The Political Asylum

Vintage Girl · Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:39 pm Post subject: Conspiracy Theories

Thought I would share with you some of the wackiest conspiracy theories around

1) Dinosauroid-like Alien Reptiles are dominating the World

Christine Fitzgerald, a confidante of Diana, Princess of Wales, claims that Diana told her that the Royal Family were Reptilian aliens, and that they could shapeshift.

David Icke's --BBC reporter-- claims that humanity is actually under the control of dinosauroid-like alien reptiles who must consume human blood to maintain their human appearance.

"Evidence" goes from Sumerian tablets describing the "Anunnaki" (which he translates as "those who from heaven to earth came"), to the serpent in the Biblical Garden of Eden, to child abuse, fluoridation, and the genealogical connections between the Bush family and the House of Windsor.

Icke theorizes that the reptilians came here from the constellation Draco. Like most conspiracy theories, falsification of Icke's hypotheses is nearly impossible, but Icke continues to sell books and give speaking engagements based on concepts ranging from the New Age to his political opinions.

So what do we think?

Insightful or insane? Very Happy

_________________
Girls are like phones. We love to be held and talked to, but if you press the wrong button you'll be disconnected!

kitchenwitch · Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 4:09 pm Post subject:

You have to ask? It reads like something from the Weekly World News which sadly is now defunct.

I've always liked the scene from the movie Men in Black where Tommy Lee Jones is showing Will Smith that the real news is in the National Enquirer and rags like that.

SilverMiniCooperS · Inmate of the Asylum Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 195

BlueEmperor · Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 1:43 pm Post subject:

David Icke also believes that he is the son of God.

B.E.
_________________
The doctor is in!

wakeyboy · Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 3:58 pm Post subject:

I think David Icke watched too much 'V' back in the 70's.

It was a really good tv show though.
_________________
http://www.realradioyorkshire.co.uk/

JuanaLaLoca · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 2:34 am Post subject:

Just because someone on Earth named a constellaton Draco doesn't mean there are reptilian aliens in it! That would be too much of a coincidence! Laughing

adrien · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 5:04 pm Post subject:

That's completely stupid. Sometime I wonder whether these people really believe this kind of thing, or whether they're just pretending, just for the pleasure of hearing normal people say "that's completely stupid".

As for Draco, sure, stars in a constellation are only linked by human imagination. Those in Draco range from some tens to almost three thousands lightyear from Earth... Of course, as far as I know it is not impossible that there is an intelligent reptilian humanoid form of life on one of the billions of planets there must be in those galaxies we call stars.
_________________
Sit on the banks of the river and wait for the corpse of your enemy. - Indian proverb.

JuanaLaLoca · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 5:32 pm Post subject:

Latest report: We have confirmed that dangerous alien twins from the constellation Gemini have invaded Earth! Laughing

And, just wait until the alien virgins invade from Virgo! Twisted Evil

kitchenwitch · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 5:56 pm Post subject:

Don't the Martians get frequent flier miles when they travel to Earth? Cool

Although I don't know why they need to come here and do all those anal probes. You've seen one asshole then you've seen them all.

JuanaLaLoca · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:19 pm Post subject:

kitchenwitch · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:31 pm Post subject:

Wait, I don't have a proctologist. Whew!

Vintage Girl · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:44 pm Post subject:

You're forgetting where you are KW. Everyone has a proctologist here. Twisted Evil

_________________
Girls are like phones. We love to be held and talked to, but if you press the wrong button you'll be disconnected!

kitchenwitch · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:55 pm Post subject:

Mpls Druid · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:07 pm Post subject:

Yeah that's true, and the instruments/probes are ice cold! Surprised

BlueEmperor · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:57 pm Post subject:

It's not just the Bushes and the Windsors who are reptilian. Kris Kritofferson is also, inexplicably, included in Mr Icke's list of prominent lizards.

He claims that in 1990, while he was a national spokesperson for the Green Party, he received a message from the spirit world through a medium - because obviously, the 'spirit world' customarily communicates to the son of God via Miss Betty Shine of Brighton. Apparently, the spirit world told him, by way of Miss Shine, that he was a 'healer', who had been chosen for his courage and sent to 'heal the earth'. She told him that one day there would be a great earthquake and that the "sea will reclaim land," because human beings were 'abusing the earth'. Not surprisingly, upon informing the party leadership, the Greens promptly banned him from speaking in public on their behalf.

Not long after that, Mr Icke began wearing only turquoise and held a press conference to announce to the world: "I am a channel for the Christ spirit. The title was given to me very recently by the Godhead" and, in an interview with Sir Terry Wogan some years ago, went on to announce that he was, in fact, "the son of God".

The 'Son of God' subsequently predicted that Great Britain would be devastated by tidal waves and earthquakes. When armageddon failed to materialise, he claimed he'd been "misinterpreted by the media".

B.E.
_________________
The doctor is in!

JuanaLaLoca · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 9:49 pm Post subject:

I think I found the real alien!

Vintage Girl · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 10:00 pm Post subject:

That really does take 'scrawny' to a whole new level. Shocked

_________________
Girls are like phones. We love to be held and talked to, but if you press the wrong button you'll be disconnected!

SilverMiniCooperS · Inmate of the Asylum Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 195

The new poster child for world hunger. Confused

Vintage Girl · Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 10:31 pm Post subject:

OK, here's another one, probably a little more well known than the dragon race of beings.

2) Apollo 11 Moon Landings were faked by NASA

Proponents of the Apollo moon landing hoax accusations allege that the Apollo Moon Landings never took place, and were faked by NASA with possible CIA support. Enthusiasts of this theory claim that:

The astronauts could not have survived the trip because of exposure to radiation
The photos were altered: the Crosshairs on some photos appear to be behind objects, rather than in front of them where they should be
The quality of the photographs is implausibly high.
There are no stars in any of the photos, and astronauts never report seeing any stars from the capsule windows.
Identical backgrounds in photos that are listed as taken miles apart.
The moon's surface during the daytime is so hot that camera film would have melted.
No blast crater appeared from the landing
The launch rocket produced no visible flame.
The flag placed on the surface by the astronauts flapped despite there being no wind on the Moon.

Any astro-physicists out there who can dispel some of these claims for us?
_________________
Girls are like phones. We love to be held and talked to, but if you press the wrong button you'll be disconnected!

Vintage Girl · Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:13 pm Post subject:

OK, that last one obviously wasn't barmy enough for you. Try this one!

JuanaLaLoca · Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 3:53 pm Post subject:

Even if they did have 666 encoded into them, what could that possibly do to you? Rolling Eyes

Mpls Druid · Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:52 pm Post subject:

The number of the beast, eh? Glad I don't believe in all that hocus pocus.

kitchenwitch · Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 5:26 pm Post subject:

I'm part of that vast barcode conspiracy....I have the technology to make barcodes and stick them on things. MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Personally I'd be more afraid of someone embedding a microchip under my skin than sticking a barcode on my ass. The government is scarier than the devil, especialy since I don't believe in satan either.

BlueEmperor · Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject:

To be honest, the whole 'Number of the Beast' thing is a very contentious scriptural concept. Obviously, '666' is the most widely-known and recognised interpretation, yet modern scholars uncovered a 3rd-Century version of the Book of Revelation (the earliest known copy) that uses '616'. The King James translation of the original Greek was "Six hundred threescore and six". But a few years ago Oxford scholars used advanced imaging techniques to read previously illegible portions of the Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 115, which gives the 'Number of the Beast' as '616'. This aligns with the Codex Alexandrinus and the Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus - one of the best Latin manuscripts.

Most scholars seem to be of the opinion that the so-called 'Number of the Beast' actually refers to contemporary figures - most likely the Roman Emperor Nero - about whom it would have been dangerous to openly criticise, hence the code. The Emperor Nero's name, when written in Aramaic, is valued at 666 in Hebrew numerology. The reference would, therefore, have been a way of speaking out against the Emperor without the Roman authorities knowing about it. Interestingly, if you use the Greek spelling of Emperor Nero's name the Hebrew transliteration equates numerically to 666, while his title in Latin is valued as 616.

There are also scholars who believe it could be a reference to the Emperor Caligula or possibly the Emperor Domitian.

B.E.
_________________
The doctor is in!

BlueEmperor · Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:02 am Post subject:

Mpls Druid · Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 5:32 am Post subject:

And he's not here at the asylum why????

wakeyboy · Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 5:29 pm Post subject:

kitchenwitch · Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 9:47 pm Post subject:

wakeyboy · Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:26 am Post subject:

kitchenwitch · Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 2:52 am Post subject:

Is the "son of God" the guy that Rupert Murdoch is sponsoring?
_________________
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
-Oscar Wilde

BlueEmperor · Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:14 pm Post subject:

No, that was the former editor of The Sun and prize plonker Kelvin MacKenzie. He was "90 per cent certain" to stand against Mr Davis if the Labour Party chose not to put up a candidate, because The Sun is a crypto-fascist publication perfectly comfortable with imprisoning potentially innocent people indefinately without charge.

Then, in inimitable MacKenzie style, he managed to insult the people of neighbouring Hull and, low and behold, he is now 100 per cent certain NOT to stand.

B.E.
_________________
The doctor is in!

kitchenwitch · Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:18 am Post subject:

I suppose it's best he insulted them now and just went away. It saves everyone a lot of time and aggravation. But people like that always find a way to be a thorn in someone's side so I'm sure he'll be back before long.
_________________
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
-Oscar Wilde

BlueEmperor · Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:39 pm Post subject:

Kelvin MacKenzie is the turd that won't flush. Mr MacKenzie is one of this country's foremost practitioners of gutter journalism and it was under his stewardship that The Sun became the populist, sensationalist rag that it is today - under the generous patronage of that cancerous scab Rupert Murdoch.

Throughout his time as editor of The Sun, Mr MacKenzie was Mr Murdoch's fawning lickspittle, meekly complying with his master's various missives and directives as to the political content on the newspaper. Mr MacKenzie added a dash of venom, by concocting some of The Sun's more vulgar headlines, often printing outright lies. The most infamous of these is probably "Freddie Starr Ate My Hampster", which turned out to be a concoction of the publicist Max Clifford. He printed numerous vitriolic personal attacks on individuals, including a particularly unflattering photograph of the then 70-year-old Labour leader, Michael Foot, alongside the headline "Do You Really Want This Old Fool To Run Britain?" He published a story, alleged to be based on an interview with an American psychologist, claiming that Tony Benn was "insane" (the psychologist in question subsequently denounced the piece and it transpired that the interview was entirely fabricated). He accused Sir Elton John of sleeping with underage rentboys and of removing his guard dog's voiceboxes because their barking was keeping him up at night (for which Sir Elton successfully sued The Sun for libel). He published a desparaging article about the disfigured Falklands War veteran Simon Weton. There was another accusing Australian Aborigines of being "brutal and treacherous". And Mr MacKenzie personally despatched photographers to break into a psychiatric hospital to ask the dying Sherlock Holmes actor Jeremy Brett whether he was dying of AIDS. He was not. The late Mr Brett, a manic depressive who never got over the death of his wife, was in fact dying of cardiomyopathy, a heart condition caused by a childhood case of rheumatic fever and exacerbated by his 60-a-day smoking habit. Mr Brett was not gay.

Of course, by far Mr MacKenzie's most infamous and offensive slander - and one which he brazenly and unapologetically perpetuates - was when The Sun tried to blame Liverpool FC fans for the Hillsborough disaster. Via his newspaper, Mr MacKenzie made numerous scurillous accusations, including that drunken Liverpool fans had picked the pockets of victims, urinated on police and emergency service workers, beat up a constable performing mouth-to-mouth and even of sexually abusing the dead body of a female victim! Despite these lies being comprehensively rubbished, Mr MacKenzie has never apologised and continues to blame Liverpool fans for the disaster.

God forbid this venomous guttersnipe should ever attain public office.

B.E.
_________________
The doctor is in!

muppetmurderer · Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:51 pm Post subject:

So, reading between the lines, BE, I take it that News International would not be in your share portfolio....?

Very Happy

Stick with the Independent!
_________________
.
.
Do you know what it means when you come home to a little affection, a little tenderness, and a little sympathy? It means you're in the wrong house

kitchenwitch · Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 5:21 pm Post subject:

Blue will certainly let you know where you stand with him. He's not at all wishy-washy, at least as far as politics are concerned. Very Happy

_________________
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
-Oscar Wilde

BlueEmperor · Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:14 pm Post subject:

The Independent??? That left-wing rag? Don't make me laugh! The viewspaper of record for the politically correct lefties, bleeding-heart liberals, impertinent republicans, pro-Arab Israel-haters, and all of the pseudo-scientific killjoy environmentalists.

Apart from anything else, two of the journalists I most despite in the whole world write for The Independent - that ignorant little twit Johann Hari and the insufferable Yasmin Alibhai-Brown.

B.E.
_________________
The doctor is in!

Mpls Druid · Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:17 pm Post subject:

Oh stop mincing words, Blue, tell us what you really think!! Wink

wakeyboy · Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:28 pm Post subject:

BlueEmperor · Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 1:22 am Post subject:

I note that you do not actually contradict anything I say though. It's no secret that The Independent's founding principal was to rival The Guardian and the lefty newsletter of choice. It's only other distinguishing feature was its claims to be 'independent' - and poking fun at the other papers for being owned by people like Mr Murdoch and Conrad Black. But the paper has been dominated since the mid-90's by Sir Tony O'Reilly and INM. So, in my opinion, The Independent owned by Sir Tony is no different to The Times owned by Mr Murdoch or the Daily Telegraph owned by Sir Frederick and Sir David Barclay (and Lord Black before them) or the Daily Express owned by Richard Desmond or the Daily Mail owned by Viscount Rothermere... they all have an agenda and The Independent's agenda is characterised by a bunch of museli-eating numpties.

The Independent is one of the leading exponents of the great 'climate change' con and a backer of all things naff and trendy - such as PR, anti-Americanism, republicanism (second in this respect only to The Guardian), Israel-bashing, and, of course, being painful embarrassment by British history and traditions.

B.E.
_________________
The doctor is in!

wakeyboy · Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 2:56 am Post subject:

BlueEmperor · Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:35 pm Post subject:

JuanaLaLoca · Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 9:15 pm Post subject:

I don't think that comparing the Queen to a president is quite right. Surely your Prime Minister is somewhat like a president, so you do have such a thing, although our political systems have many differences. The Queen is a bonus!

wakeyboy · Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 10:03 pm Post subject:

BlueEmperor · Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:22 am Post subject:

I am talking about any system under which the Head of State is a politician, whether it be an executive president or a purely ceremonial one. They both have that same drawback of being yet another tired old politico in a grey suit. There is a great deal to be said for separating the functions of the Head of State and the Head of Government - in our case the Prime Minister - and having an apolitical figure as the former. By embodying the State, it means we need not be tormented by the tug of war that must take place in the hearts of so many Americans in wanting to love their country while at the same time having to cheer a president who is, well... George W. Bush. I and my fellow countrymen are blessed in that we can all love the Queen and still damn the Government.

B.E.
_________________
The doctor is in!

wakeyboy · Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:38 am Post subject:

BlueEmperor · Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:44 pm Post subject:

What utter rubbish. This idea that there's a load of embittered poor people sitting around in their hovels feeling hard done by because the Queen gets to live in a castle is an absolute nonsense, more often than not put about by middle class intellectual prigs. It's total crap... not to mention more than a little bloody patronising. And from what I've been reading in the newspapers over the weekend it sounds to me like the Queen's living in conditions that are far from luxurious. How many people do you know, poor or well off, who can say they live in homes that haven't been redecorated since 1948 and whose wiring has remained untouched since the 1950s? I read the other day that the Princess Royal was nearly killed getting into her car when a chunk of falling masonry just missed her in the quadrangle of Buckingham Palace.

We need to kill forever this idea that the monarchy represents anything less than excellent value for money. Obviously, the recent publication of the accounts for the Royal Household has stimulated the predictable royal-bashing from groups like Republic. It amazes me that - what is it now, two years? - since a tabloid photographer posing as a footman snapped Her Majesty eating out of Tupperware, republican elements still try to accuse the Queen of extravagance. Now in Her eighties, the queen performs hundreds of engagements a year, has tens of thousands of people to garden parties and receives over 50,000 items of correspondence. The Royal Family cost the taxpayer £40 million a year out of a £500 billion budget. This is chicken feed compared to most republics. The USA spends more than that keeping the President's private jet, Air Force One, fuelled and on stand-by for a year.

Obviously, this year has bought more than the usual lot of carping, as the Royal Household's expenditure is up - conveniently ignoring all the previous years in which Her Majesty's spending has gone been down. This is despite the increased need for security and the ongoing serious structural problems in both Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle that I have already mentioned and for which the Queen has insufficient cash to repair.

The majority of costs incurred by the monarchy would still arise if we had a 'bicycling monarchy' on the cheap, since 'Head of State expenditure' is unavoidable. And, in any case, the idea that Dutch monarchy is somehow 'less ostentatious' is piffle. Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands is fabulously wealthy, probably even more so than Queen Elizabeth II. The Dutch Royal Family does not disclose its net worth but they have a large stake in Royal Dutch Shell and the Dutch bank ABN Amro and their wealth has been estimated to be as much as $2.5 billion (though they dispute this figure). Even the Princely Family of Liechtenstein are said to be more well off than the Windsors, thanks to the family trust that manages their assets; the Princely Family owns the LGT banking group and RiceTec, a Texas company that develops hybrid rice. Doesn't quite match up to recent revelations that the Queen now owns a branch of McDonald's in Slough, does it?

B.E.
_________________
The doctor is in!