Talk:David Shayler

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Contents 1 David as a Scout 2 New Shayler website also deleted? 3 David Icke style stuff? 4 "Truther" issues

[edit] David as a Scout

I knew David when he was a Scout (the Baden Powell movement!), it is no surprise to me that he found himself drawn into the secret services. He was a loner, and an odd-ball in the nicest sense of the word. The alleged use of mind altering substances is hardly unique, especially after being a member of the "schizophrenic" world of the secret services. I have read extensively about the "alternative" view of history and the attempts at a NWO, it all makes far more sense than what I learned at skool (sic).

With the Internet, this view is finding a far wider audience. People (especially in the US) have been lecturing on this stuff for many years. People like Shayler and those that went before him, have always been dismissed as cranks, and marginalized. Strangely their lectures and warnings from pre and post WW2 seem to follow a fairly accurate prediction of events that followed. George Bush senior New World Order and George Bush junior inferences and comments about a future WW3 (WTF), start making far more sense. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 is a very interesting document, and worth reading carefully. To whom it was addressed, and it's contents. This is what it took to bring the US into WW1, as Britain (by that time) was at it's knees, much of the US supporting Germany! Prescott Bush (George Bush senior's father) and the Harriman Bank was was convicted of being involved in funding Hitler's Germany. Folks, it's all here in Wikipedia... "Can you see what it is yet?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.211.130 (talk) 10:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Shayler website also deleted?

Hmm, I'm listening to David Shayler right now on Alex Jones' radio show, and Shayler is saying people can go to his website, davidshayler.com, but when I go there seems to not be a webpage (just one of those generic "placeholder pages" with generic links, sorry don't know what those pages are called.)

The article here has a link to a copy of the "disappeared" Shayler website that used to be at shayler.com, but is this the same thing happened over again, with the website at davidshayler.com? 62.16.177.20 19:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] David Icke style stuff?

• A decent source for this would be fabulous.. Secretlondon 17:04, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Truther" issues

Defenders of the official version of events want it to appear that people that claim that holograms hit the WTC are representatives of the movement. While we can document historically that they have beliefs about 9/11, to remove the fact that the vast majority of those who question the official version of events have rejected Shayler for his baseless claims of missiles and holograms is merely to try to continue to prop up hoaxes. He outed himself by making claims about being a messiah and that real planes didn't hit the towers -- simple facts, no "disputes" involved. Because of this, he has been openly rejected, and is no longer invited to participate in most all events, publications and discussions about 9/11 truth issues. Few tolerate the "truthers" who worked for the intelligence agencies or the Bush Administration and then conveniently went "nuts" when they were talking to reporters about 9/11 questions. He is rejected, plain and simple. 152.131.10.133 (talk) 20:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they will come up with every excuse to remove the information because they want to tarnish anyone who questions the official version with real instances of people who go nuts. Icke did the same thing with the Green Party -- went nuts and they quickly rejected him -- but you don't see people trying to remove the fact that he was socially and formally rejected by the party. 71.127.11.177 (talk) 04:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

That's because the only evidence we have that this particulary crazy was rejected are blog entries, not generally considered reliable. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 04:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

So it would take CBS news coverage to "prove" that an entity you consider "fringe" and mere nutcases had rejected Shayler? 71.127.11.177 (talk) 15:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. It's an interesting problem trying to decide whether the fact that some nutcases rejected other nutcases can be verified. But blog entries are, at most, considered the personal opinions of the bloggers. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The references are varied - blogs, websites, news articles, essays, discussion forums. CBS News can't cover everything . . . . 71.127.11.177 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 16:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)