you that.
	Do you ever wonder, David, and here's a question I've never asked you before in the many conversations that we've had.
	We all think, don't we, what would life have been like if we'd done X, Y, or Z?
	In your case, do you ever wonder what would have happened if you'd continued to be a BBC television sports journalist or you'd continued with a football career and you hadn't done all of this?
	No, because it was never going to happen.
	See, my life, and if people just look back at their own lives, they'd see a similar pattern, at least the vast majority would.
	You come into the world and your conscious mind is aware of what your conscious mind is aware of, but your conscious mind is a tiny fraction of our awareness, our consciousness.
	I mean, even, you know, people talk about the subconscious.
	Well, what is the subconscious?
	It's a vast spectrum of awareness that the conscious mind is not aware of.
	Another mainstream scientific fact, every second the brain is receiving 11 million what they call sensations, like snapshots of reality, if you like.
	And the brain takes that 11 million a second and uses about 40 per second to create the reality that we think we're seeing.
	So the amount of our awareness and the subconscious takes the lot in, it absorbs the lot.
	And therefore, there are other levels of us that know more than the conscious mind does.
	And so my conscious mind's going through at that time, looking at dots.
	Okay, I was a footballer, dot.
	I was a journalist, dot.
	I was a television presenter with a BBC, dot.
	I was a Green Party politician, dot, and so on.
	But when I had my, if you like, awakening to all this in the early 1990s or 1990, all that had gone before was a tremendous benefit because of how I'd seen these things, these organizations and work within them that I was now understanding from a completely different level.
	I'd also gone through that mass ridicule, which had cleared me out of the fear that what other people think.
	So there was no self-censorship and no worry about, you know, what will they say, couldn't care less.
	And I'd had my dream through my childhood and teenage years of becoming a professional footballer taken from me with rheumatoid arthritis at the age of 20, around 20 years of age.
	And I had that massive emotional upheaval to deal with, which was very beneficial to me in making me very emotionally strong.
	So it wasn't a case of what if I'd have gone on being a footballer, what if I'd have gone on being a television presenter.
	That was never in the script.
	I got from them what I could have a benefit for what was coming later, and I didn't know.
	The other levels of me did.
	So it's not even a question because it was never going to happen.
	And what would you say to those who may email me and say, and here I am setting up a straw man, and I'm sorry for that.
	But they may say, well, what your current persona as writer of books and philosopher about the world and conspiracy theorist, some people say, what it's given you is it's kept you in the public eye.
	And they might claim that that's why you've done all of this, because you wanted attention and here was a way to get continued attention.
	Oh, yes.
	Do you know what, Howard?
	Ever since I was a little kid, I had this dream.
	I had this fierce ambition that I wanted to be ridiculed on an historic scale, that I wanted to be laughed at wherever I went, that I wanted to be abused and ridiculed in the media, that I wanted my name to be said by a comedian with no joke necessary and the audience would laugh.
	I dreamed of that.
	I mean, hello, I went through that because I believe in what I'm doing.
	And other people say, he's only doing it for the money.
	I'm sitting now in a one-bedroom flat on the Isle of Wight, which is where I've lived since virtually the 1990s.
	And I'm sitting in an office, which is so small.
	If I swung a cat, it would hit the wall.
	And that's where I produce everything.
	See, people judge others by themselves.
	So they look at me, for instance, and it's not just me, it's others.
	And they say, well, hold on a minute.
	He's gone through all that ridicule and he's doing all this.
	So there's got to be a catch.
	He's either doing it for the money.
	He could be mad.
	That could be an explanation as well.
	Or he just wants attention.
	What they can't grasp, because they wouldn't do it for the same reason, is that I came across information about where this world is being taken and where it has gone in the 26 years that I've been talking about it.
	And I look at kids and I look at my grandkids and I look at young people today and I look at even generations older than that, well older.
	And I see the world they're going to live in unless they are alerted to where it's going and we get together and do something about it.
	And therefore, once you know that, there's no walking away.
	You take whatever comes your way because there's no walking away from that.
	To walk away and say, I'm going to do this and I want to do that.
	And I'm going to just retire or whatever.
	How could you get up in the morning and say, oh, I think I'll go on a cruise?
	How can you do that when you know what's unfolding for people?
	That's my motivation.
	And again, whether people believe that, I couldn't give a damn.
	The only person I have to be at peace with is myself.
	And I am.
	David, thank you very much for that.
	You and I will talk again.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	I wish you all the best with the tour.
	By the way, I read you an email from Alison in Liverpool, and she says she's very much looking forward to coming to see you if she can get tickets in Manchester in January.
	Oh, brilliant.
	Yeah.
	You know, she's going to be in the audience by the looks of that.
	So it's a great, great big connection.
	It's amazing, isn't it, that we can talk, you and I, seriously in this way, but we're completely off the grid.
	This is non-mainstream, and that's the bit that I love most.
	David, thank you very much.
	If people want to know about you, it's DavidIyke.com, isn't it?
	Yeah, everything, the talks all over the world, Brixton tickets, my books, and a headlines page every day, free of charge, of course, that puts the day's news into a different perspective.
	David, take care and give my love to the Isle of Wight.
	Cheers, Howard.
	Bye.
	Special guest on this edition, David Icke.
	As we say, always controversial.
	Your views on him and the way that this show went, gratefully received.
	Contact me through the website, theunexplained.tv, with any thoughts about this or any of the shows that I've done, and any guest suggestions that you might have for future editions of this show.
	Like I say, I'm always happy to see what you say.
	If you want to get in touch with me, the website is the place to do it.
	If you want to make a donation, same idea.
	Go to the website, follow the PayPal link, and your donations for this show help it to keep going and are helping with my plans for its future, which continue and which will unfold as this year of 2016 continues.
	It's always like walking through treacle trying to make things happen, but I promise you, they will.
	You know, when you've got to go make a living by doing shifts in regular media, it's hard to keep everything balanced, but we're doing that.
	And I'm grateful to you for your constant support for the work that I'm doing.
	More great guests in the pipeline here on The Unexplained Online.
	So until next, we meet here.
	My name is Howard Hughes.
	This has been The Unexplained I Am in London.
	And please stay safe.
	Please stay calm.
	And above all, please stay in touch.
	Thanks very much.
	Take care.

▲