All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 13, 2017 - The Unexplained - Howard Hughes
01:00:23
Edition 319 - David Icke Part One

This time - David Icke on his "explosive" new book...

| Copy link to current segment

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.
Well and truly into a chilly November here in London town and a special two-parter of The Unexplained that we have for you coming up.
David Icke is here.
His new book is called Everything You Need to Know But Have Never Been Told.
A big and portentous title for a very big book.
It's hundreds of pages long.
David Icke, as you know, is always controversial, is always charismatic, and he will be both of those things on this show.
Thank you very much to Adam Cornwell, my webmaster from Creative Hotspot in Liverpool for making all of this happen.
Thank you to you.
Your thoughts, welcome on this show.
I have to say, before we start our conversation with David Icke, the views you're about to hear are those of David Icke.
They are his alone and they are not necessarily the views of myself, The Unexplained or Adam Cornwell from Creative Hotspot.
We have to make that clear at the beginning, but I think you will find this an interesting show and I always welcome your thoughts.
Go to the website theunexplained.tv and tell me what you think.
So, part one of my conversation with David Icke, the new book is called Everything You Need to Know, but Have Never Been Told.
How is life, David?
I guess one of the answers to that question is going to be hectic.
Well, yes, it is, and it's a good hectic as well.
You know, I mean, when I started out, no one wanted to do anything but laugh.
Never mind, listen.
And this was the case for a very long time, basically, until the turn of the millennium, when a series of events, of course, 9-11 and the invasion of Iraq, which turned out to be based totally on a lie,
started to encourage people and push people to question what they were told about the world.
Well, listen, we can agree on that.
I think that's right.
They were mile markers along the road.
And before that, your path was a very difficult one.
But, you know, what I say to people, and there was somebody I work with, and I told him the other day that I was going to be speaking with you, and he said, what are you talking about?
I always get this.
What are you talking with him for?
You know, you're sure you should be doing this.
And I said, well, have a think about this.
Whatever you may think about what the man says and writes, in my life, he was the first to question whether politicians and people in positions of power were what they seem to be and were telling us the truth.
He was the first to call out possible paedophilia in certain areas of society.
Nobody dared to do that.
And at the time, he risked getting sued to do it.
Now, these days, David Icke packs out theatres, sells books by the shed load.
He's got to be doing something was my response to it.
What do you think?
Well, the reaction comes from a process that I talk about in the new book, which is the creation of what I call the postage dam consensus.
Because when you break down a human life from birth to the other end, you can see that it's actually an incessant perception program.
And people program each other once they've fallen for what I call the post-Istan consensus.
For instance, when you come out of the womb, you are immediately affected and influenced in terms of your perceptions by your parents.
Not because your parents are being malevolent, but your parents have been through the sequence of programming that you're about to go through.
They bought it and they're passing it on to you, thinking it's the best thing for you.
Very soon, I mean, I've been saying this, Howard, almost since the start.
People just need to take a deep breath, take a step back and look at it again.
Look at everything again from a one-step back perspective.
Because another point I make in the book is one of the greatest forms of programming, of perception, is familiarity.
Once something becomes familiar, this is the way things are, it's not questioned anymore.
It gets a gimme once it becomes familiar.
Well, that's called acceptance, and that is basically, I mean, you've only got to turn on the television and see that there is a consensus out there, and people don't even think about it now.
They accept who's in charge, they accept what they're told, and whether you follow David Icke's line of thinking or not, that is something that people more and more are beginning to question.
And, you know, my personal view, and I'm allowed a view on this, is that's a healthy thing, whether you buy the path that is laid out in your book, which we're going to get into because it's 580 pages long, I think, whether you buy it or not, the truth of the matter is that more and more people are ceasing to believe right from the ground up where they are rejecting traditional politicians.
Now, whether what they're opting for in replacement for that is a good thing or a bad thing is above my pay grade, doesn't matter here.
But people are beginning to break out or try to.
Yes, they are.
and what they're doing is they're deprogramming.
They're deprogramming, because this program is incessant within, Look at the education system.
We've got children who have only just come into this world a matter of three or four years.
And they're sitting in front of an authority figure representing the state who is giving them the state's version of everything.
What's right, what's wrong, what's historical truth, what isn't, what reality is, everything.
And immediately they are subject to the imposition of the state.
So being imposed on in terms of perceptions, indeed, physically, if you like, you have to sit at that desk.
You have to be there before the bell goes.
You can't leave until the bell goes again.
You can't go to the toilet without asking.
You can only eat when you're told, et cetera, et cetera.
It becomes a gimmick that you accede or concede yourself to authority.
But of course, if we don't, and I will get into the education thing because it's close to the end of your book.
I've been through your book, so I want to go through it step by step.
But the only thing I'd say about that right now is if we don't educate kids in some way, that's anarchy, isn't it?
Well, it depends what you call education.
Surely education is something where you encourage the child to think for themselves.
You put information in front of them, but you don't tell them they must believe it.
You don't pass on what are fundamentally challengeable absolutes and tell them that this is how it is.
And I think there's a posh scientific word for that, isn't there?
And that is entraining.
And that is in so many areas of our lives where we are becoming entrained, be it by governments or technology or whatever.
Let's work through the book.
And I'm going to start with the comments on the back cover.
I love the layout of this book.
And it's a big book.
It's almost like, I don't know whether you intended it to be your magnum opus, the work of your life or not, but it's a big book.
You quote here from Gandhi almost every day something that David Icke said long ago supported by happenings of evidence as Mahatma Gandhi said.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Ida, do you think you're winning now?
Oh, I think they're about to fight me.
I think we're probably around there.
But in terms of winning, see, something you said a few minutes ago is very relevant to what I'm doing.
I'm not standing up and saying, here's everything you need to believe.
What I'm saying is, look, this is another way of looking at the world.
Here's the evidence, plus all the other evidence in the vast library of previous books.
Make of it what you will.
And I've said very clearly in the book, question everything, including what you've read here, because this is how we got into this mess, by what you rightly call entrainment, where you just basically, it's the very same principle as three violins playing a certain note,
and you put another violin in there, and that violin, whether it's playing a note or not, will start to vibrate and play the note of the other three, which is the dominant frequency.
And so what we have, if you break it down to physics, is we have a dominant frequency, which is also called a dominant perception, or what I call the postage stamp consensus.
And if you don't stand by your principles and you don't defend your right to think for yourself and conclude for yourself, then you get vibrated, literally vibrated into line and entrained into the prevailing postage stamp.
And this can be seen all the time.
It can be seen by not least through people fear, increasingly with political correctness and this tyranny that's going on, increasingly fear even losing their job if they step out of line.
All right, that's coming up in the book soon.
That example you gave a few minutes ago, that guy would have walked away thinking that Howard, he's bloody strange.
He's interviewing that David Height bloke.
Yes, you've got a steering.
Because what you've done is you've committed a crime.
You've committed a crime.
It's the golden rule of the postage stamp.
What is the crime of being different?
What happens is that these people think that by doing a program like this and by doing interviews like this one, I endorse every word that everybody says.
And you and I have both been journalists in our lives.
That's not what it's about.
It's about having the right to ask questions and having the right to think out of the box.
Okay, I want to dive into the book.
One quick thing before I do.
The right of the listener to make their own mind up.
Yeah, and that's what we give them here, I hope.
You have, I think it is three shows effectively launching this book.
So the question before we dive into the book, and we are going to, I saw that, three shows, two of them sold out, one on the way to being sold out.
What is it you think the people, and I don't know numerically how many, what is it you think those people are wanting from you?
What are they hoping to get out of David Icke on the stage?
Well, I think a number of things.
First of all, to hear information they wouldn't normally hear.
But also, I think increasingly, and I think there's great aspects of this book that relate to this, to hear someone saying what they think, but are often too intimidated to say themselves for all the reasons that I've just mentioned.
There is a war on freedom of speech.
No question that wherever you look, there's a war on freedom of speech and freedom to have a different opinion to the prevailing norm.
And what I've done in the book is just said, well, you know, I can't say that.
Well, watch me.
Because if we don't start drawing the line, well, there'll be no freedom left.
There'll be no freedom left in a matter of a few years.
And I think that a lot of people are just delighted to hear someone saying in public what they would like to say.
Because you are right.
I mean, I've been on a world speaking tour now since the summer of 2016.
I've been all over the world, all through Europe, the Balkans, Australia, America, etc.
And there is a wake-up going.
Not just the number of people that are questioning what they didn't question before, but the kind of people, system people, people you thought would never question the system.
They've always been in it.
But now they are.
And they're not getting answers.
And you know, what's also happening, and I find this very interesting, is that the veil is lifting.
The veil is lifting on things in a way that's getting people to see that the world hasn't been like they thought it was.
And this is a domino process because once you realize, hey, I've been lied to about this, the next question is, so what else have I been lied to about?
And then the dominoes start to fall.
I've seen this process in so many people over the years.
So this is a time.
I mean, you're talking to me.
I went through most of the last nearly 30 years being laughed at, ridiculed, abused, and ignored, often, mostly.
But that doesn't happen now because something's changing.
And that's a really, really positive thing.
And I hope this book will be a catalyst for going still further into this, what you might call mainstream society, so that more and more people see, actually, I've not been told the truth all my life.
All right.
The book is called Everything You Need to Know, But Have Never Been Told, which is one hell of a title.
It is backed by a pretty big advertising and promotion campaign, David.
It gave me the impression that here is a man who is going for broke.
Isn't that so?
Well, yes.
I mean, basically what's happened over the years is my books have come out with no promotion at all, except through my website and me going on the road because we didn't have the money to do it, wasn't there.
And what has happened is my son, Jamie, and my other son, Gareth, now run that whole operation.
They've done a fantastic job in the last two years.
They've come in at just the right time because the interest was reaching a point where we just didn't have what you might call the infrastructure to deal with it.
They've created it.
And so for the first time in all the books I've written, we're actually having some mainstream promotion of it.
And that is another indication of how this is now expanding.
Take it already.
I've been on that radio station in its first incarnation and also in its new one.
And I've always been treated with tremendous respect there.
I have great respect for that station in terms of the way they've treated me.
And so, you know, we don't have any problem.
And, you know, journalists are also, of course, not the majority, nothing like, but more and more journalists are starting to see it.
Because, you see, when I say there's a war on freedom of speech, it's not just there's a war on the alternative media, as it's called, through the algorithm censorship of openly done now by Twitter and especially Facebook and Google and Google and YouTube.
The pressure on the mainstream media to conform is getting greater and greater.
I mean, it's always been there.
Of course it has, but it's getting greater and greater.
And what kind of life must it be for a mainstream journalist to get up every day and have to watch every word just in case you upset someone or something or say something out of turn?
See, what this is doing, it's driving everyone apart.
It's driving people into fear.
It's making people freeze.
It's making people take the point of least resistance because the greatest form of censorship is self-censorship, where you don't actually go through an argument of why something should be broadcast or published.
It just doesn't take place.
You just don't write anything outside of the tram lines anymore because you know the consequences of doing it.
So the point I've made in the book again and again, we're all in this together.
And those of us who are in what you might call the alternative media, although I'm looked down upon by much of that, because again, the postage stamp consensus, it very much infiltrates the alternative media, much of it as well.
So we need to come together and understand that the assault is on freedom of speech, and that means everybody, including the mainstream media.
And if we don't come together and we go and be divided and ruled, there'll be no freedom left.
There will not be any freedom left.
Because as I said in the book, the pressure now and the direction that communication is going is out of things that are printed and into things that are digital, that are online, that are on the internet.
And this is fantastic for censorship because you may be able to censor a newspaper in the way that you say this isn't going in and you might have an argument about it, whatever.
But once you get your communication founded on the internet, then artificial intelligence and algorithms come in and it doesn't even need a human hand to censor.
It just means key words or key phrases, which is what's happening now.
And yet you praise the alternative media, which to a man and woman uses the internet and digital media and you would say controlled forms of communication.
Those people haven't been stopped.
You haven't been stopped, have you?
Oh, well, I mean, we should think of the tense of that because one of the really common and developing themes of the last particularly 12 months since the result of the American election has been systematic censorship of the kind of information that I put out there because of algorithms which push down
the search engines, that which would normally have been much higher.
And this doesn't affect me because I write books, but The one way that, or a key way, that, shall we say, citizen journalists have been able to work full time, and you have to work full time on this.
This can't be a weekend and evening thing because there's just too much to do, too much information to process.
So they've grabbed often a meagre living from videos posted on YouTube from which they get a proportion of the advertising.
And that's been a staple, basically, for many people in the alternative media to allow them to function full-time.
What has happened, one of many, many things that have happened in the last 12 months in relation to this, is that they had this big row erupted out of, I think it was the Times newspaper started it, where they said, oh no, there's advertising on jihadi videos on YouTube.
Of course, that was the excuse, because once they suggest we must, and then they got all these advertisers came out, these major corporations, and suggest, we mustn't have our advertisements on these videos.
I mean, had they not looked before, but suddenly in concert, they started singing from the same song sheet.
Well, you know, maybe that was what we call the cock-up theory of history.
Maybe they just hadn't looked.
You and I have both worked in mainstream media.
Sometimes the most basic things get ignored or forgotten or not seen.
No, I'm not talking about media not looking.
I'm talking about corporations.
No, no, no, I know what you're saying.
Paying for the advertising not looking.
But anyway, whatever the background, what you then had was YouTube not saying, yeah, we're going to take down advertising, therefore monetization, from jihadi videos and people seeking and encouraging violence.
We're going to take him down from basically the entirety of the alternative media.
And that's what's happened.
It's had a devastating effect on the collective income of the alternative media.
We've not been affected in that way because, like I say, I write books and I do other things, but a lot of people have been fundamentally affected.
And that is not by accident, it's by design.
And what then followed was this whole fake news hoax.
Is there fake news on the internet?
Absolutely there is, but it comes from all sides.
And so what was then censored on the basis of fake news and fact-checked by very dodgy fact-checking organizations in the interests of stopping fake news were genuine alternative media sites that actually do care about facts.
And what has happened in this period of the last year is that there has been a gathering attack on the alternative media.
Simple example from the last couple of weeks.
There is an alternative website called Activist Post.
I know the people there.
They're very, very straight people who are interested in facts and they're interested in questioning the official version of things to see if they stand up.
They have had no warnings from YouTube, nothing.
They've had no questioning of their methods or anything.
And then a couple of weeks or so ago, maybe a bit longer, the YouTube organization owned by Google just took the YouTube channel of Activist Post down, just deleted it.
They lost all their videos.
Now, this is what's happening.
It doesn't get in the mainstream media.
So people say, oh, no, you're not being censored.
But this is what's happening.
And it's happening on an increasing scale.
And we've seen nothing yet, as I say in the book.
This is meant to go on and on and on until there is no alternative media.
All right.
So you think I must get into the content of the book.
And I'm sorry for listeners who will say, Howard, you're not getting to the point.
Well, we needed to have this discussion beforehand.
But you believe, David, there's a war on them.
So this is not your magnum opus.
This is not your retirement piece.
This is just another brick in the wall.
No, I mean, I'll keel over still doing this at some point.
Okay.
I have every reason to believe that is so.
Let's get into the book then.
Why did you begin the book with a full description of the process that got you to where you are?
In other words, what happened to you in South America?
Because I want new people to know how the information has come to me all these years.
I think that's something that people who are new to my information need to know.
And the message you were given is, we are guiding you.
Yes.
And what has happened ever since is that my life has been a synchronistic journey of what you might call constant coincidence that has led me into information in documents from people I meet, in books, in many personal experiences, in many various ways.
And it's been a sequence in which a subject would come into my life out of nothing.
And then immediately information relating to that subject will be coming at me from all directions.
This has happened again and again and again.
And this is how I put the information together.
I mean, when you look at the scale of information in this book, never mind all the others in front of me here going back to 1991, you can't have done that just by sitting here pulling it out of the ether or just even researching it without some synchronistic help.
I mean, where do you start?
Where you started was the statement that is in the very early part of the book and I've read in your work before.
You say the body is an advanced computer and quotes, and this is the crux of everything that you say.
I think everything is infinite awareness.
For people new to you, what does that mean?
Well, it means that that which is perceiving the world now, from me and you and everyone listening, that state of awareness is who we are.
Everything else is a vehicle for that awareness to have different experiences, whether it's a human experience or whether it's some other experience in the great infinity of experiential possibility.
That's what I'm saying.
We are a state of awareness.
Now, if we are not very careful, we can be programmed to self-identify with not that infinity of possibility and perceptual potential, but with what we're experiencing.
So we fall into what I call label consciousness, or I am our, I am our man, I am our woman, I am our this, I am our this race, I am our this religion.
I guess it's a little bit like watching the television in black and white when you could be seeing it in colour.
On page 27, you say that by expanding the frequency band DNA operates on, we can connect with other realities.
Well, this is the whole area of cutting-edge scientific research now.
There's been a lot of it by Russian scientists in recent years that have understood that what we call the body, a DNA, whatever, is actually a receiver transmission system.
We are receiving information and we are transmitting information on particular frequencies.
And these frequencies are interacting with what I call the cosmic internet, which is basically the universe that we perceive, is like a massive Wi-Fi field and we're interacting with that field.
And our perceptions and our perceptions of self dictate the range of frequency that we are broadcasting and transmitting and receiving on.
Therefore, if you perceive yourself to be little me, all I am is Ethel at the checkout.
I've got no power.
I've got no potential.
I'm just little me.
Well, that perception expresses itself as a frequency.
And you will therefore be interacting with this cosmic quantum field of possibility and probability within that frequency band.
And what you will therefore attach yourself to in terms of information, which we then manifest as experience, will be a tiny, tiny band of this quantum possibility.
And thus, you become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Those that think they're little me have lives that confirm the perception of little me.
It's a feedback loop.
And the hidden hand, as you call it, wants it that way.
Say again?
The hidden hand, as you call it in the book, wants it that way.
You say that our perceptions are driven by, and I love this phrase, manufactured ignorance.
Exactly.
You see, it's what I'm pointing out is that there is a hidden hand.
I go into the nature of it.
And of course, there's a lot more to know about it.
But how do you control billions of people, what I would call points of attention with an infinite awareness, if they are in any way aware of their own infinity, their own infinite potential, and aware that what they're experiencing is what they're experiencing.
It's not who they are.
Because once you see, once we start identifying, self-identifying with our experience, that experience is constantly telling us, because we're in this limited range of frequencies we call the world, it's constantly feeding us limitation.
It's constantly feeding us a sense of I can't, a sense of it's not possible.
And therefore, that becomes a feedback loop because the experience is telling you that everything is limited.
And you are experiencing the fact that everything seems to be limited.
So your perception is everything is limited.
And that just goes on through a lifetime.
And because of that sense of limitation, this is what I call the postage stamp consensus, you are interacting with this quantum field of possibility and probability only within that tiny range of frequency.
What I'm saying is, and I've experienced it, I'm not just sitting here kind of conceptually saying that this is a possibility.
I've actually experienced it.
Once I started not self-identifying with David Icke, which is the name of my experience, but with the awareness that was having that experience, my life started to change.
My life became an incredible adventure of doing things and coming across things that you never normally would.
And, you know, if you look at where I was, Howard, which you'll remember very well in 1990, basically, 1990, 91, basically, I was subject to historic levels of mass ridicule and much abuse.
And the mainstream media in about 1991, 92 just walked away and started to ignore me, believing that they'd left a corpse in the gutter.
And that was the end of him.
When you walked away from all of that, David, I've never asked you this before.
How did you feel when Terry Wogan, you know, God rest his soul, great broadcaster, asked you on television or said to you On television, the audience is not laughing with you, they're laughing at you.
It was a devastating phrase.
How did you go away feeling?
Well, there's actually a bit of background to that because he had a psychic on, a Welsh guy, I think, a few weeks before, a psychic I actually met actually, synchronistically, quite a while later, and we had a chat about it.
And the audience started laughing at him, and Terry Wogan used exactly the same line.
So it wasn't spontaneous.
It was something he'd used before.
In a similar situation, why were the audience laughing at me?
Because I was so unbelievably different to their normal.
So their defense reaction is to laugh.
The point is that, yes, it was deeply unpleasant what happened, especially what happened after that, because I couldn't walk down any street in Britain without being laughed at, going into a pub, forget it.
A comedian only had to say my name to get a laugh, and it wasn't a joke necessary.
So what I'm saying is, Howard, look at where I was.
That should have been the end of everything.
But look at where I am now filling theatres on the other side of the world and in countries of Europe where people sit there for 10 hours listening to translated words as I speak them.
How could I possibly go from there, which we've just discussed, to here?
Why?
Because I perceive myself as awareness, having an experience, awareness that is infinite in its potential to manifest and create its reality, as opposed to having its reality downloaded to it, cradle to grave.
And thus you are able to create things, you're able to manifest things that you're not if you are in I am David Icke mode or I am Ethel at the checkout mode, because you don't believe you have that power.
I started to realize I did have that power, as we all do, as long as we lose this self-identification with what I call phantom self.
Phantom self is the name I give to that which we're experiencing that we mistake for who we are.
And in terms of the question, if you are going to control billions of people, you cannot do it physically.
There's too many people.
You've got to control their perceptions.
And then they will, if you do get control of their perceptions, and it happens with most people, then those perceptions are everything.
They will dictate what that person will think, what they won't think, what they'll believe, what they won't believe, what they'll challenge, what they'll support.
Once you have perception, you've got them.
And so what you need to do to control perception and hold that control is to limit people's perception of everything, who they are, their own power, the world.
I mean, how many people realize, Howard, that this world is not a physical place as we experience it, but actually a tiny band of frequency called visible light.
That's all we can see.
It's so narrow, it's laughable.
And I remember you telling me in an interview probably four conversations ago, and I didn't quite understand it then.
I understand it more now, that the table in front of you is a table because you perceive it to be.
And now mainstream science is starting to talk around those things.
I laugh whenever I see a story come into my inbox along those lines now where a scientist begins to question the nature of what we call reality and the possibility that it might not be all that we thought it was because you were saying that first.
Well, this is an area that actually synchronistically goes on from what we've just been talking about.
If you are going to control people's perceptions, you've got to control the information those perceptions receive.
How do we develop our perceptions?
From information received.
That information might be a personal experience, or it might be the 10 o'clock news, or it might be some scientific paper.
That's how our perceptions are formed from information.
So if you're going to control the perceptions, you have to control the information.
It's why the alternative media has been such a nightmare and why they're desperately now trying to shut it down.
But when you go back into ancient societies and you look at what the shamanistic streams of knowledge were talking about and what they were talking about in the mystery schools of the ancient world, they realized and knew then that the world was a physical illusion.
But then as this process of information control advanced, the mystery schools were taken over by the hidden hand and became the secret society network of the modern world.
Shamanistic streams were destroyed or marginalized to the point where very few people heard about what they were saying anymore.
And the so-called modern materialistic world came in and started to take over.
Crucial to that was the introduction of mainstream science.
Mainstream science is not real science.
It's a song sheet.
And if you talk to scientists, as I have over the years, who are trying to push the cutting edge into these areas outside of the postage stamp version of science, the professor Richard Dawkins' perception of everything, et cetera, at Oxford University, then they start to get in trouble.
They get in trouble with funding, they get in trouble with peer pressure, etc.
There is a manipulation of mainstream science To stop this coming out.
What is happening now, Howard, however, is that because it's so fraudulent in its explanations of reality up to this point, it's faced now with a great panorama of cul-de-sacs, which are explanations for things that cannot go any further.
It cannot go any further within mainstream science because mainstream science, from its point that it's coming from in terms of what reality is, cannot answer any of these questions.
And then other people are coming in who are coming from another angle of what reality is, which is not physical, but actually holographic, illusory physical.
And suddenly, whoa, all these questions and mysteries that mainstream science cannot even begin to explain suddenly become obvious and explainable.
And so what we're seeing now is the pressure of emerging information and the cul-de-sac nature of where mainstream science has reached is coming together to push us through this glass ceiling into a much greater understanding.
And so we're having mainstream now scientific studies concluding that our reality is holographic, that the basis of our reality is not physical but energetic based on information, just like a Wi-Fi field.
And it's changing everything because what's been happening, and this has been a wonderful, wonderful way to hold the status quo and keep people under control.
Symbolically, our reality is like the reality that we experience as the world.
It's like a movie screen.
It's like a movie on a screen.
And of course, you're never going to change the movie on the screen because it's a done deal when it hits the screen.
But we have been manipulated to think that you can change reality once it's a done deal.
And therefore, we can't.
So nothing changes.
And those in the shadows know that.
What we need to do is to go back to the projector and change the real.
Then we change the movie.
And that real operates in the unseen at energetic levels of information.
And more and more mainstream scientists, not the majority, anything like, but more and more are starting to see this.
I mean, when you've got Rich Terrill, a computer scientist at NASA, coming out and saying he's concluded that our reality is a digital hologram, well, that was in my books years ago.
Years ago.
And there's a line in the book which says, you don't need a scientific mind to understand reality.
You need a free one.
And what some of these mainstream scientists now are doing is starting to free their mind.
Free their mind from what?
Their program.
Look at a scientist, Howard.
They come out of the womb in the way I described earlier.
They get parental programming, the way I described.
They then go through all their formative years in mainstream academia and education.
They then go on to university and obviously get good degrees to become a scientist.
They then go into their specialization.
And throughout the whole of that period, they've been downloading the official version of everything.
Thus it becomes their reality.
And for these scientists who are breaking through this and starting to see the nature of reality in its true sense, what they're doing, again, the same phrase, they're deprogramming from that program to therefore ask questions that they wouldn't normally ask.
But my mainstream science friends, though— My mainstream science friends who will email me, I'm sure, as you say these words would say that science has always worked this way.
We have one paradigm, then we realize that's not quite right, so we adjust it to another paradigm, and that's how science progresses.
So, you know, science is not completely and utterly, fundamentally, basally flawed.
It actually is something that evolves.
And it's beginning to evolve, you would say, and certainly from what I'm seeing, somewhat towards the direction that you've been traveling in.
Yeah, it is fatally flawed, and it's fatally flawed for this reason.
If you come to a conclusion and then you come across other information, which makes you evolve that conclusion, right?
That's science, okay?
That's just critical thinking.
What has happened in mainstream science is when other information has been put forward or has come to light, they have dismissed it.
And I'm talking about science as an institution.
It's been dismissed, it's been ridiculed, it's been waved away with an arrogant wave of the hand.
And information that is now being accepted was actually around all along.
This is the point.
But science wouldn't let it in, because to do so would have brought down the scientific orthodoxy of how everything worked.
I mean, you know, there's a group of researchers which go under the name of the electric universe who have done some brilliant research into the electrical and electromagnetic nature of the universe and the way it communicates through electricity, through plasma states and through electromagnetism, which was waved away by the mainstream.
And now, purely by the evidence that's coming to light, as people have more and more greater ways of seeing the universe in more and more detail, they're now having to go down that road.
But this is the point, Howard.
They're going down that road, not Everybody, but as institutions, kicking and screaming.
They don't want to go there.
You know, I have a friend who's come up with some, I won't go into it because he's putting it all together, but he's come up with some big revelations, which basically rewrite fundamental parts of human history.
And he chatted to people, shall we say, at a major, major university about his findings.
And the people there realized that actually he makes absolute sense by what he's saying and the evidence he's producing.
But the reaction was not, oh, that's fantastic.
That's amazing.
It was, what do you want us to do?
What do you want us to do?
Burn all our books?
This is what I'm talking about.
It's the way it's been, it's held on to its orthodoxy instead of moving with the information, which is what a free mind does.
Because let's look at all these institutions, science included, it has its rules and regulations.
It has its peer pressure.
It has its, you can't say that's.
You look at the institution of the BBC, the institution of the media, it has the same.
The institution of doctors and medicine, it has the same.
This is academia the same.
They are structures of orthodoxy which repel all borders challenging that orthodoxy until the point is reached where the evidence is so overwhelming they can't man the castle any longer and keep them out.
So David, do you believe that all of these institutions that you talked about are doing the handiwork of, and you talk a lot about elites, of the elites to keep people believing one set of things and under control?
Is that so?
Absolutely.
But let's put that in perspective.
If you set the rules, how many people actually set the rules and set the orthodoxy in an institution?
Tiny, tiny number.
At that point, many of them will know that that's what they're doing.
They're setting an orthodoxy straitjacket to stop the truth coming out.
Everyone else in that institution, the great vast, vast majority, one of two things.
One, they have been through their entire academic and scientific career being told that this is how things are, so they believe it.
So there's their perceptions hijacked for a start.
And secondly, there are consequences for challenging that orthodoxy, just as there are consequences in the media for challenging media orthodoxy.
And there are consequences in politics for challenging political orthodoxy.
So A, you've got the download of the perception, the postage stamp, and then you've got all the pressure and carrot and stick techniques that hold people in and stop them questioning because, you know, what happens if you question it's not good.
So we'll just keep repeating the same stuff.
So this combination has created institutions that basically in terms of moving on with new information and new insight, it's like turning around an oil tanker in the Thames.
It's so slow.
You say in the book, and I'm leaping ahead an awful lot in it, that mind control is being used by the elite networks to keep people, effectively to keep people down.
What does that mean?
Well, you could use another phrase, and it would be equally valid, perception control.
It's the same thing.
See, when people talk about mind control, which I mentioned in the book, but in other books, I've gone into this in a very, very deep and detailed way.
They think of mind control as a Manchurian candidate where someone says a key word and suddenly the person is taken over by another personality and starts to carry out a programmed behavioral response.
Those people exist and those people exist on a scale that would shock anyone that's not researched this.
But what is that?
What happens when, what they do in these mind control programs, a lot of this came out with the MK Ultra revelations that came out in that, a fraction of them did, but enough that were absolutely shocking in the United States some decades ago when it was revealed that there was this American and Canadian,
and Britain was involved as well, operation to mind control people and experimenting mind control on a very large scale.
Again, using many, many of these scientific and psychological institutions to mind control people so that they would do whatever they were programmed to do, assassinate people, be sexually abused by famous people and then not be able to remember it.
And it's called what was called in those days trauma-based mind control or DID, dissociative identity disorder, also called at one time multiple personality disorder.
And what they do, and I studied this deeply, both sides of the Atlantic for the best part of 10 years, they break up the mind and the way the brain processes information into compartments like a honeycomb.
And they call these compartments altars, altered states.
And they create what they call a front altar.
And this is the personality that the person normally uses to interact with the world.
And to the person themselves, that front altar personality is them.
That's who they are.
And then they are given keywords, hypnotic keys of words, could be a sound, it could be anything that's programmed in.
And suddenly that front altar moves back into the subconscious and the programmed altar comes forward and that becomes the person's personality and then takes over their behavioral processes and they assassinate people or carry out a terrorist attack or get abused by a famous politician.
And then after that, the process is reversed and the front altar is brought back.
The front altar has not experienced abuse by the politician.
The back altar has.
And unless that back altar, the walls of that back altar break and that knowledge, that memory floods into the conscious mind, as it has done for so many people over the years, then they'll never remember the fact that they were abused by that politician.
And are you saying that on a mundane, day-to-day, everyday level, for all of us, such techniques are being used to control what we think?
Well, in a cumulative way, yes.
Obviously not in the same way, because these individual people that are mind-controlled go through laboratory-like mind-control programming.
But you talk about elites having control over all of us and controlling the way that we are.
Well, I mean, I could talk for hours about this.
No maverick behavior.
What does anyone think political correctness is doing?
It's deleting any behavior outside of a tiny accepted norm.
People are not just censoring what they say anymore.
They're censoring what they do, how they behave, all of it to fit this politically correct tyranny, because that's what it is.
But you have to agree that it's better, isn't it, in our society today that women and ethnic minorities are treated better than they used to be?
That's not political correctness.
That's just being more enlightened, isn't it?
No, that's being more respectful.
But that's very different to political correctness, which is imposing words.
It's saying you can't say this word, you can't have this opinion.
You know, if people want a free society and freedom of speech, they've got to realize that that includes the freedom of people to say what they don't agree with.
But what's happening now is that right to say something they don't agree with is being deleted.
And it's being deleted by Twitter storms and pressure on people and abuse of people.
So people are frightened to say anything because there's no balance.
I mean, you look at this, what's happening now in Westminster.
I've got a, if I can find it here, I've got a newspaper headline from this week which kind of sums it up really, if I can find it, and the effect that it's having.
It's talking about, here we go, there's never been a worse moment in history, a parliament frozen in fear.
Now, if members of parliament have been abusing women, they should take the consequences.
But there's a difference between someone being physically attacked and what others would call a bitter banter, which has gone on throughout, you know, certainly in modern times.
But they are put in the same pot and they're not the same thing.
And what you've got now, and you'll have it at Westminster now, too.
And you know me and what I think of politicians.
If they've been doing unpleasant things to women like that, they should face the consequences, just like Weinstein should.
And we have to say that Harvey Weinstein denies the allegations made against him.
Yeah, he does.
What will be happening at Westminster now is that the natural interaction and discourse between men and women will have been fundamentally changed by this.
That the male MPs will be increasingly frightened, some terrified, of saying the wrong thing, doing the wrong thing.
They'll be going through this mental gymnastics before naturally interacting with women.
What should I say?
How can I say what?
If that stops them from saying or doing sleazy things, that has to be a good thing, David, doesn't it?
If that stops them, men or women, from doing or saying sleazy things that are not appropriate, that's good, isn't it?
Well, I'm not talking about them saying sleazy things.
I'm talking about them censoring what would normally be natural discourse between men and women.
And what I'm also pointing out is the mental gymnastics that people are going through to choose their words and what they do before they say or do anything.
All this spontaneous discourse is being destroyed.
And what it's doing, what it's doing and what it's meant to do is to drive wedges between every group possible, to drive wedges between men and women, to drive wedges between people of different races.
This is what it's there to do.
It's part of divide and rule.
So you think it's a control agenda.
Who's doing the controlling?
Well, as I explain in the book at great length, there is a hidden hand, a web with a spider at its center, symbolically.
And this is all coming out from there.
And it comes out through the institutions and it comes out through the secret societies, then out into the institutions that we see.
I mean, you see, if anyone thinks that there's not a global agenda playing out, they should have just been at my shoulder for the last 18 months as I traveled around the world going into country after country and culture after culture.
What I've been doing is I have a presentation in four sections of about 10 hours in total over a whole day.
And there are certain, what I'm saying is, this is the agenda that they want for the world.
And this is how they want to change human society.
So every time I go into a country, I go in there a week early, I look at what's happening in that country, and I've a checklist.
The checklist is of all the things that I say this agenda wants to introduce globally.
And it's tick, tick, tick, tick in country after country after country, where the same things are happening at the same time, justified by the same excuses.
This is globally coordinated.
If it wasn't, that wouldn't be happening on the scale and with the synchronicity that it is.
And as they say, that concludes part one of the conversation with David Icke about his new book, Everything You Need to Know But Have Never Been Told.
As I speak these words, I believe he's on a tour promoting the new book.
It will be interesting to see how much of the so-called mainstream media picks this up.
But I have a feeling that David is wanting to go for maximum impact with this volume.
Your thoughts, welcome.
Let me know what you think about it.
And of course, David is also contactable through his website.
I'll put a link to that on my website, theunexplained.tv.
But your thoughts on this show, anything that you've heard today, more than welcome.
Go to theunexplained.tv.
That's my website, designed by Adam from Creative Hotspot in Liverpool.
So, until part two of this conversation, which is going to be released soon, 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.
Thank you.
Take care.
▲
Export Selection