• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Dutch Government censors David Icke (not allowed to come to Holland)

Select those you agree with:

  • 01: I think it's good to disallow David Icke to speak

  • 02: I think it's good to allow David Icke to speak

  • 03: I am 'glad' they censor free speech more and more

  • 04: I am 'sad' they censor free speech more and more

  • 05: I don't like David Icke, but he should be able to share his beliefs

  • 06: I do like David Icke, and he should be able to share his beliefs


Results are only viewable after voting.

stvdv

Veteran Member
It's not a free speech issue, it's border control issue.

No foreigner has the right to enter a country, especially not for the purpose of enriching themselves and promoting their ideology.
Thank you for your POV. I see it as a free speech issue though, not a border control issue. Time will tell who got it right here
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
Thank you for providing me with the video with subtitles.
Indeed: Icke does not promote Anti-Semitism, he is not a Holocaust denier.
Thank you

Clearly he is not, but mainstream media uses this lie to shut him off. Too bad most still love mainstream media and think they speak truth
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
It's about a term we often use in Europe.
La pensée unique.
La pensée unique: a freedom of thought conundrum
:hugehug:
Thank your for your link. I missed that OP of yours, a very good and true one. Mainstream media does a good job in spreading all this misinformation as a trick to take gradually our freedom away, and most people just accept it. Before WW2 many people also did not see any trouble with Hitler, but soon they discovered his true nature. I think we are heading in a similar direction, only this time it is not 1 person but many
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Yes, I don't need the government for that.
But they can do that. They can identify people that are threats to those that cannot think in their states and ban then from coming into their country. Like many supporters of woo woo you do not seem to understand the concept of free speech.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
And is David Icke (what an appropriate name!) complaining? He still can go to quite a few other countries. And of course he has free speech in his native land. But when it comes to being banned from countries he is a rank amateur. Don't get me wrong. There is no excuse for antisemitism. But it appears that Icke has only been banned from the Netherlands. Steven Anderson has been banned from over thirty countries. If you want hate, we are number 1. 'Murica!!

Steven Anderson (pastor) - Wikipedia
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
But they can do that. They can identify people that are threats to those that cannot think in their states and ban then from coming into their country. Like many supporters of woo woo you do not seem to understand the concept of free speech.

I understand, some people need the government to protect them from other people's opinions.
I just rather not be one of them.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
I understand, some people need the government to protect them from other people's opinions.
I just rather not be one of them.
Because evidently the Dutch government considers its own citizens to be handicapped, and handicapped people need to be protected from words and messages that may harm them.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
Well, then you're doing better than David Icke.
"I doing better than Icke I don't know"

We believe different about certain things

But the point is, that I want him to be free to voice his opinions, and that I want to be free to accept or reject (and v.v.)
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I understand, some people need the government to protect them from other people's opinions.
I just rather not be one of them.
You might be a prime example of someone that needs such protection. Unfortunately many of those that do not need such protection make exactly the claim that you just did. I know far too little about your personal beliefs to state with conviction either way.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
I understand, some people need the government to protect them from other people's opinions.
I just rather not be one of them.
I agree completely

Babies need protection, small children too.

But once grown up, I don't need to be protected from words others say. If I claim I need to be protected then I weaken myself tremendously

Though

I think this is more an issue of respect or lack thereof, that some people want to have the freedom to impose their beliefs on others.

Probably due to fear or being unable to tolerate others their opinions

And they try to impose their will on a rather very small group, which looks like discrimination even
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I agree completely

Babies need protection, small children too.

But once grown up, I don't need to be protected from words others say. If I claim I need to be protected then I weaken myself tremendously

Though

I think this is more an issue of respect or lack thereof, that some people want to have the freedom to impose their beliefs on others.

Probably due to fear or being unable to tolerate others their opinions

And they try to impose their will on a rather very small group, which looks like discrimination even
And once again, in fact even more so, this is exactly they sort of nonsense that would come from one that needs such protection.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
I think that 1984 is their Bible.
Thought police...what a wonderful word...;)
1984 AND Brave New World (new normal)

This shift in thinking happened after the Corona indoctrination. So much fear was spread by the governments. It seems they want their government to decide everything for them now. Well, I think that is exactly what Klaus Schwab has been planning the last few decades. He is not stupid, that he knew this would lead exactly to what he envisioned. Human psyche, for the majority, is quite predictable, after all we are all human.
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Is that all that you have? The problem with Icke is not just that he is wrong. People have the right be wrong from sun up to sun down and times in between. What they do not have a right to do is to harm others and there is a great potential for that with the idiocy that Icke spews.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Is that all that you have? The problem with Icke is not just that he is wrong. People have the right be wrong from sun up to sun down and times in between. What they do not have a right to do is to harm others and there is a great potential for that with the idiocy that Icke spews.

May I give an explicit example? There was an incredibly brave magistrate, a district attorney that fought organized crime and he was considered a braggart, a loudmouth, a visionary by some politicians.
There is even a video on YT of one politician who insults him on live TV, from the nineties.

It turns out this politician was arrested and jailed for organized crime.

So...I am very suspicious whenever someone wants to censor Icke.
And I am really curious about how personal the motivations of this censorship are.
 
Last edited:

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
"I doing better than Icke I don't know"

We believe different about certain things

But the point is, that I want him to be free to voice his opinions, and that I want to be free to accept or reject (and v.v.)
... which he is.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
You might be a prime example of someone that needs such protection. Unfortunately many of those that do not need such protection make exactly the claim that you just did. I know far too little about your personal beliefs to state with conviction either way.

Isn't that who you are advocating for?
People whom you believe need such protection?
IMO, you can't protect people from everything.
Better they learn how to protect and think for themselves.

IDK if you advocate for bigger government but the government is made up of people and like the rest of us, just as prone to false information.
 
Top