Why would americas most intelligent patriots lie...(Apollo related)

Why would they lie? Because they think its the truth!

Have you ever seen Manchurian Candidate? Its pretty much the same concept.

reply to post by zatara


Damn Buzz socked him good! I've seen a similar interview, could be the same guy, but Edgar Mitchell was tricked into an interview at his home and at the end he was bombarded the same way Buzz was and Edgar Mitchell got so upset he kicked the guy in his ass before throwing him out. Edgar Mitchell even swore on the Bible that he walked on the moon. Damn I wish I could find the video on YouTube!

Hmmm, did you change videos? Because I was commenting on this one and now its gone

Why would they lie? Why wouldn't they lie, would be the better question. If they stick to the story they get to be the first people to go to the moon, that simple really. If they tell the truth now they were all just ordinary astronauts that lied for years and years.

However, I believe what they say. Whether they went to the moon or just think they did. They believe what they are saying is true.

Originally posted by sc4venger
Why would they lie? Because they think its the truth!

Have you ever seen Manchurian Candidate? Its pretty much the same concept.

The

Manchurian

Candidate

is

a

movie.


Not

real

life.




Do

you

know

the

difference?

Originally posted by Phage
For some reason the jackass Sibrel didn't show the complete footage. I wonder why. Maybe because it makes it clear that it isn't a "cutout" of Earth.

Original

It looks like a pretty convincing rebuttal of the acetates over the window story. However, something is still bugging me...

Around 7min0sec mark on the video below it is Armstrong claims that the camera is against the window. Sibrel claims it can't be as an arm gets in the way. The second video you post claims it was the window frame. See the video again at 7m.

The shadow can't be the window frame if the camera is against the window. If whatever is causing the shadow was very close to the camera it would appear to move much quicker in the opposite direction to where the camera points but it doesn't. At one point the arm/frame moves into the field of view even though the camera appears to move to the right? Is the camera against the window or not?

Note for ATS members: The "Banned in America" (CERTAINLY NOT MY CHOICE OF TITLE!) clip is actually part of A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon (by Bart Sibrel). Not everything in the video is correct of course.

On the other hand a human intelligence officer from the RAF I spoke to had some interesting views on the body language of some of the astronauts when confronted by Sibrel. He thought some of them were definitely hiding something. The question is - were they just hiding the fact that they wanted to punch Sibrel's lights out.

reply to post by Pimander

You fell for Sibrel's nonsense. He really likes out of context sound bites.
Armstrong does not say the camera was against the glass. The camera was handheld, it was moving. It's the window frame.

Maybe they aren't America's most intelligent patiots?

Just a guess.

I don't know where the notion that U.S. astronauts are the "most intelligent patriots" comes from, but I'll respond to this thread anyway.

I do think U.S. astronauts are lying about what they've seen when asked about UFOs. I don't think all of them are willfully lying to us. Like we've read from other whistle blowers I suspect many have been threatened.

This is a big conspiracy. One that is so big that I imagine lives have been threatened and some threats have actually been carried out to maintain it.

That won't excuse them when the secret is ultimately revealed and those who are still alive give an answer like "I was only following orders." when finally confronted.

If extraterrestrial visitation ever becomes an accepted reality during my lifetime and civilization still stands after its revealed, I will demand no less than the harshest punishments upon everybody who held this ultimate secret from us. U.S. astronauts will have to prove to us that they had the best excuse in the world to keep thier mouths shut before I'd let any of them go leniently.

To me, this is irrelevant, what's done or hasn't been is exactly that, however it wouldn't be difficult to believe that the landings were faked, who'd know any different if a crew flew out around the moon without landing? Plus anything to get one over on those "pesky commies", such as it was at the time.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Pimander

 

You fell for Sibrel's nonsense. He really likes out of context sound bites.
Armstrong does not say the camera was against the glass. The camera was handheld, it was moving. It's the window frame.

Listen mate, I might be suspicious about many things but I'm no fool. You must be getting the idea that I like to ask these questions by now?

It does look like the camera moved away from the window frame but the arm/frame came into view at 7m25s. However, I will concede that Armstrong says, "filled up with the TV camera," rather than against the glass. I expected you to point out that the camera was moving to the left but panned to the right - which would explain the footage.

If the video confirms that the command module left the Van Allen radiation belt - proving that the astronauts could have travelled to the Moon - what do the members think they are hiding about the Apollo missions?

reply to post by Pimander

I'm responding to your questions. Your question implied that you believed the camera was held against the glass.
That the camera was moving and panning is obvious...unless you get fooled by Sibrel's claim and editing.

There are plenty of people who don't think men landed on the Moon. What do people think they are hiding if they do believe it? Aliens on the Moon. Nazi's on the Moon. Probably a few other things on the Moon. Anything but rocks and craters.

reply to post by JimOberg


oh

really

.

Thanks

for

letting

me

know

.


Brainwashing is something we can only see in movies.

Originally posted by zatara
I do not know from how many applicants the Mercury/Appolo astronauts got selected but what I do know is that these choosen astronauts were/ are mental healthy, highly intelligent, strong personallities and let us not forget and most important willing to die for their country.

I started this thread because this whole situation with Bart Sibrel and his own little Apollo project keeps me thinking. I do not understand....

It is easy to say that the tactics of Sibrel are unethical and that he is a blunt moron....maybe he is but that does not take away that the outcome of his confrontation with the astronauts was meaningless and worthless.

For the readers who do not know what I am talking about I have THIS YouTube vid with Sibrel confronting Buzz Aldrin. Sibrel is pushing all the 'Buzz buttons' he can find and gets rewarded with a punch after finally pushing the button that really does buzz.

With this formula of interviewing many of the Apollo astronauts and asking them the request of swearing on the Holy Bible that they indeed landed and walked on the moon he tries to provoke a...honest answer?

Anyways,...back to my not understanding. The thing is that the behaviour, body-language is pretty much the same with each of the astronauts when asked to swear on the bible.....they refuse....and get anoyed when asked to explain themselves.

It is my guess that a good experianced forensic psychiatrist will have an interesting conclusion after studying these Sibrel encounters.

Okay now you know that I am very doubtfull about the Apollo moonlandings. Taking all the other 'evidence' like photographs and other investigated material in account the question remains.....Why would these bright, honest, intelligent, patriotic and young men lie about their extra-ordinairy accomplishments?

To me, and many others it is clear that something about the moonlandings/apollo program does not add up. Maybe they did land but did not all the 17 Apollo-landers reached their designation.

So I am asking myself what could be a legitimate reason for these guys to lie for the NSA, CIA, President or Congress.

I do not think that it has something to do with corruption of a president, NASA officials or just because they just couldn't deliver the technology. After all...if you can land one on the Moon you can land the other 16 too...

How does it all fit in with the fake photographs.....i am convinced that photographs were faked. Do not ask me to proof that because even if there is proof it will be denied...by fanatics

If these men are willing to stand and live with such a enormes lie it must be something really convincing and vital. The only thing that can give such a reason is when the story of having been warned off the Moon by ET is true.

The whole country...the whole world was watching how the first Apollo rocket took off and the expectation was that everybody would pay close attention with the rest of the Apollo landings...so what to do...to keep the presence of ET and their message a secret to the people on Earth? Fake the rest.....

This is the only way I can make sense of the faked moonlandings and the cooperation of the astronauts with the lie.....

With my limited abillity to be a judge of character Neil Armstrong gives me the impression to be a no-nonsense and rightious kind of guy. He is not the man who will lie for a corrupt president or to lie for any scam. You can see that he is unhappy with not being able to tell the truth....but he can live with himself because the lie is for reasons justifiable....back then.

Listen to this interview to learn more about Neil Armstrong

Does my analysis make sense...? Do I understand correct or do you say, no......listen, this is how it all fits together.

edit on 22/8/2011 by zatara because: austronauts do other things than astronauts

edit on 22/8/2011 by zatara because: (no reason given)

I think Sibrel is a government plant. He never talks about anything substantive. The whole bit with being punched by Aldrin was/is probably staged.