It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Disclosure of the Moon Landing Hoax: Part 2

page: 71
17
<< 68  69  70    72  73  74 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 02:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: admirethedistance
a reply to: turbonium1

I'll bet you're one of those people that also believes the Earth is flat, aren't you?


I'll bet you're one of those people who can post nothing better than tired old cliches, aren't you?




posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 02:09 AM
link   
Where's the boxes of "behind the scenes" film?



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 04:10 AM
link   
double post
edit on 28-6-2015 by turbonium1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 04:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: choos

when it cuts to the point where Mitchell had had enough he asks Sibrel to leave this cut occurs right after making him swear on the bible..

what does SIbrel do?? he chooses to stay and provoke him some more.. not to mention it cuts out between leaving the house and entering the car, so you have no idea how long it actually took them to leave.


Sibrel is asked to leave at 6:09 in the clip below..

www.youtube.com...

From 6:10 to 6:21, after he was asked to leave, it is Mitchell who keeps on talking to Sibrel. Mitchell says that if he, Sibrel, continues this, and presses it, he will take him to court. For what? Saying he didn't go to the moon?
Sibrel then says he encourages being taken to court by Mitchell, and presents his card to him. Mitchell's son talks for awhile to Sibrel, as Mitchell rips up the card, at 6:57.

It is funny that you think Sibrel is provoking Sibrel, when it is actually the opposite.

Mitchell tells Sibrel to get out again, after he rips up the card, at 6:57. Sibrel says okay, we're heading out, and grabs his jacket, by 6:59. As he is putting on his jacket, Mitchell's son talks to Sibrel, and he replies. Before Sibrel can even finish putting his coat on, Mitchell grabs his arm, and threatens to deck him if he doesn't get out. Again, it is Mitchell who is provoking Sibrel, and it is again Mitchell who is responsible for preventing Sibrel from leaving, by grabbing him before he has time to get his jacket on. Sibrel was not doing anything wrong - he was putting his jacket on, so he could leave. He did not persist in staying in the house. it was actually Mitchell who started going psycho, during that time.

Once Sibrel got his jacket on, he bent down to pick up his bag, and Mitchell kneed him in the butt, at 7:10. Mitchell again tells him to get out of his house, which might have already happened if Mitchell didn't go off his rocker.

Mitchell calls Sibrel foul names, threatens to sue him, grabs him while he is trying to put on his coat so he can leave, as requested. Mitchell threatens to deck him if he doesn't leave, when Mitchell is the one preventing Sibrel from leaving, over the entire period.

You can see this is true, with your own eyes. I've provided all the details of it. There are no edits. Sibrel is first asked to leave at 6:09, and is leaving by 7:15, at the fadeout.

Where do you get the idea Sibrel is not trying to leave the house? He is leaving the house just over one minute after he was first asked to leave. He would have left sooner, if Mitchell didn't keep preventing him from leaving, while he kept screaming at him to leave!



originally posted by: choos
also i dont see him packing anything up.. i see him get his card and give it to Mitchell while standing there provoking him some more..


Obviously, either Sibrel had to pack up his gear, or his cameraman had to pack it up for him, so do you think it matters that you don't see him do it on film? Or do you think they left all their gear in the house?



At one point, Sibrel is bending down to a table, to collect something he had brought into the house. Mitchell suddenly kicks him (actually knees him) in the butt....




originally posted by: choos
complete lie on your behalf..

why do you continue to lie??

Sibrel chose to stay there and continue provoking Mitchell..
Mitchell kneed his butt because of Sibrels taunting.. end of story, almost everything is on film everything else has been cut out by sibrel..


I'm not lying, you are delusional. The video shows exactly what happens, so get a reality check and look at it.


originally posted by: choos
do you honestly think that when asked to leave you should slowly pack your things while mouthing off at the property owner?? is that how your world works??


No, my world works because I don't imagine seeing things completely opposite to what really happens in videos
edit on 28-6-2015 by turbonium1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 04:36 AM
link   
I ask someone 'please leave my house', and he can't put his jacket on to leave my house, because I grabbed his arm and tell him I'm going to deck him if he doesn't leave..

He's obviously a trespasser, because I've asked him three times to leave, within a minute, and he hasn't left yet!



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 05:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1
I ask someone 'please leave my house', and he can't put his jacket on to leave my house, because I grabbed his arm and tell him I'm going to deck him if he doesn't leave..

He's obviously a trespasser, because I've asked him three times to leave, within a minute, and he hasn't left yet!


what your trespasser isnt doing though is mouthing off at you after you asked him to leave..

Sibrel clearly is provoking the situation.. i guess you are too biased to see it.

to further prove your blindedness due to your bias:

originally posted by: turbonium1
Same as Aldrin was the criminal who punched Sibrel in the face, without any justification.


i know you wont see whats wrong with this, but it just goes to show that you are blinded by your bias.. apparently Sibrel did nothing wrong to Aldrin, apart from hounding him and calling him foul names again.. because provoking people doesnt count..
edit on 28-6-2015 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2015 @ 05:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

Sibrel is asked to leave at 6:09 in the clip below..


From 6:10 to 6:21, after he was asked to leave, it is Mitchell who keeps on talking to Sibrel. Mitchell says that if he, Sibrel, continues this, and presses it, he will take him to court. For what? Saying he didn't go to the moon?
Sibrel then says he encourages being taken to court by Mitchell, and presents his card to him. Mitchell's son talks for awhile to Sibrel, as Mitchell rips up the card, at 6:57.


so what you are saying is that even though Mitchell asked him to leave and continued to talk to Sibrel, that Sibrel has every right to stay and continue calling him a liar??

is that it??

so if you asked someone to leave your house and continued to talk to them, they are now entitled to stay and call you a liar??



It is funny that you think Sibrel is provoking Sibrel, when it is actually the opposite.


you need to watch a bit longer.. what reason does Sibrel have to to stay and continue provoking the situation AFTER being asked to leave??

do you honestly think the best course of action for Sibrel AFTER being told to get out is to continue provoking Mitchell??


Mitchell tells Sibrel to get out again, after he rips up the card, at 6:57. Sibrel says okay, we're heading out, and grabs his jacket, by 6:59. As he is putting on his jacket, Mitchell's son talks to Sibrel, and he replies. Before Sibrel can even finish putting his coat on, Mitchell grabs his arm, and threatens to deck him if he doesn't get out. Again, it is Mitchell who is provoking Sibrel, and it is again Mitchell who is responsible for preventing Sibrel from leaving, by grabbing him before he has time to get his jacket on. Sibrel was not doing anything wrong - he was putting his jacket on, so he could leave. He did not persist in staying in the house. it was actually Mitchell who started going psycho, during that time.


yes after offending him again.. do you not understand what im saying??

Sibrel pissed Mitchell off and Sibrel was asked to leave.. to avoid escalating the situation Sibrel should have shut up and left.. not stay and continue provoking the situation..

Sibrel was looking to escalate the situation in every way possible.. because that is his way he done the same thing to Aldrin, basically saying he has no evidence at all so he must force some aggressive reaction..


Once Sibrel got his jacket on, he bent down to pick up his bag, and Mitchell kneed him in the butt, at 7:10. Mitchell again tells him to get out of his house, which might have already happened if Mitchell didn't go off his rocker.


so his speech about "people can have fun ....." that just never happened in your world??


Mitchell calls Sibrel foul names, threatens to sue him, grabs him while he is trying to put on his coat so he can leave, as requested. Mitchell threatens to deck him if he doesn't leave, when Mitchell is the one preventing Sibrel from leaving, over the entire period.


Mitchell is preventing Sibrel from leaving??

what video are you watching seriously?? where does Mitchell prevent Sibrel from leaving?? Sibrel CHOSE to stay and conitnue provoking the situation..


You can see this is true, with your own eyes. I've provided all the details of it. There are no edits. Sibrel is first asked to leave at 6:09, and is leaving by 7:15, at the fadeout.


no edits but has a fadeout...

also what happened after the fadeout?? oh you dont know..


Where do you get the idea Sibrel is not trying to leave the house? He is leaving the house just over one minute after he was first asked to leave. He would have left sooner, if Mitchell didn't keep preventing him from leaving, while he kept screaming at him to leave!


the fact that he is standing there in front of Mitchell arguing with him and calling him a liar..

not hard to see unless you are blind..




Obviously, either Sibrel had to pack up his gear, or his cameraman had to pack it up for him, so do you think it matters that you don't see him do it on film? Or do you think they left all their gear in the house?


his gear was already packed up.. all he had to do was shutup pick it up and leave..

but he chose to stand and provoke the situation..



I'm not lying, you are delusional. The video shows exactly what happens, so get a reality check and look at it.


you are lying.. why?? because you are ignoring everything before that knee, like calling Mitchell a liar and provoking him further.. no one asked Sibrel to stay and argue after being asked to leave



No, my world works because I don't imagine seeing things completely opposite to what really happens in videos


let me see then.. why dont you piss your neighbour off, when he asks you to leave you go take your time and call him foul name, im sure he will just give you a cup of tea and ask you to stay no issues..



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 07:34 AM
link   

a reply to: choos
where does Mitchell prevent Sibrel from leaving??


Undoubtedly Sibrel's departure was eminent, but when his back was turned, Mitchell approached him from behind with intentions that werent entirely clear ...



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 08:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Misinformation


a reply to: choos
where does Mitchell prevent Sibrel from leaving??


Undoubtedly Sibrel's departure was eminent, but when his back was turned, Mitchell approached him from behind with intentions that werent entirely clear ...


so what you are suggesting was that Sibrel was deliberately "presenting" himself for mitchell to take him??

but since Mitchell doesnt swing that way he got a fine knee instead??



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:34 PM
link   

a reply to: choos
Sibrel has no reason calling Mitchell a liar ...


Mitchell impetuously postulated "he doesnt hit people", yet he endeavours too promptly proceed an initial foray to hit up on Sibrel...

ergo, concordantly... although a lie may or may not have been perpetrated, that contingent assertion was a deliberately absurd deception hastily revealed too be forthcoming ...



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Misinformation


a reply to: choos
Sibrel has no reason calling Mitchell a liar ...

although a lie may or may not have been perpetrated,



a lie has been perpetrated by yourself..

you quoted something that simply doesnt exist..

but if thats not a lie then i guess i will hold you to it.. you clearly changed the quote since it cannot be found anywhere else in the post.

so, Misinformation has officially acknowledged that Sibrel has no reason calling Mitchell a Liar.. ergo admitting that Sibrel is just there being a giant ass and deserves more than what was received..
edit on 29-6-2015 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 10:32 PM
link   

A new disclosure



Apparently, in September of 1959, Nikita Khrushchev, during his famous visit to the United States, rather indelicately yet strategically challenged Richard Nixon to swear on the bible about some recent goings on in outer space. Apparently, Nixon had been telling stories to the media about Russian rocket failures.

I thought it was funny that the Soviet is ready to swear on the bible about his national space program in enemy territory! Multiple levels of irony




Source for DJW

news.google.com...,482770&hl=en
edit on 6/29/2015 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 10:12 PM
link   

a reply to: choos
Sibrel "deserves" more than what was received ...


undoubtedly there is a general overwhelming disparity amongst the propagandists confabulatory on what precisely Sibrel may or may not potentially deserve ...




posted on Jun, 30 2015 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Misinformation


a reply to: choos
Sibrel "deserves" more than what was received ...


undoubtedly there is a general overwhelming disparity amongst the propagandists confabulatory on what precisely Sibrel may or may not potentially deserve ...



Given how you wrote down that sibrel had no reason to call Mitchell a liar, but in the video we see sibrel call Mitchell a liar.

I can assume when you say "propagandists confabulatory" you are actually referring to yourself..



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Khrushchev challenged Nixon to swear on the bible. Nixon said "No comment."
Sibrel challenged Apollo astronauts to swear on the bible. Two astronauts physically attacked him.

Why won't they swear on the bible if it's true?

When Neil said "Mr Sibrel, knowing you that's a fake bible." How does Neil know Bart so well? Do they know each other?

Why does Neil think it's a fake bible?


edit on 7/1/2015 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 01:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: choos
Given how you wrote down that sibrel had no reason to call Mitchell a liar, but in the video we see sibrel call Mitchell a liar.

I can assume when you say "propagandists confabulatory" you are actually referring to yourself..


He is a liar telling a good lie for the sake of Nixon's Apollo.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 02:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: choos

so what you are saying is that even though Mitchell asked him to leave and continued to talk to Sibrel, that Sibrel has every right to stay and continue calling him a liar??


Mitchell "continued to talk" to Sibrel, really means....

Mitchell continued to provoke Sibrel, by first calling him a foul name, and then threatening to sue him if he tried pressing the issue ...

You say it was all Sibrel's fault, because he didn't leave the house immediately after he was told to leave, and continued to provoke Mitchell, who was the innocent victim. Sibrel continued to call him a liar!

Can you show where in the video Sibrel continually calls Mitchell a liar?


Next - if Mitchell was just trying to get Sibrel out of his house immediately, why would he continue to talk with Sibrel?

Mitchell's comments were meant to be ignored by Sibrel, as you see it?

And Sibrel was to blame for not leaving when Mitchell grabbed his arm, while telling him 'once again' to leave his house, right?


If Mitchell wanted Sibrel out of the house immediately, he would not continue to talk to Sibrel, knowing it will get a response. Nor would Mitchell have grabbed his arm, which prevented him from leaving the house, asap.

This is all because you want to see Mitchell's behavior is a completely normal response to a nut-job like Sibrel...

...so you have Mitchell, who wanted the nut-job out of his house at once, which is a normal response. Mitchell told him repeatedly to leave, and the nut-job refused to leave, while provoking him more and more! Mitchell had to respond with a knee, and a death threat, before he could finally get this nut-job out of his house. Right?

Mitchell was talking to Sibrel, who should not have replied to him because he had been told to leave, just a split second earlier. But he refused to leave, and continued to provoke Mitchell.

This is how you want it, but it's certainly not the reality....

Grabbing his arm does not help him to leave the house asap, and you know it.



originally posted by: choos
you need to watch a bit longer.. what reason does Sibrel have to to stay and continue provoking the situation AFTER being asked to leave??

do you honestly think the best course of action for Sibrel AFTER being told to get out is to continue provoking Mitchell??


You have it backwards, as I've explained above.


originally posted by: choos
Sibrel pissed Mitchell off and Sibrel was asked to leave.. to avoid escalating the situation Sibrel should have shut up and left.. not stay and continue provoking the situation..


You have it backwards, yet again.


originally posted by: choos
so his speech about "people can have fun ....." that just never happened in your world??




originally posted by: choos
Mitchell is preventing Sibrel from leaving??

what video are you watching seriously?? where does Mitchell prevent Sibrel from leaving?? Sibrel CHOSE to stay and conitnue provoking the situation..


I've explained this point, too.


originally posted by: choos
also what happened after the fadeout?? oh you dont know..



Nor do you.

My argument still stands, anyway.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 02:35 AM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

And the ones that did swear on the bible? Does that prove they went?

And I assume you have a source for Nixon's "no comment"?

Your version of the story (which is not a new disclosure because it was reported in the media at the time) has somehow acquired a slightly different spin.

Krushchev told a version of events about an unmanned Soviet moon probe that differed from Nixon's. He said he was prepared to swear on a bible to prove his own version. He suggested Nixon could do the same for his version of events. It was not discussing the US space programme.

Convicted violent thug Sibrel's publicity stunt challenges occurred after much stalking of the astronauts, invading their privacy and calling them liars. Sibrel once made his way into Armstrong's home uninvited when he was not there and scared his wife. Armstrong was right to be wary of him.

Do you have any proof Apollo didn't happen?



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 03:18 AM
link   
Mitchell's death threat came after Sibrel left the house, just about to drive away.

It clearly has nothing to do with getting him to leave the property, by that time.

The only reason is to try and intimidate Sibrel, of course.

Nothing else makes sense.

You can't admit to it, that's the real problem.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 03:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
Convicted violent thug Sibrel's publicity stunt challenges occurred after much stalking of the astronauts, invading their privacy and calling them liars. Sibrel once made his way into Armstrong's home uninvited when he was not there and scared his wife. Armstrong was right to be wary of him.


This stalker, and convicted violent thug - that gets punched in the head, kneed in the butt, grabbed by the arm, and gets death threats, by his victims!!

Good one...



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 68  69  70    72  73  74 >>

log in

join