First Thoughts on David Icke at Wembley Arena

Where the Dreamland Festival had been semi-academic and familial, my fieldwork at Icke’s London Wembley Arena presentation on Saturday, 27th of October 2012, could hardly have been more different in terms of atmosphere and setting. Rather than 120 attendees, there were close to 6000, and instead of a leafy Gothic retreat in southern USA, we were in London’s cavernous Wembley Arena. What’s more, it was bitterly cold, and it turned out that the queue I was in was not getting into the venue, due to a broken ticket scanner. It did give me a chance to listen in to some of the conversations going on around me.

A group of young men immediately behind me got talking to an older couple about Icke. This was their first time seeing him live, they said, although they had all watched his previous presentations online. Their friend had got them into it, they said, “he’s the real nutter”. The chap from the older couple laughed; “well, we’re all nutters here.”

“I’m surprised to see so many couples here,” he then opined. “Women don’t tend to be so awake.”

Eventually we were told to go to one of the other entrances, so we marched round to the front, and arrived at our seats just in time to catch the closing seconds of Gareth Icke’s opening set. Although I had a clear view of the stage, the steep and already almost full arena made getting to my seat awkward. I tried to get a bit of chat going with the others around me, but unlike Dreamland, people were keeping themselves to themselves.

The choice to have his son’s band play at the gig was criticised later by a few people; they thought it was “selling out”. The situation is certainly more complex than this, however; as already noted, Gareth is a director of Icke’s estate, and it cannot be coincidental that he released the single “Remember Who You Are” at the same time as his father’s book of the same title. Whatever his other faults (open to debate), Icke has always been a proud and attentive parent, promoting his children’s activities through his website, and his Ryde flat is adorned with soft toys for his grandchildren’s amusement. What is perhaps more surprising is that Gareth is prepared to throw his lot in with his father’s ideas quite so much.

Other than that, however, the show was typical of his later presentations; three sections, beginning with the “spiritworld – holographic universe” material, through the Illuminati, into Reptilians and then back to the real world, with practical applications. The first section moved extremely slowly. As has been the case since his earliest books, we got a potted history of Icke’s personal history, and a lot of speculative physics about how the universe is a hologram. One of the two women on my right dozed off, and latecomers trickled in throughout the first hour. The room was vast. Someone had brought a baby, which cried throughout.

In the second section, Icke started talking about the Illuminati. I was very interested in how the reptilian material was received; was this, as several reporters have suggested, something which put people off Icke’s other idea? Well, my experience suggests otherwise. The room fell quieter than would be possible through random means. The two ladies who had slept through the first section suddenly woke up; I saw several of the couples around me cuddling up. Two solutions suggested themselves; 1) the couples had bonded over the reptilian thesis, and the fact that they shared something dangerous was part of their shared identity, or 2) the reptilian thesis provided a meeting point between the conspiracist and New Age people. Nor can this really be explained by the suggestion that people are drawn to the more outlandish material for entertainment; given that you could watch any of his previous presentations on the internet for free, it would be an expensive night out, even if you lived in London to start with.

I was surprised, however, that he didn’t milk the Jimmy Savile aspect more. Given that it was the main story in the popular press at that time, including the more conservative (small c) outlets like the BBC and the Daily Mail, it would have seemed an obvious opportunity for Icke to argue that the mainstream media had caught up with him; yet he showed unusual restraint.

Towards the end of this section, he added some new material. Human Race, Get Off Your Knees had introduced the idea of the hollow Moon, and Remember Who You Are had added Saturn into the mix; Icke claims that Saturn is not only the origins of the term “Satan” and “Satanism”, but also of the idea of the Black Sun. The Reptilian frequencies are broadcast from Saturn and amplified by the Moon, and this Saturn-Moon matrix is an important aspect of the control mechanism through which we are controlled. I could not but think of Gurdjieff during this section; he wrote that most humans were unconscious, and that their emotions were “food for the moon”.

Perhaps as interesting, although less obvious, was his increasing use of terms taken from gnosticism. In particular, he several times referred to the highest powers of the Illuminati as “Archons”, rather than reptilians. Was this a way of distancing himself from the reptilian thesis without abandoning it altogether?

After a second break, (I retired to the bar), the third section proceeded as it has since 2003 or so; how these ideas might be taken into the real world. This particular performance added a new coda, however. A number of musicians were brought out, and Icke led a sing-along. Not only that, but he performed his “non-complidance”, and invited anyone in the audience to join him if they wanted to. I was frankly surprised at his energy, given that he’s in his fifties, suffering from arthritis and in no way slender. Moreover, it was a brave move given that this was his highest profile performance to date.

So; still talking about reptilians; still surprisingly New Age; moving noticeably towards gnostic terminology; still very energetic and a skilled orator. And, need I point it out; ETs, conspiracies and New Age…

5 thoughts on “First Thoughts on David Icke at Wembley Arena

  1. Jim Boyle April 2, 2013 / 2:57 am

    Thanks David. This gives a us small feel for the event.

    I find the use of the Archons interesting.I think John Lash was the first to push this connection in a major way. I think it is a way to get the Evangelicals on board with some of the other themes. The behavior of the historic Archons can indeed be made to fit the behavior of some of the modern interactions with some reported entities or world figures or movements.. That doesn’t necessarily mean they are the same thing. One could compare the actions and intents of suppressive governments or large multinational corporations, like Monsanto, to the behavior of some ancient mythological host of beings. That doesn’t mean they are those creatures, they perhaps just use the same efficient tactics which have the same end result for humans, sometimes on an equally large scale.

    I think you may be correct when posing “Was this a way of distancing himself from the reptilian thesis without abandoning it altogether?” The quilt he stitches together is coherent , yet is made from so many different patches of cloth from so many sources. He is not the only one who does this. however he is one of the most energetic and determined. Have to tip my hat to him for that alone.

  2. Will November 11, 2014 / 10:39 am

    I know this was sometime ago, but seeing this I feel compelled to comment: your comments about Icke’s restraint on the Savile issue is curious. Even curiouser is that you seem to believe “the mainstream media had caught up with him.” Can you cite just one instance where Icke publicly accused Savile of being a peadophile prior to Savile’s death? I can’t find any and I note that in The Perception Deception Icke’s weasel words are that he “did what I could to circulate this information.” Icke also evades his own long tenure at the BBC. A lot of people working at the BBC knew about Savile and did nothing. Yet Icke would have us believe he only found out about Savile while from Princess Diana’s psychic?

    • adamkadmon November 11, 2014 / 12:47 pm

      Before his death? No, not at the moment. But he certainly made the accusation a year before the charges of paedophilia became public:

      It isn’t mentioned in any books before The Perception Deception, so far as I’m aware. It is possibly mentioned in one of the live videos, but it will take a long time to ascertain. But I’ll look into that, though, because it’s an important point. Icke has certainly “retrofitted” his ideas before, most obviously his original 1991 predictions. (See my paper, David Icke’s Reptilian Thesis and the development of New Age Theodicy”.)

      I actually wrote that “it would have seemed an obvious opportunity for Icke to argue that the mainstream media had caught up with him” (emphasis added). That doesn’t imply that I agree with that statement.

      I don’t see the BBC thing as particularly relevant. Icke has never been secretive about his BBC past. It seems to me more likely that he didn’t hear the rumours because he was a fairly naive but combatative part-timer.

  3. Will November 13, 2014 / 10:22 am

    “Retrofitting” seems a polite way to describe deliberately misleading people by cultivating the impression that one had been bravely exposing Savile’s crimes for years. I’ve looked closely and cannot find any evidence that Icke ever went on the public record about Savile prior to his death. Notably, if he had done so even once, I’m certain Icke would have publicised it. Instead he has managed to turn his very short “death of a showman” entry – which links to a lengthier article on the Truth Seeker website written by someone else – into a brave tale of being ahead of the curve.

    What I find perplexing is that since 1998 Icke has made all sorts of extreme and lurid allegations in his books against a lot of prominent people, living and dead, including former Presidents and Prime Ministers, and even some middling US celebrities – allegations of paedophilia and worse – but for some weird reason never mentioned the presenter of Jim’ll Fix It. And it’s remarkable that the one person he consistently failed to mention appears to have been guilty of a range of crimes on a massive scale.

    My view – set out in detail here – is that Icke most likely had heard about Savile’s reputation while working at the BBC, and as a former BBC employee was aware that the libel risk was quite high. So I don’t think Icke was cautious purely on evidentary grounds – as he suggests – but he knew this was a rare occasion where he would be sued. So not so brave afterall…

    But I will be interested to see how widespread knowledge of Savile’s criminal behaviour was when the Dame Janet Smith Review is completed.

    A bigger lesson, I suspect, is that Icke’s caution around Savile suggests a bit more calculation to his activities than might otherwise meet the eye.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s