This is a follow up to my recent article about David Icke and the spurious criticism it received. The best way to do this is to go through some of the comments. The following quotes are verbatim.
“Icke got banned for telling the truth.”
No, he appears to have been banned for ignoring repeated warnings about making ill-advised comments on the coronavirus.
“So The Duran now advocates for censorship?”
Not as far as I know, and neither do I, but many people don’t understand what censorship is, or free speech. David Icke and others like him have no problem branding the rich and famous child sex abusers, Satanists, even mass murderers, yet if you accused Icke of kicking his dog he’d probably sue you for defamation. Icke has in fact been sued for defamation, successfully. He alleged Canadian lawyer Richard Warman had sought to suppress his “exposure” of Satanic ritual child abuse. That action was concluded in 2015 with Icke shelling out a tidy sum.
Defamation isn’t a free speech issue, although things can get complicated. The British politician Jeffrey Archer was awarded half a million pounds in libel damages against a newspaper that claimed he’d had sex with a prostitute. A decade later the truth came out, and Archer ended up in criminal court.
My own view is that in the age of social media, it is largely a waste of time and resources for anyone to sue for defamation unless the defamatory material is both extremely gross and is published by a mainstream source that is generally regarded as above reproach. We have seen with the years’ long lie campaign against Donald Trump that little if any of the American media can now be so regarded.
Another point here, when someone is the victim of an especially gross libel by a “fringe” source, the usual course of action is to ignore it. Some people, including David Icke, see this as vindication: “If Lord Rothschild really is not a blood-drinking lizard, why doesn’t he sue me?”
Yeah, right.
“The author is severly misinformed about the Hampstead child abuse case…”
No, he is not. I met some of the people who supported and still support this garbage. To a man and woman they are batshit crazy.
“re: Hampstead case. Below is a compilation of police interviews…”
The author goes on to link a YouTube video, one that should not be on YouTube because all these videos were ordered to be removed by the Family Court and later by the Crown Court.
Again, this is not a free speech issue. The two kids in these videos are supposed to be protected, not blighted for the rest of their lives.
The author of the same comment goes on to parrot the usual claims about the late Jimmy Savile. Like Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein, Savile is said to have been a serial rapist. A High Court judge found he had committed over thirty rapes. Yet like Cosby and Weinstein there was not one contemporaneous police report or medical report to validate even one of these allegations. What does that suggest?
“The protocols of the learned elders of Zion are genuine…”
No, they’re not.
“It saddened me quite deeply to read this article by ‘The Darkman’ on The Duran. Hurling accusations at Mr. Icke, without demonstrating precisely where he went wrong is without merit. “
No, your comprehension is wrong. Here is what I actually said about Icke:
“If your information about David Icke comes only from the mainstream media, don’t believe a word: he is no anti-Semite, no hate preacher, and no madman. Rather, he means well but is extremely gullible… Primarily, David Icke is a modern mystic, and should always be viewed as such.”
I also provide documentation on that. Is this what the mainstream media and powerful Jewish groups say about Icke, seriously?
“Banning Icke and others like him is a sign of weakness, not strength.”
I have never said Icke should be banned. I have suffered far more legalised persecution than he has. In 1996, an attempt was made by a powerful Jewish organisation to have me thrown in gaol for having the temerity to expose and document their lies. I was actually arrested. Has Icke ever been arrested?
Like most everyone else, I find the current situation troubling, but the governments of the world are caught between a rock and a hard place. If the coronavirus turns out to be the second coming of the Great Plague, tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions, could die. On the other hand, if it turns out to be no worse than common or garden influenza, the global shutdown will do enormous economic damage. Clearly to take the extreme position is the lesser of evils.
The situation with the virus remains ambiguous, one group of experts contradicting another. Under those circumstances it is reasonable that someone like Icke who had a massive subscriber base on YouTube be asked to refrain from adding ill-informed speculation to the existing debate. He ignored that warning, and has now paid the price.
Don’t feel too sorry for him, this ban will only enhance his martyr status.
The post David Icke’s Expulsion From YouTube — A Clarification appeared first on The Duran.
Source