posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 03:03 PM
When it comes to any response from NASA about this document that I highlighted here blatantly admitting to an S-EVA during Apollo 12, there is
something that should be appreciated. What you are seeing here is a classic “leak” of Top Secret information in an unclassified document several
decades after the fact. However, the timeframe does not change the fact that this information that was leaked is indeed referencing a Top Secret event
that occurred during the Apollo 12 mission, and as such, if the author of this NASA document does reply with an answer about it, it would be
absolutely ILLEGAL for her to confirm yet again that this covert Standup-EVA did in fact occur. She would be committing TREASON if she were to now
knowingly confirm that information again to us publicly. All she can legally do is attempt to come up with an excuse to “explain away” this
paragraph to make it appear as if it was both “accidentally included” and “completely incorrect” - a huge mistake or error on her part
So, the author cannot confirm the document as being accurate, as that would be committing treason! Nor can she direct us to any classified source
materials that she used as reference when compiling that document, because that would be directly and deliberately confirming the existence of Top
Secret documentation related to Apollo 12 that we, the general public, are not supposed to know about - tack on another National Security violation
there! Sad attempts at excuses or total silence is all I expect from NASA here, because it is simply illegal for them to confirm again that this
covert S-EVA during Apollo 12 took place. It is still classified as a Top Secret event!
Now, could this paragraph referencing this S-EVA be a mistake? I say not likely! Firstly, there is simply no way this paragraph is accidentally
referencing the Apollo 15 mission (Apollo 15 was the only Apollo mission to officially admit to conducting a Standup-EVA). Firstly, the document lists
the mission dust issues experienced by the Apollo crews in sequential order, starting with Apollo 11 and running through the missions up to Apollo 17,
and this paragraph is clearly at the start of the section dealing with Apollo 12. Apollo 15 does not get brought up for the first time until a page
and a half later. More importantly, note that the paragraph in question not only directly states “Apollo 12” when referencing this Standup-EVA,
but it even confirms why they had to do the S-EVA (due to dust issues on landing)!
The only Apollo mission to ever “officially” confirm that they conducted a Standup-EVA was the Apollo 15 flight to Hadley Rille/Marsh of Decay in
July of 1971, and this document is clearly NOT mistakenly referencing that declared event that happened a year and a half after the Apollo 12 mission.
The Apollo 15 S-EVA was publicly pre-planned well before that mission and was included as part of the publicized flight plan - so the public knew
about it before Apollo 15 left Earth, and that obviously means that the Apollo 15 S-EVA had nothing to do with dust issues on landing! Not only does
this document directly state “Apollo 12”, but the dust issues that are referenced that necessitated the S-EVA clearly were applicable to the
unclassified historical record of Apollo 12. Apollo 12 in fact encountered the worst dust issues on landing of any of the Apollo crews, so if anyone
needed to conduct an S-EVA due to dust issues, it was the Apollo 12 crew!
Obviously, this author of this document not only states that the S-EVA was conducted during Apollo 12, but she also states "why" as well as
"when". So, she made THREE errors in one paragraph?? That is a mighty big hurdle for her to explain away as being an accidental and incorrect
inclusion, because she was clearly getting those three facts from somewhere! Too bad it would be illegal for her to divulge the classified source
materials she used!