This second wife Richards later divorced David Icke and was quoted in the Daily Mail saying he thought she was turning into a Reptilian. She later denied saying that, but neither she nor Icke sued or even threatened to sue the paper, which is strange. Which means it looks like part of the project.
Icke’s dad was in the RAF. Before he became a conspiracy theorist, David played football for Hereford United, was a reporter for the Leicester Advertiser, and then was an announcer for BBC radio. In 1976, he moved to Saudi Arabia, allegedly to “help” with their football team. That’s curious. In 1981 he became a news presenter for BBC’s Newsnight, a major news program in the UK. He continued to work on BBC Sport until 1990, by which time he was a household name. In 1989 he was one of a handful of panelists in the high-profile debate on animal rights at the Royal Institute of Great Britain. Other panelists included Germaine Greer, Tom Regan, and Mary Warnock.
All this success is more indication he was connected, since it is via these connections you succeed—as Icke himself later admitted in lectures. He has told us the world is rigged, so before 1990 it appears it
was very rigged in his favor. Despite that, suddenly in 1990 Icke appeared to go off the deep end, claiming he was the “Son of the Godhead” and claiming to receive messages from the beyond from Wang Ye Lee. That name sounds like another Intel joke. Icke’s wife Atherton changed her name to Michaela, which she claimed was an aspect of the Archangel Michael. Rather than put them both in straightjackets, Terry Wogan was instructed to invite Icke to come on his program Wogan, a popular prime-time talk show. Icke also appeared on BBC radio with Nicky Campbell, and ITV with Fern Britton. I have to ask you, does this sound like a logical response to a colleague going starkers? Invite him on national media to make an ass of himself? No, this looks like the start of a new project, doesn’t it, with this as his bon voyage publicity. Remember, Wogan had him back on a few years later, by which time he was already vindicated. Wogan backed down and appeared to be lectured by the superior Icke. Very very strange. Ask yourself this: why would Wogan have him on, and why would Wogan allow Icke to have the upper hand? These shows are completely staged, and Wogan and his people were in control. They could have edited the show any way they liked. So why run promotion for Icke? And, of course, they did a similar thing with Alex Jones on Piers Morgan a few years later. Piers is a Morgan. Hello, does anyone ever make any connections? Does anyone even look at a last name? These people don’t have to hide because their audience is so gullible.
Within the year, Icke had a book out with a mainstream publisher. Gill and MacMillan published Truth Vibrations in 1991. Seeing that Gill and MacMillan mainly publishes educational books for school and college students, why would they publish this wild conspiracy theory of a guy claiming to be a “World Visionary”? It makes no sense. Although we are told Truth Vibrations was a bestseller, only one copy comes up in the US at Ebay on a search.
Five more books came out in the next three years. This from a guy who couldn’t get through high school, dropping out at age 15. And again, all were promoted by mainstream publishers. The first of these was Love Changes Everything. But we find the same thing at Ebay, with only two copies available worldwide, one in Australia and one in the UK! It was published by Aquarian Press. To see some of the other offerings of Aquarian Press through the years, go here. Looks like another MI6 front to me.
We are told Icke has a huge audience, but to me it looks manufactured. The lack of books at Ebay tends to confirm that. We see huge audiences for his lectures, but those can be bought. Remember, Leni Riefenstahl had 30,000 extras for her films back in the 1930s. So just because you see a packed auditorium does not mean any real people are paying to get in. Maybe they were paid to sit there. Do you really think that many people are going to show up to be lectured to by David Icke? Believe it if you must, but I no longer do.
A couple of readers have compared me to Icke, or asked me about Icke, which is why I am here on this page today. I point out that Icke tends to accept mainstream history, simply giving you an alternative reading. He accepts that the Protocols are real. Like Dave McGowan, he accepts that Kennedy, Lincoln and MLK were assassinated, etc. So he and I have nothing in common. I have proved that most of the big events of recent history were staged, so my reading and Icke’s reading have no point of contact.
In my opinion, Icke is from the families he is pretending to out, and his project is to blackwash conspiracy theories in general, by making them look as whacky as possible. This is what all the Reptilian shape-changer stuff is about. Like Ezra Pound, Bill Cooper, Eustace Mullins, and hundreds of others, Icke is an Anti, sent in to sully-by-association anyone who allies themselves to him, or resembles him in any way. They want to be sure that anyone who researches Jewish subjects, in
whatever way, can be tarred and feathered with the same pot as Icke. I think that it is possible that, like Pound, Icke may someday soon be instructed to go completely mad, ending up in a mental institution. This will finally and abruptly blackwash all his statements about Zionists. But since he has appeared half-mad all along, this may not be necessary.
Notice that another prominent plank of Icke’s theorizing is that our world is a hologram, beamed from the Moon or Saturn. Except for the part about Saturn, he shares this theory with mainstream science as sold at such places as Scientific American and other top science rags. Neither Icke nor the science mags are in good company there. On my science site, I have deconstructed this project thoroughly in many papers. It is a conspicuous project of Western Intel, another subset of the old Operation Chaos, by which worldwide Intelligence attempts to explain to you the source of your own confusion. It isn’t that you are purposely miseducated, taught a lot of contradictory things to keep you disempowered. It isn’t that all problems—scientific and non-scientific—are vastly overcomplicated, to keep you from progressing. It isn’t that the media is one gigantic lie. It isn’t that you are kept miserable and confused so that you will spend more money to compensate. It isn’t that you are kept in a state of managed fear and anxiety and panic, to the same end. No, according to them, the problem is that you are a brain in a tank, fed information from the Moon in the form of holography. You aren’t being hoaxed by crypto- Jewish governors, intent on stealing everything you own while you are in therapy; no, you are being hoaxed by aliens or Satanists or reptilians from another dimension.
Also notice that Icke has nourished a relationship with the far right, while I have simply outed it as another hoax. I have no relationship to the far right, and want none. I sell myself as an old-fashioned liberal (not neo-liberal), of the pre-Limbaugh definitions. Meaning that I am opposed to both the old- world-order of top-down control via lying and theft and the new-world-order of top-down control via lying and theft. Mainly I am for the truth and for a world not managed on every level by the hoaxing governors. I am against all the treasury-sucking schemes of the elite, and believe that public monies should go to real and useful projects. I am against raping the world and the majority of its people for profit.
But on a gut level, I think I am personally offended by the lies. I am offended that I have been lumped in with the sheep, expected to believe this stuff. I am offended that they are still trying to pass stuff by me in emails or phonecalls. I say to them, tell it to someone who might believe it. I am the one who did all this research, so you can’t fool me anymore. If you try, you are just exposing yourself. Some of them still try, though, which indicates to me they are just following orders. They haven’t read my papers—beyond a skimming of a couple—and their instructions are to try to divert me for any amount of time they can, in any way possible. This is what RatWiki is, and the forums, and the spamming of my inbox. Anything to keep me from doing more research. It isn’t working, is it? Money poorly spent, their only sin.
Addendum May 15, 2017: A reader sent in some supporting information. Icke admits he lives on the Isle of Wight. Curiously, many of those in the peerage in the families listed above also live/lived there, including the Stuarts, Leighs, Seymours, Parrs, and Vernon-Harcourts. Icke claims he is not wealthy, living in a row of flats called Vernon House. That’s a curious coincidence, eh? He has a video on his own site, showing his flat there. He lives in flat 8, of course. They didn’t have a flat 11 or 33 or 47, so that was the best they could do. Strangely, no one in any of the flats has a name on the callbox, including Icke:
That’s a screen capture. How do you know who to buzz, if you don’t know the flat number? Inconvenient, isn’t it? Are your flats or apartments labelled like that? I doubt it. All six were written by the same person, weren’t they? And where are flats 2, 3, 6 and 7? There are ten numbers, but only six flats. You will say there is a second callbox somewhere, but again that isn’t very convenient for visitors, is it?
First published May 14, 2017
Just my opinion, as usual.
I am just going to tell you a few basic genealogy facts, and you can do the rest here.
Start at the House of Names, where you will find the name Icke is a variation of the name Hicke or Hickes. Just remove the “H”, you see. I don’t know how David Icke pronounces it, but it was not originally pronounced Eye-ck. It was pronounced Ick, as in icky. Rhyming with sick. And dick.
So the Ickes descend from the British Hicks/Hickes. Who are the Hicks? They are in the peerage, being the Baronets of Beverston Castle. The 1st Baronet Hicks married Margaret Paget in about 1650, and this linked him to all the top families. She was the daughter of William Paget, 4th Lord Paget. Her grandmother was Nazareth Newton, and Nazareth’s grandmother was Margaret Woodville, daughter of the Earl Rivers. A Woodville had been Queen (of Edward IV) in those years, remember. They were later linked to the Tudors. Before she married Paget, Nazareth Newton had been married to Thomas Southwell, whose mother was Margaret Neville. The Nevilles were the Lords of Abergavenny, related to the Lords Dacre and the Parrs. The Nevilles were also the Earls of Westmoreland, and later became the Westmorelands. Through them, the Hicks were also related to Earls of Stafford and the Beauchamps, Earls of Warwick. Through the Pagets, they were related to the Knollys, and through them to the Riches, Boleyns, Howards, and Spencers.
The Hicks later became Hicks-Beach, the Earls of Saint Aldwyn. The 3rd Earl was still alive in 2003. His maternal grandfather was Henry Mills, and Mills’ mother was Mary Seymour Dawson-Damer. The Seymours were the Marquesses of Hertford. Her father was a Dawson, the 4th Earl of Portarlington and her mother was Harriet Montagu, of the famous Montagus. Her father was the 6th Baron Rokeby. The Montagus are related to the Robinsons, Morrises, and Drakes. Through the Dawsons, they are related to the Stuarts, Earls of Bute. George Washington was a Montague.
But can we link David Icke to this nest? Well, David’s middle name is Vaughan, which is also a clue.
The Vaughans are also prominent in the peerage, being the Barons of Fethard and Earls of Lisburne. The daughter of the 1st Earl Vaughan married Baronet Palk, whose grandmother was Frances Abraham. The Palks were also related to the Blighs, Earls of Darnley; and the Fullers. Also to the Hydes, Earls of Clarendon; and through them to the Stuarts, Dukes of Lennox; and the Howards, Earls of Suffolk and Dukes of Norfolk. These Howards are again linked to the Dacres.
Notice that the Stuarts, Dacres and Howards have already come up twice, giving a doubled indication Icke is from these lines.
Icke’s mother’s name is not given, but we are told she was a Cooke. The Cooke’s were also Baronets. They are related to the Wemyss; the Balfours; the Somersets, Dukes of Beaufort; the Stewarts, Earls of Galloway; the Baronets Middleton; the Pagets, Earls of Uxbridge; the Russells, Dukes of Bedford; the Egertons, Dukes of Bridgwater; and the Leveson-Gowers, Earls of Gower (think Levinson). Through the Cookes, we again come to the Riches, including Henry Rich, 1st Earl of Holland.
Notice that the Pagets came up again, giving us a tripled indication Icke is from these lines.
David Icke’s first wife was Linda Atherton. Atherton is also an important name in the peerage. They are related to the Kennedys, Marquesses of Ailsa. These Kennedys are again related to the same Stuarts and Howards. Also to the Hamiltons, Lyons, Sutherlands, Setons, Leveson-Gowers, and Lindsays that we have seen in recent papers.
Notice that both the Cookes and Athertons are closely related to the Leveson-Gowers, possibly indicating Icke married a cousin. And seeing the Stuarts and Howards come up again gives us a quadrupled indication Icke is from these lines.
The Athertons are also related to the Pilkingtons, so Ricky Gervais’ round-headed little friend in the podcasts is probably from the peerage as well. The Athertons are also related to the Nevilles and the Leghs. Through the Hungerfords they are related to the Moores and Owens. They are also related to the Baronets Vernon, the Baronets Dutton, and the Cholmondeleys. Through the Cholmondeleys, they are related to Breretons, and through them to several Kings, including Henry IV. In 1800, a Henrietta Atherton married James Smith-Stanley. He was the son of the 11th Earl of Derby, Edward Stanley.
Also see Edward Atherton, famous FBI agent. Also Faxon Atherton, California millionaire in the 1800s, and his daughter Florence who married Edward Eyre. Also the actor William Atherton, whose mother is a Robinson. Also Charles Humphrey Atherton, descended from Kingsleys, Spaldings, Butlers, Masons and Cranes of MA. This links them to the fake witchcraft trials. Maj. Gen. Humphrey Atherton was the judge who allegedly executed Ann Hibbins in 1656. Although he has a page at Wikipedia, it is not listed under a Wiki search for Atherton. He held the highest military rank in colonial New England. He was also a land speculator, which means he was a millionaire and a crook. He also allegedly hanged several Quakers, although if you don’t believe it you aren’t alone. Both Nathaniel Hawthorne and Henry Longfellow later wrote about Atherton, indicating once again he was a previous agent.
Icke’s second wife was Pamela Leigh Richards. Notice first the middle name. We saw the Leghs above, didn’t we? Same name, different spelling. The Richards are also related to all the people above. For instance, in 1932, Patricia Richards of the peerage married George Child-Villiers, Earl of Jersey. When that marriage ended, she moved on to Major Robin Filmer-Wilson, son of Arthur Stanley
Wilson-Filmer. The Barons Wilson were related to the Grays (Greys), and through them to the Stanleys. The Wilsons were also related to the Barings (Bank); the Smiths, Barons Carrington; the Foresters; the Townshends; the Manners, Dukes of Rutland; the Percys, Earls of Northumberland; the Seymours, Dukes of Somerset; and the Somersets, Dukes of Beaufort. We saw the Seymours and Somersets above, so, again, Icke was apparently marrying or bearding another cousin.
The Richards in the peerage go back to several Solomon Richards in the 17th century. They were still marrying Wilsons back then, since one of them married a Rhoda Wilson. Note the first name. The mother of another was named Dorothy Jacob. Note the last name. These Richards hit it big in 1814, when a Solomon Richards married Elizabeth Sewell. Her mother was a Beresford and her grandmother a Bermingham, which linked them to the Fitzgibbons and the Powers. Through the Beresfords, they were also related to the Hamiltons and the Balfours, who we saw above. This linked them to the Sackvilles, Stanhopes and Annesleys. The Stanhopes linked them to the Sneyds. The Sneyds link them to my previous paper on MLK.
More recently, a Nancy Richards married a Baronet Pickthorn in 1924. His mother was Edith Berkeley Murray, which last name also links us back to my previous paper. Who would have thought I could link my last paper to this one, linking Icke to MLK? Not intentional. It is just that—as I have told you —all famous people, black or white, are closely related. These families run everything worldwide, and only their offspring are placed in these positions in art, politics, the media, TV, films, science, etc.
In 1868, a Rev Richards of the peerage married Henrietta Fergusson, another bonnie marriage, since she was of the Fergusson Baronets. They were related to the Crawfords and Kennedys. These were the Kennedys, Earls of Cassillis, related again to the Foresters.
More recently, Commander Julian Richards married Janet Vaughan Jones in 1951. Remember, Icke’s middle name is Vaughan. In 1958, Jane Scott Richards married James Wallace Wilson Stuart, son of the Earl of Moray and Mabel Wilson. The Earl’s mother was Edith Palmer. They were related to the Grays, the Carnegies, the Murrays and the Blairs (think Tony Blair). The Murrays were Lords Balvaird. The Grays were related to the Stewarts, the Lyons, and the Kennedys. This Stewart was a son of James V of Scotland.
Then we have the current Richards, Barons Milverton. They married the Steuart-Corrys, who are just the Stuarts again. The Richards are also related to the Montagus, Dukes of Manchester.
The Infiltrated Revolution