Nexus Publisher, Duncan Roads
Replies to David Icke's Expose that Sir Laurence Gardner
is a Reptilian Shape-Shifter
by David Icke
NEXUS PUBLISHER REPLIES TO GARDNER CLAIMS
by David Icke
The following is a reply from Duncan Roads, the publisher
of NEXUS magazine, to the claims by Stewart Swerdlow and Arizona Wilder
about Sir Laurence Gardner. In the interests of the free flow of views and
information, and your right to come to your own conclusions, I print it
in full. My responses are also included in dark red.
It was with considerable shock and horror that I read the
posting about Sir Laurence Gardner on your website. I am glad, however,
that you have so publicly promised to post any of Laurence's replies.
Sure...I just want to know what is going on and
put all information before people. It is for them to decide what they
think in the light of that.
Since you are so happy to publish Stewart's (alleged) experiences
involving Laurence, I wonder if you would care to consider my own?
Sure. Sad, though, that what you make out to be
a personal letter to me was sent to a stream of other people before it
got to me.This, therefore, meant there was no right of reply for me like
I am offering to Sir Laurence and to you. But never mind, whatever. If
that's the way you feel it appropriate to conduct yourself, please feel
I have paid for Laurence to come to Australia twice now. Each time he came
to speak at our annual NEXUS Conference. He was so well received, and so
popular the first time, that we brought him over a second time.
Many people are popular in Australia, including,
God forbid, among large numbers of Australians, the Queen of England.
Don't see the relevance in this, mate.
As you no doubt are aware, we have run three series of articles written
by Sir Laurence. Feedback from our Internet Reader Survey, plus the many
letters and emails indicate his articles are a great source of fascination
for readers of NEXUS and their immediate circles.
Fine, but what is your point? To be honest, I cannot
see how it connects to the article and invitation to Sir Laurence Gardner
to put the record straight on what Stewart is saying he experienced.
I chose to run those articles as they challenge the existing 'status quo'
of western religions, plus provide interesting insights into the history
of Christianity. I considered that they presented exciting and empowering
views of history, and how are lives are affected to this day.
Again, where are you going here, Duncan? I have
not challenged Nexus Magazine's right to publish Sir Laurence Gardner's
articles. You have a right to publish what you like. What I was pointing
out was that Sir Laurence has been given major coverage in Nexus to present
his views without criticism or questioning from you or the magazine. In
contrast you have gone out of your way to criticise and dismiss my own
book and views which, even more than Sir Laurence, "...challenge
the existing 'status quo' of western religions, plus provide interesting
insights into the history of Christianity". Double standards.
I am aware that your own views of history incorporate the belief that Christ
did not exist.
As I have said many times, my research points to
the fact that no 'historical Jesus Christ" ever existed. Was there
ever a Jewish man named "Jesus Christ"? Or is this a perversion
by way of intentional frauds by the church? The answers are no there was
not and yes it is.
And how come the "Jesus"
stories are awash with exactly the same events and experiences told about
countless pre-Christian deities going back thousands of years? Just a
co-incidence? I am far from the only one who challenges the literal existence
of the Biblical "Jesus". If he did not exist, of course, there
cannot be a bloodline back to him, which is the whole foundation of Sir
Laurence's work. He has a right to say one thing, I have a right to say
I am also therefore aware that the ideas promoted by two, high-profile researchers
of late, Zecharia Sitchin and Laurence Gardner, are contradictory to your
own. I perceive, thus, that you have reasonable motive to character assassinate
Really, Duncan, this is just silly. I really don't
give a damn whether people believe in the historical Jesus or whether
they think Sitchin is correct in everything he says. Why on earth should
that ever matter to me? It is none of my business what people believe.
In fact, I agree with quite a bit of what Sitchin says and, as I said
in the website article, Sir Laurence Gardner has much fact in his writings.
Why do you have to portray everything in such black and white terms? People
should read what I write, what Sitchin writes, and what Sir Laurence writes.
Then they should come to their own conclusions. I couldn't care less what
those conclusions are because it is none of my business.
Zecharia Sitchin and Laurence Gardner are well-respected by the public,
not just for the content of their ideas, but because they have originated
NEW concepts and ideas to consider. They have taken existing pieces of the
puzzle, and have found new pieces to present a bigger suggested picture.
Yes, but so what? That also applies to you and your
magazine, and to me and my books, and to Henry Kissinger. Doesn't mean
that what we say is all true, does it?
In contrast, you have built your 'research reputation' upon the work of
others. Even the reptilian conspiracy theory you promote is not new. The
only thing original in your 'research' is that you have persecuted two much-needed
Oh Duncan, don't be daft. You have built your magazine
upon the work of others. You could not publish a single edition, but for
that. Of course you, and Gardner, and Sitchin, Bible teachers, academics,
myself, and every other researcher uses and studies previous research
on subject matter. Every doctorate thesis also includes a bibliography
of 'prior research,' to give evidence and credibility to the conclusions
of the author of the thesis. Did you talk to Sir Laurence Gardner about
this statement? Don't you think he read other research before coming to
his conclusions? You don't think he read the book, "Holy Blood- Holy
Grail"? I know he has used the research of others, but how can anyone
not do so when they are trying to piece together vast amounts of information?
What utter nonsense this is, Duncan,
what utter hypocrisy!
Now persecution. I have the accounts
of two witnesses on file to the statements in the article concerning Sir
Laurence Gardner. Two witnesses is a common law application directly from
the wording in the Bible and adopted throughout history as defence in
law. Two witnesses have come forward with their separate and individual
accounts concerning Sir Laurence Gardner. In common law, the word of two
witnesses stand as FACT, unless controverted by greater evidence. I have
reported the accounts of these two witnesses. Your letter offers no controverting
evidence in law to refute the testimony of two witnesses. Let anyone produce
that evidence and I will publish it with equal prominence immediately.
I just want the truth - whatever it is.
I have had personal dealings with Laurence and Zecharia. I wonder if you
have ever bothered to consider contacting them before publicly attacking
their characters and promoting the idea of their being shape-shifting reptilian
aliens from another dimension who kill and eat babies at satanic Illuminati
ritual sacrifices? That would have been considered good research in my books!
Duncan, I am not saying they do. I was not there. I am reporting what
people say they experienced. I am KEEN, let alone willing, to publish
whatever they want to say in reply to these claims which is relevant to
what is being suggested.
If you have controverting evidence..
bring it forward and I will publish it here - willingly. I just want to
know what is going on. The group you do not refer to in your letter even
once are the stunning numbers of children who are being abused and ritually
murdered and tortured day after day. What about them? Do we not owe it
to all of them, past, present, and future, to do all we can to find out
what is happening? That's all I am trying to do.
Does anyone think I enjoy pouring
over this stuff every day? There are many more things I would much rather
do with my life, thank-you. But if we walk away, it goes on.
Instead, you have chosen to rely on two obviously traumatised individuals.
Assuming for a moment that their experiences ARE based in THIS reality,
I can assure you that Arizona Wilder is NOT considered 'reliable' by others
in her 'field'; and your latest witness for the prosecution, Stewart Swerdlow,
is considered by other, original Montauk experiencers as VERY suspect.
Ms. Wilder has also made the same and similar allegations against William
Buckley, but you did not come to his defence. How can you assure me of
anything concerning Ms. Wilder? You say I should have contacted Gardner
and Sitchin. Have you contacted and spoken to Ms. Wilder before condemning
her and dismissing her in your magazine and elsewhere? No. Like, I say,
it's just hypocrisy, Duncan. And what is Arizona Wilder's "field"?
Suffering appalling abuse from the time you are born is not a "field".
Now for spurious... Did you know the
"official website' of the European Council of Princes resided on
a Gardner products website? Did you know the "official website"
of the Royal Stewart line of Scotland resided on a Gardner products website?
Did you know the "official website" of Prince Michael resided
on a Gardner products website? Are you aware that there are geneologists
who claim to have debunked Prince Michael's claims, promoted by Sir Laurence,
as without foundation? Have you said so in Nexus to give balance?
If gossip and innuendo are all you need to defame people like Sitchin and
Gardner, maybe you should be held to the same scales of justice?
I am held to the same scales of justice that you insinuate. I have had
my character assassinated for ten years in the UK media, Duncan, and the
South Africa media, etc., etc.. That's just one of the hazards of doing
what I do. Don't give a shit.
After spending many years organising conferences, talks, workshops for scores
of new-age speakers/gurus, (this was before I took over NEXUS) I can honestly
say a lot don't really 'have it together'. Many want women on the side,
money before they talk, drink, drugs, 5 star travel, or just more money.
Laurence was certainly NOT one of these.
Okay, I give up. Where did I ever say that he was?
Thus, when I select speakers for our conference, I always 'check them out'
with other conference organisers around the world. You would be amazed at
some of the experiences we swap! Admittedly, Zecharia is not considered
the easiest person to work with, but he is widely considered as professional,
honest and up front. Laurence came up with glowing recommendations from
the one or two organisers I could find.
Good, pleased for you.
You, David Icke, on the other hand, I should point out, have a reputation
with some organisers to the point where they have told me they will never
have you back again. The list of businesses that will never deal with you
again is also quite long, even here in Australia. Are they ALL reptiles
too? Would YOU like me to publicly mention what they all say about you?
If you do Duncan, you will be doing what you are accusing me of doing.
But go ahead mate...name them...name them all. Send the names to this
website and I will post them right here.
But why are the numbers of people
keen to help me getting bigger all the time?
I can only go on my gut feelings about Laurence. I was able to spend several
days of lunches, dinners and drinks with him. I had considerable time to
form a character judgement of him, and based on these experiences I found
him to be one of the most honest, reliable, and refreshingly egoless people
for whom I have ever organised events.
So what? You now stand as a character witness for Sir Laurence. Good,
that's your right. But again and again you have refused to address the
On a personal note, I want to say how disappointed I am personally with
where you have taken this. I, like many others, used to look up to you.
You are very charismatic on stage, a powerful and motivated speaker, and
very energetic. Your passion for what you believe comes through very strongly.
Your advocation of values such as unconditional love earned my respect the
instant I read it.
However your trawling the internet for anyone who has anything
negative on Laurence borders on the tactics and style of the very tabloid
trash media you so cheerfully criticise. I wonder what I would get if I
asked for anyone with any dirt on David Icke to contact me?
Go ahead. I am sure you would get plenty. But they would not tell you
anything that has not been printed already or that did not appear in my
autobiography. Tell you what, Duncan, if you want to publish dirt on me,
give me a ring. I might be able to help you with the detail.
(By the way, children are being tortured
and killed around the world as we speak. Is this really the best use of
I did not "trawl" the internet
for trash on anyone. I ask the thousands who come to my website what they
know about a stream of subjects - just as you get information to your
magazine constantly from readers. Why have thousands of people coming
to a website every day and not use their knowledge and experiences to
move our understanding forward?
I have done precisely this with the
Ritual Child Abuse going on world-wide. Are you saying I should not do
I have now come to believe that you are just desperate for sensationalism,
at any cost. Your use of twisting carefully selected extracts from Laurence's
work indicates clearly that you have little interest in engaging in constructive
debate. You have chosen smear instead of seeking the truth of the matter.
What still amazes me is that you have not even bothered to contact Laurence
to discuss any of this. You should really apply for a job at Weekly World
News, or with Rupert Murdoch - their journalists use similar tactics.
When did you contact Arizona Wilder, Duncan? Oh, that's right, you didn't.
And, by the way, far from carefully selecting extracts from Sir Laurence's
work, I add a link in the article to his site and EXACTLY what he is saying
in his own words. Also, if I was interested only in "sensationalism",
why would I turn my attention to a person who 99% of the population on
Planet Earth have never heard of??
Ironic that one of the 'conspiracy movement's' recent 'stars' is putting
the boot into two such admired writers/researchers such as Laurence Gardner
and Zecharia Sitchin!
I personally believe that you have Laurence and Zecharia completely
wrong! I do not believe that they are shape-shifting reptilian aliens as
you depict. I believe Arizona and Stewart are totally mistaken in this respect.
Fine, and you have every right to believe that.
Arizona and Stewart say they experienced something different. Its called
life and freedom of expression. I repeat, I just want to know what the
truth is, either way. I am merely reporting what they say and giving everyone
the opportunity to say something different. I have invited Sir Laurence
to respond. Why are you doing it and not he?
You accuse me on your webpage as being scathing of your claims about Gardner.
This is correct.
You imply that this is because I have 'massively promoted'
Gardner. This is incorrect. I am scathing of your claims because based on
my own personal experiences with Gardner and Sitchin, I simply do not believe
they are shape-shifting reptilian aliens from another dimension who kill
and eat babies at satanic Illuminati ritual sacrifices!
You just said you have organised events for Gardner, and published his
articles at length. Further, you stated that you had "lunches, dinners
and drinks with him, ...had considerable time to form a character judgement
of him ...(and)...have paid for Laurence to come to Australia." That
is massive involvement and therefore, promotion for a magazine.
Of all the likely contenders out there to be reptiles, you continually pick
on Sir Laurence Gardner, almost to the point of obsession! (I notice you
have dropped off accusations of Sitchin of late). I suggest you are targetting
Sir Laurence purely because his research contradicts your own theories about
the non-existence of Christ.
Oh my goodness. Does anyone with any discernable brain-cell activity,
really believe that I would do this because another author disagrees about
Jesus?? Duncan, Duncan, Duncan, is that really the best you can offer?
I did not PICK on anyone, certainly
not Sir Laurence Gardner. No-one would be more delighted than me if what
is said about him is not correct. I can only report what is being said
and that's what I do. Look at the stream of other far more famous people
named by Arizona Wilder, Cisco Wheeler, Fritz Springmeier and so many
others. Why do you not cite them? Sir Laurence is hardly mentioned in
The Biggest Secret, and yet a long, long, list of other far more famous
names are. How can you then claim that I am "picking" on Sir
I did not send out letters or my articles
to Laurence's detractors, nor did I attempt to post my article on Laurence's
website, forum, or network. But you or your colleagues did with your letter
in relation to me.
Why else would you be so hung up on the guy?
I am not hung up on anyone. It is the simple pursuit of what is going
on. If anyone is obsessed with Sir Laurence, Duncan, it would appear to
PS: If you do end up posting this for all to see, be sure to tell them to
read the FULL series of articles by Sir Laurence, available for free at
our website- Nexus Magazine. I notice the link you refer to on your website
may not give readers access to the full range of Gardner's articles. An
accidental oversight on your behalf I am sure.
Tis done...the free flow of information is all I am concerned about. I
am sure that now you will have the same concerns and include in any articles
referring to me in your magazine that my website is http://www.davidicke.com
Funny, you never have so far. An accidental
oversight, I'm sure.
I would just end by saying that after
reading what is, for me, an extremely childish letter, my lasting question
is this: Are you REALLY the publisher of a magazine that has designs on
being taken seriously?
You are? My God. I will never see
it in the same light again. And I'm sure I am not the only one.
Link URL for websites
Feel free to post this page URL anywhere!
Copyright(c) David Icke- Bridge of Love Publications
Permission granted to distribute this article freely in free-to-the-public
media and publications
Other requests should be directed to BridgeofLoveUSA@aol.com
All information posted on this web site is
the opinion of the author and is provided for educational purposes only.
It is not to be construed as medical advice. Only a licensed medical doctor
can legally offer medical advice in the United States. Consult the healer
of your choice for medical care and advice.