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.

 

Second Fake Dutch Moon Rock Given To The Queen Of The Netherlands By Apollo 11 Crew!

page: 12
10
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: MissVocalcord
a reply to: TheWhisper
I posted a reply here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I'm not discussing anything about the Drees stone here further. (unless new information becomes available which would allow for such a thing)

Protocols and the Royals are very strict, here is an example about protocols and when you do not understand them. at around second 35.

edit on 28-4-2015 by TheWhisper because: and when you do not understand them

edit on 28-4-2015 by TheWhisper because: strict




posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheWhisper
It is mentioned in a newspaper did you forget about that?

But now there is another source explicitly stating only two gifts were given; no moon rock. The interesting part however is that in the news paper in your TS only two gifts are mentioned also.
You yourself already made the mistake thinking Queen Juliana was holding the moon rock in her hand judging on the photo. So it is likely somebody else could have made the same mistake more then 45 year ago.



That the moon rock given to the Dutch Queen is not mentioned by other newspapers is irrelevant

It is very relevant, you keep whining on about protocol and how big the size of the moon rock the Queen should have gotten, however nowhere (except, so far your single, source) else it is mentioned.



rock given to Drees is...

See www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 05:24 PM
link   
a reply to: TheWhisper


Find a rectification that was placed in 1969 about that article and you may have a point.


Then please post a link to every single newspaper on Earth "rectifying" their mistakenly reporting men landing on the Moon in 1969... or admit you're deliberately posting rubbish.



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 05:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: MissVocalcord

originally posted by: TheWhisper
It is mentioned in a newspaper did you forget about that?

But now there is another source explicitly stating only two gifts were given; no moon rock. The interesting part however is that in the news paper in your TS only two gifts are mentioned also.
You yourself already made the mistake thinking Queen Juliana was holding the moon rock in her hand judging on the photo. So it is likely somebody else could have made the same mistake more then 45 year ago.



That the moon rock given to the Dutch Queen is not mentioned by other newspapers is irrelevant

It is very relevant, you keep whining on about protocol and how big the size of the moon rock the Queen should have gotten, however nowhere (except, so far your single, source) else it is mentioned.



rock given to Drees is...

See www.abovetopsecret.com...


The only thing you have to do is to find a rectification of the TS article to prove your point. The moon rock is mentioned in other sources you have maybe not found it.



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 05:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: TheWhisper


Find a rectification that was placed in 1969 about that article and you may have a point.


Then please post a link to every single newspaper on Earth "rectifying" their mistakenly reporting men landing on the Moon in 1969... or admit you're deliberately posting rubbish.

TW will Just show another source that refers to a moon rock given to the Netherlands during that visit much easier.



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheWhisper
The only thing you have to do is to find a rectification of the TS article to prove your point.

Already replied to you on that one;
www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 28-4-2015 by MissVocalcord because: quotes looks better



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 06:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheWhisper

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: TheWhisper


Find a rectification that was placed in 1969 about that article and you may have a point.


Then please post a link to every single newspaper on Earth "rectifying" their mistakenly reporting men landing on the Moon in 1969... or admit you're deliberately posting rubbish.

TW will Just show another source that refers to a moon rock given to the Netherlands during that visit much easier.


I submit that if TW had such a source TW would have included it in the first post. TW has made these other sources up, rendering this entire thread a [HOAX!]. I propose that if TW cannot post links to these sources TW claims to have in the next 12 hours, those sources do not exist and the Mods should move this thread into [HOAX!].



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 06:09 PM
link   
I'm curious why the Queen of the Netherlands was supposedly given a moon rock by the Apollo 11 crew, when no other head of state received one from them on their tour, including those leaders of countries that were involved in some way with Apollo. What made the Netherlands so special?



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: DelMarvel

Yes, you'll just keep furthering the questioning and exhausting me of responses, then pounce when you cherry pick a derived weakness in my reasoning. I don't need to know every detail of how they compartmnetalized to know that's most likely how they achieved what they wanted to without spilling the beans to the Guy that mops on the lower level of NASA. That's ridiculous


I certianly haven't exhausted you of responses because I've been asking questions like this for a while here and have gotten no responses at all.

And I didn't say anything about anybody mopping floors.

I specifically asked about who brought Kubrick coffee. Or whoever was in charge of the filming. Someone did the catering. Someone drive the trucks with the sets. Someone built the sets. Someone had blueprints. Someone studied actual data from the moon to design the sets. Someone supplied the lights, the film, the cameras. Someone designed the lighting. Someone held the mics. Someone did the editing. Someone wrote the scripts. Someone recorded the voiceovers. Someone coached everyone on acting. Someone took out the trash. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. And all those someone's had multiple assitants. And everyone had wives and girlfriends and boyfriends and children and grandchildren that they never said a word to for 45 years? Even on their deathbeds? About this fantastic project they were involved in?

Of course, not that I would know anything about a "large scale project" like this or the personalities of the kind of people you would need to do it.



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: DelMarvel

I said that's the path we were going down, not that you've already done such. Any way, funny post and I hope you weren't serious



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: TheWhisper

Time to put your money where your mouth is, Adrian. What is this source?

Why is your source credible, but MissVocalChord's source is ignored by you?



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 02:27 AM
link   
a reply to: DDBrock
You see that is the problem with him. He requests, no demands even, to immediately release any source you find, but when he thinks he has something he suddenly "needs to follow other leads" and refuses to even post it.

When he asks for information you expect he is happy to get some answers, but then all of a sudden "it has nothing to do with" it.

Of course a second source telling the Queen received a moon rock might be found, but does this make the story more reliable? Sure not; it still wouldn't make much sense at all. Logic is what is missing a lot of time.....



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 03:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: MissVocalcord
a reply to: DDBrock
You see that is the problem with him. He requests, no demands even, to immediately release any source you find, but when he thinks he has something he suddenly "needs to follow other leads" and refuses to even post it.

When he asks for information you expect he is happy to get some answers, but then all of a sudden "it has nothing to do with" it.

Of course a second source telling the Queen received a moon rock might be found, but does this make the story more reliable? Sure not; it still wouldn't make much sense at all. Logic is what is missing a lot of time.....

TW is happy to answer your question we told you that another source is confirmed. In time it will be released so until that point you should not judge it. You are well informed about the Apollo project and the history. The problem is that you attack the single source that is released with a 5 minut investigation as you told yourself. TW has already told a few times if information is found that points into the other direction that it also will be published. TW has to tell you that even more sources are under investigation that support the TS article. Why are you not confirming what you found in your archives/research.

"Of course a second source telling the Queen received a moon rock might be found but does this make the story more reliable? Sure not"

Are you telling that you found also a second are even multiple sources that confirm the TS article here? Obvious you will also disqualify that source as wrong as it is not seen as reliable. LOL

Lets view the visit and see how it all fits together.
a The Queen get a moon rock from the astronauts.
b Drees gets a moon rock from the ambassador
c Both rocks are fake

This is an option as NASA and the US Ambassador have made statements after the rock was found to be fake. How was approached by the NASA or the ALSJ to search the Dutch archives for more information about this fake moon rock is an interesting question, don't you think MissVocalcord.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 03:42 AM
link   
a reply to: TheWhisper

You manage to write a lot without ever saying anything.
Is there a course you have to do for that? Is there a ceremony and certificate at the end?



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 05:21 AM
link   
a reply to: TheWhisper

Let's cut to the chase. Are these your other sources?

planet.infowars.com...

www.awe130.com...

It's not a second source if you wrote it yourself, you know.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 05:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: KissaCat
I'm curious why the Queen of the Netherlands was supposedly given a moon rock by the Apollo 11 crew, when no other head of state received one from them on their tour, including those leaders of countries that were involved in some way with Apollo. What made the Netherlands so special?


That is indeed an interesting question. When you look at the image you see from left to right.
Dutch Queen, Prince Bernard (founder Bilderberg group) Collins, Aldrin, Armstrong and Prince Claus.

Prince Bernard (what ever you think of him) was an intelligent and well informed man who was well aware of what was going on in the world of the elite. What is confirmed worldwide is that Drees did get a "moon rock" that was in 2009 exposed as fake. It is unthinkable that the Queen the head of state of the Netherlands did not get a moon rock and a old former PM Drees did, that would be seen as an insult in the world of the elite.

Another option you may consider is that the Queen did get this moon rock of petrified wood. Prince Bernard knew direct that it was fake. To avoid embarrassment for the Royals they asked the US ambassador to hand the fake moon rock that was given to the Queen to former PM Drees later that day.

Some journalist already did pick up the story that a moon rock was given to the Queen by the astronauts and wrote their stories. Their is no journalist who would make up a story about a moon rock given to the Dutch Queen. The Dutch Royals have an department that reads every news article that is published about the Royal family. When something is incorrect they will inform the newspaper or publisher and ask for a rectification. This has to do with the fact that the Dutch royals are expected to express no political opinions and to sign whatever parliament puts in front of them, and generally they do.
Source: The Gardian
www.theguardian.com...

A. The department that has to protect the Royals from wrong information did miss the article and that is why it is still available and no rectification is placed.

B. The department that has to protect the Royals did asked the journalist or newspaper to rectify the article but they refused as they had hard evidence to back the information that the Queen was given a moon rock by the Apollo astronauts.

A. seems unlikely as other source are also indicate that the Dutch did get a moon rock during the visit of the Apollo 11 astronauts. It is exactly confirmed by the "moon rock" given to Drees. The US ambassador is quoted in 2009 by The Telegraph in the UK:
“I do remember that Drees was very interested in the little piece of stone. But that it’s not real, I don’t know anything about that,” Mr Middendorf said.
www.telegraph.co.uk...

"But that it’s not real, I don’t know anything about that". Shows that even the US ambassador thought it was a real moon rock he gave to Drees in 1969. The story about the Dutch moon rock is an intriguing story and it has many twits and turns. Maybe one day the real story will be shown to the world.

Some "historians" here do not like to link the two stories together, but the official story about the fake moon rock of Drees is not adding up in many ways.

The theory that is explained above is not possible if they keep telling that Drees got a "moon Rock" and the Dutch queen a few worthless gifts. The Queen should also be presented with a moon rock as stated in the news article TW found. That would make it a second fake moon rock. To put the cherry on top of the cake NASA tells no moon rocks at all are given away during the visit.

How ever you look at it someone is not telling the truth.






edit on 29-4-2015 by TheWhisper because: yo=you

edit on 29-4-2015 by TheWhisper because: protects = protect



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 05:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: TheWhisper

Let's cut to the chase. Are these your other sources?

planet.infowars.com...

www.awe130.com...

It's not a second source if you wrote it yourself, you know.


He's even using the photoshopped images in his blog from his OP on here where the disc has been replaced with something that resembles a stone.

For anyone catching up, this is exactly the type of blatant lying and manipulation you can expect for the hoaxies.

The video evidence found by Phage (0:40) shows clearly the same scene and the fact she was holding a commemorative disc:



OBM found original high resolution images of the exchange here:

afbeeldingen.gahetna.nl...

afbeeldingen.gahetna.nl...

Any excuses that the OP can't change his first post, if there are even any, is null and void when you see on his own site he is happily using the photoshopped images for his false narrative.

That, ladies and gentleman, is what you can expect from these people. The only hoax about Apollo are the hoax idea promoters feeding off people's distrust to promote their own agendas.
Absolutely sickening, I wouldn't be surprised if these people also go round door to door 'collecting for charities' in areas where old people live.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 05:57 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

Just so there is absolutely no doubt that TW has deliberately altered the newspaper photograph in order to perpetrate his [HOAX!], here are some freeze frames:





Her Majesty is clearly holding a polished disk, not a rock. AWE, I mean TW should be ashamed of himself. For all his droning on about protocol, he has altered a photograph of Queen Juliana for his own nefarious purposes. This thread not only needs to be moved to [HOAX!], but the member responsible for it needs to make a full confession or be banned. This confession must be made on his own blog, or the ban should be permanent.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 05:57 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

Can you also find a source article from 1969 that states that Drees got a moon rock from the US Ambassador? What you show is that gifts are given to the Queen.

But what about the protocols and gifts, lets see.
The Queen gets a few worthless gifts from the astronauts and the old former PM the most important gift from the US ambassador. It doesn't add up any royal investigator or specialist will confirm that to you.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 05:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheWhisper
a reply to: AgentSmith

Can you also find a source article from 1969 that states that Drees got a moon rock from the US Ambassador? What you show is that gifts are given to the Queen.

But what about the protocols and gifts, lets see.
The Queen gets a few worthless gifts from the astronauts and the old former PM the most important gift from the US ambassador. It doesn't add up any royal investigator or specialist will confirm that to you.


Forget it. It's game over. Confess.




top topics



 
10
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join