Moonlanding

[Ognir]

Seems like Mike & sullie believe we went to the moon shite  

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1395.htm
Massive UFO Fleet Said Headed Towards Earth...

[Anonymous]

They're meeting on the darkside and will attack in a week.  Send another mission to the moon to stop them!!!

[MikeWB]

You two still haven't answered those questions I posed in that thread Hehehe... are they that vexing? Are Russians and hundreds of scientists from around the world who were receiving the data "in on it"? Heheheheheh

Some of the Huffshit's nonsense is still left in your thinking... which is a shame since people might discount your other research because of this opinion. Do you two realize that you're  risking your credibility by pushing this total bull? Less than 5% of people believe in this nonsense and you pushing it is just a giant distraction and you're both playing into Zionist hands. They'll probably just say something like: "Jewish conspiracy? Those two also think we didn't go to the moon... they're just spreading lies. Ignore them."

Here's a quick debunker for most of the nonsense that seems to be out there about Moon hoax: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scien ... opup&ino=1

[youtube:2zatj0ug]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mefEKqzq8cg[/youtube]2zatj0ug]
[youtube:2zatj0ug]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfKItI-cHPM[/youtube]2zatj0ug]
[youtube:2zatj0ug]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOv_zvM-oJQ[/youtube]2zatj0ug]
[youtube:2zatj0ug]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCNV1hiKpLI[/youtube]2zatj0ug]
[youtube:2zatj0ug]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dTATMEJSuQ[/youtube]2zatj0ug]

[Ognir]

come on Mike, do you really think that either Darly or myself would push anything from eric Huffshill

[MikeWB]

Check out the link, watch the videos, read the books... theory you guys are pushing is one of the silliest things I've ever come across in this broader conspiracy community. No planers, energy weapons, holograms and shapeshifting reptilian pushers have more evidence. Just look at the pushers of this Moon hoax theory... just a bunch of batshit crazy people... not even a single rational, educated person believes in it. You don't have Architects & Engineers for Moon Hoax truth around.

As for Huffshit, wasn't he even on some TV show pushing Moon hoax? That did wonders for his credibility.

Now think about this for a second... let's just say that, for the sake of an argument, Moon landing was a hoax... but less than 5% of the population believes it and thinks that those who think it's a hoax are complete nutjobs. What exactly do you two plan on gaining by pushing this theory when it's totally irrelevant to the bigger fight: exposing Zionism? How exactly will our world change if this Moon hoax is exposed? How will it make people believe you more when you talk about Zionism?

You're doing a disservice to the whole community by pushing this crap and by associating the Jewish power with it. It's hard as it is to spread the message about Zionism and now you're shooting yourselves in the foot by pushing this nonsense and are trying to appeal to a tiny minority of an already tiny minority.

Rense is pushing ghosts, UFOs, chupacabras... Jones is pushing Nazis and German Death Cults... Icke is pushing reptilians...  George Noory is pushing witches, ghosts, life after death, sasquatch.... and you two are pushing Moon hoax (in Current News forum nonetheless!). WTF???

[Anonymous]

Good Mike Trust your Government, See Where That Get You!  NASA is and was a black hole for tax dollars, to go to the crime network. Hasiblad cameras used normal film that could not work in a lunar environment, just one of hundreds of lies told. Go drink more kool-aid and prepare for the UFO's

[/tab]

.

Look, the Moon is very near Earth



The Van Allen radiation belt ? Piece of cake










http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html



Or are you part of this crew ?











.
.

[Fester]

Not sure about which evidence is the best.  Can say with complete confidence that we've been lied to about EVERY major story.  Can't believe that we've been told the truth about this one.  It's a big story in terms of sheep herding ergo it's gotta be bullshit.

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Some Moon Hoax-age discussion over at these threads too... from last summer 2009

viewtopic.php?p=24099

viewtopic.php?f=35&t=6144&start=30

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

MikeWB, using Myth Busters, a Hollyweird television show that claims that the WTC towers were demolished by Arab hijackers with boxcutters and melted steel, isn't helping your case.

You two still haven't answered those questions I posed in that thread  Hehehe... are they that vexing? Are Russians and hundreds of scientists from around the world who were receiving the data "in on it"? Heheheheheh

Hah! Yeah, because USA and Russia are enemies! The Cold War wasn't a Hegelian dialectic :wtf:  You Es Eh! You Es Eh! You Es Eh!



Oh, come on Mike, don't be bashing Rense's UFO talk   :think:



Seriously though Mike, I dont get you. Most people that believe there is an international conspiracy are also predisposed to believing that there are several other conspiracies, including the moon landing hoax. I didn't get my moon landing ideas from Eric Huffschmid. Did anyone else here? Doubt it. I dont even listen to Huff. You certainly dont fit the typical anti-Judaic mold, that's for sure. I wonder, do you accept the official 9-11 story too?

You think people will lump moon hoaxer theorists with Jewish conspiracy theorists? Well, do they really need to? Probably not. A Jewish Conspiracy theorist alone is laughed at. If all these conspiracies are true, then wouldn't you feel pretty stupid that you spent some much time trying to proof some and then disregarding others because you thought they were poisoning the well?

[Anonymous]

repost
WERE THE MOON LANDING SHOTS FAKED?
Shocking : See what NASA has done (Long but worth reading)

9 SPACE ODDITIES:
1. Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.

2. A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Lander lifting off the Moon. Who did the filming?

3. One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who took the shot?

4. The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen freely bending their joints.

5. The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium flares.

6. Text from pictures in the article said that only two men walked on the Moon during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor has no camera. Who took the shot?

7. The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow? And why is the flag fluttering if there is no air or wind on the moon?

8. How can the flag be brightly lit when its side is to the light? And where, in all of these shots, are the stars?

9. The Lander weighed 17 tons yet the astronauts feet seem to have made a bigger dent in the dust. The powerful booster rocket at the base of the Lunar Lander was fired to slow descent to the moons service. Yet it has left no traces of blasting on the dust underneath. It should have created a small crater, yet the booster looks like it's never been fired.

WERE THE MOON LANDING SHOTS FAKED?

In July 1969, more than 600 million people watched in awe, as Neil Armstrong became the first man to walk on the surface of the moon. The last men to set foot on the moon were the astronauts of Apollo 17, in December 1972. But even before this, a set of conspiracy theories were spreading, the most radical of which claimed that NASA had faked all the lunar landings-that man in fact never landed on the moon. Look at the evidence and decide for yourself.

This shot of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin planting the
US flag on the moon's surface was taken by a 16 mm
camera mounted on the lunar module. Aldrin's shadow (A)
is far longer than Armstrong's. Yet the only light on the
moon - and the only light source used by NASA - comes
from the sun, and should not create such unequal
shadows.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
Buzz Aldrin stands with the sun shining down across his left shoulder. Although his right side is in shadow, there is too much detail shown on that side of his space suit (B). It should be much darker and less visible because the contrast between light and dark is much greater on the moon. With no atmosphere to pollute the light on the moon, all the photographs should look bright and crisp. But the landscape behind Aldrin (C) gradually fades to darkness. This 'fall-off' effect, hoax theorists say, should not occur on the moon. But the fading effect could have happened because film is less adaptive than the human eye and makes objects seem darker the further they are from the camera. There is a curious object reflected in Aldrin's visor (D). Some theorists think that it is a helicopter, others say that it is a 12-metre glass structure. NASA claims that it is a piece of equipment on the lunar surface.



NASA claims the strange shape (E) - in this shot taken from the Lunar Module while it was 95 km above the moon's surface - is a shadow cast by the Command Module's rocket. But when larger aircraft fly at lower altitudes over the Earth, they do not cast such huge and defined shadows.



As the Lunar Module Antares, from Apollo 14, rests on the moon's surface there is no crater beneath its feet (F), despite the considerable amount of dust that would have been thrown up during its descent. There also appears to be a footprint (G) directly under the module, yet no one walked on this part of the moon before the craft landed. On the left side of the craft, the words, 'United States' (H) are clearly visible, whereas they should be in shadow. Buzz Aldrin himself said that there is no refracted light on the moon, which points to the fact that another source of light was used to take this shot.





These shots of John Young and James Irwin - like many Apollo photos - show a lunar sky without stars (J). Yet with no atmosphere on the moon, stars should be visible - a fact confirmed by Maria Blyzinsky, Curator of Astronomy at the Greenwich Observatory, London. If NASA could not hope to recreate the lunar sky, they may have opted for simple black backdrops. NASA claim that the sunlight was so strong it overpowered the light from the stars. On the shadow side of the landing modules, there are plaques (K) with the American flag and the words 'United States' quite bright and clearly visible, but the gold foil around the plaques is in near darkness. Studio spotlights highlighting these areas, or technicians retouching the prints, could have caused this effect.



As Alan Bean holds up a Special Environmental Sample Container, the top of his head is clearly in view. But the camera taking the shot was fixed on Charles Conrad's chest, and the ground here seems to be level, so the top of the helmet (L) should not be in the photo. Shadows visible in Al Bean's visor should not be in the photo. Shadows visible in Al Bean's visor (M) go off in various directions, not in straight parallel lines, as expected, suggesting that there is more than one light source. The container Bean is holding (N) is brightly lit at the bottom, yet it is facing away from the light. This may be due to the light reflected from Bean's suit on to the container, but the rest of the container is not so brightly lit.



In this photograph of John Young readjusting an antenna next to the Lunar Rover Vehicle (LRV), there is a marker, known as a cross-hair (inset) (P), that goes behind the LRV's equipment. These cross-hairs (Q), which appear on all the lunar photographs, are made by a screen of cross-hairs placed between the shutter and the film. The bright, reflected light may have obliterated the fine line of this one, or it could have happened if the image was retouched. The foreground shows what looks like the letter 'C' on a boulder (R). Is this perhaps an identification letter left on a studio prop? The letter C on the original photo is actually quite well defined and it is hard to imagine what can cause such a well-laid inscription on a boulder in a desolate place such as the moon. The tracks made by the LRV's wheel turn rather oddly at right-angles (S). These tracks could have been caused by studio technicians pushing the buggy into place. Such clear tracks and footprints require moisture to form and should not appear on the dry lunar surface.

[satya]

Who cares if it is faked or not at this point?  Why spend any time on this?  How is this helping us in any way fighting the Zionists?   EH wanted you guys to spend time on this non-issue to distract you and DBS and Ognir have taken the bait.  I thought you guys were smarter than that.

[joeymaclover]

Listen up!  Just take the red pill on Mondays, the purple one on Tuesday and the blue for the reminder of the week and you should be fine!

 :?  :?  :?

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

The stage director must have been choking on a matzo ball during the flag fluttering scene. Was the moon landing produced by Steven Spielberg?

Satya said

Who cares if it is faked or not at this point? Why spend any time on this? How is this helping us in any way fighting the Zionists? EH wanted you guys to spend time on this non-issue to distract you and DBS and Ognir have taken the bait. I thought you guys were smarter than that.

How is it helping? Exposing lies wherever they may be combats the Nepho-Judeo-Masonic plot. You are using the same erroneous argument as MikeWB. Why do you think anti-Zionists take direction from Eric Hufschmid? He is a has been. I guarantee you that 99.9% of moon hoaxers didnt get their ideas from EH.

[bigwaga]

This site claims that people have never been in space (it defines space are over 1000 miles away from earth). I have been looking at the Nasa photos and apart from the alleged moon landings, all of the photos are no where near that high.

The english translation is a bit odd to read

http://www.geschichteinchronologie.ch/atmosphaerenfahrt/01_sputnik-shock-ENGL.html

Why is the international space station not really in space, but in an orbit that looks pretty close to earth IMHO, wouldn't you want to do experiments in space, away from the influence of earths gravity and the van allan belts so you could study all the different types of radiation etc that are out there.

just cos there is no oxygen and the gravity is weak does not mean that it's space.

just a thought

John

[thirdeyewise]

While I have come to believe that the Moon landing was faked, I think it is a waste of time to discuss it. If you already have a decent understanding of the big picture then it is easier to see how that piece of the puzzle fits. Here are some lively discussions from Theforbiddentruth, they really get into it:

http://theforbiddentruth.net/7839-did-we-go-moon.html
http://theforbiddentruth.net/8468-how-faith-blocks-reason-moon-landing-hoax.html

[ahaze]

For all the Moon landing speculation, it seems to me the Space Shuttle and International Space Station pretty well nullify the concern.  With folks from my neighborhood who've actually been out there, I'm predisposed to believe humanity actively travels to and from outer space and the matter of destination seems irrelevant.  Rather for me its a curiosity of how far the technology has gone beyond the main show we all get to see, and based on the common-folk in the aero-space industry around here the secret science has taken space travel "50 years" beyond what we can comprehend.

[youtube:1e0rhld3]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQqkQdQrsC8[/youtube]1e0rhld3]

TIU's search engine's fouling on me trying to sort out whether everyone's down with Ben Rich and the LM skunkworks and such.

[rusix]

Dark Side of the Moon, by William Karel.  

After studying in Paris, Karel emigrated to Israel where he lived for about 10 years in a kibbutz. Returning to France in 1981, he turned to photography  and worked for more than ten years as a photo-reporter for several agencies like Gamma (1972-1976) and Sygma (1976-1983). Then he started to direct movies.1

Questions to think about:  Why would a purported "Jew" do a "documentary" on apparent Moon-landing damage-control using high-level bad dudes like Rumsfeld and Kissinger to explain the controversial "technicalities": i.e. we went to the moon, but the footage wasn't real, it was created in a studio by Stanley Kubrick to make sure we had something to show as proof that we beat the Russians in this alleged technological and ideological war?  Don't forget, "no animal (non-'Jew') was mistreated during this filming".

His movie says a lot.

Some facts about distance just for info
The average distance from Earth to the Moon is 384,403 kilometers (238,857 miles). The actual distance varies over the course of the orbit of the moon.2

Earth radius (1 Re=6378 km)
Inner van Allen Belt is located at about 1.6 Re
Outer van Allen Belt is located at about 4.0 Re
the distance to the Moon is 60 Re 3


The Van Allen Belts and Travel to the Moon
According to this guy, follow his science and it shows no harsh radiation damage...

So the effect of such a dose, in the end, would not be enough to make the astronauts even noticeably ill. The low-level exposure could possibly cause cancer in the long term. I do not know exactly what the odds on that would be, I believe on the order of 1 in 1000 per astronaut exposed, probably some years after the trip. Of course, with nine trips, and a total of 3 X 9 = 27 astronauts (except for a few, like Jim Lovell, who went more than once) you would expect probably 5 or 10 cancers eventually in any case, even without any exposure, so it is not possible to know which if any might have been caused by the trips.

By this point I have no doubt told you more than you really wanted to know about the Van Allen belt and the Apollo radiation problem! Nevertheless, I have barely scratched the surface, and waved my hands a bit, to make it seem likely that I'm not full of baloney. But in the end you always have to either do it all yourself, or trust a stranger completely, or try to find some path in between: which means understanding a little science, so you can judge for yourself if my arguments make any sense at all, check a little, think about it, maybe do a bit of research on your own from the references if you are interested. The only alternative is to trust no one and do everything, which is simply impossible for anyone; or really give up all your judgements to other people, who may be saints or crooks, wise or insane. I hope you will try to find the possible but not perfect in-between path by learning some science. It is hard, but it is fun and interesting, and it gives you your own power to think and evaluate for yourself, albeit in a limited and imperfect way.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

While the moon landing hoax may not directly aid the Jewish-Masonic matrix, it does instill a false sense of patriotism in Americans. A false sense that can and is used to further control them. So, IMHO, it is not a waste of time to discuss this. If you think it is, simply don't comment on this thread.

[Negentropic]

Re: Moonlanding
by Timothy_Fitzpatrick » Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:48 am

While the moon landing hoax may not directly aid the Jewish-Masonic matrix, it does instill a false sense of patriotism in Americans. A false sense that can and is used to further control them. So, IMHO, it is not a waste of time to discuss this. If you think it is, simply don't comment on this thread.

Not directly because nobody on the lower levels even notices the connection unless they have figured out the high-level game, but indirectly for sure. It's all high level propaganda, all part of the propaganda matrix. They test-run their bullshit artistry and the public's gullibility with stuff like this. If they could feed the entire world that pile of crap, something like 9-11 30 years later is then a piece of cake too. Americans (and to some extent the entire world through America) have so much false-pride-&-ego invested in that space-shit that even if you proved it was a hoax 100% conclusively without a shadow-of-a-doubt in a court of law, they would still deny it, just like O.J.'s DNA evidence and the 9-11 Arabs-from-a-cave-with-box-cutters buttcrap.  

[Father Brown]

Re: Moonlanding
by Timothy_Fitzpatrick » Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:48 am

While the moon landing hoax may not directly aid the Jewish-Masonic matrix, it does instill a false sense of patriotism in Americans. A false sense that can and is used to further control them. So, IMHO, it is not a waste of time to discuss this. If you think it is, simply don't comment on this thread.

Not directly because nobody on the lower levels even notices the connection unless they have figured out the high-level game, but indirectly for sure. It's all high level propaganda, all part of the propaganda matrix. They test-run their bullshit artistry and the public's gullibility with stuff like this. If they could feed the entire world that pile of crap, something like 9-11 30 years later is then a piece of cake too. Americans (and to some extent the entire world through America) have so much false-pride-&-ego invested in that space-shit that even if you proved it was a hoax 100% conclusively without a shadow-of-a-doubt in a court of law, they would still deny it, just like O.J.'s DNA evidence and the 9-11 Arabs-from-a-cave-with-box-cutters buttcrap.

Exactly. Let's not forget Global Warming and other scientific bunk that can easily be peddled once Faith in Science and our Scientists becomes "undisputable" after such a success. The never ending quest for scientific progress becomes unquestioned. Why not stem cell research? Why not homos marrying each other? After all, didn't we prove that we were God back in 1969? Is that the reason they read from the Book of Genesis on Apollo 8? Sure, it looked like they were trying to still give God some of the credit for the creation of the universe. But, were they really saying we were now equals? Nicely stated, Negentropic. I have been trying to say the same thing for awhile but was having trouble coming up with the words in which to do it. Brief and to the point. Thanks.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Must see documentary for MikeWB and the Moon-landing-hoax deniers

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 852724360#

"Magnificent Achievement," blared the headline in the Chicago Tribune newspaper. "Bravo!," trumpeted The London Guardian.

The year was 1969. In what appeared to most eyes as the most monumental and technologically incredible feat in human history, man had walked on the moon. Blasting from earth into space, NASA's Apollo 11 craft, carrying aloft three heroic astronauts, sat down on the moon's dusty surface. A breathless and ecstatic audience numbering in the billions were glued to their TV sets and radios. Then, they heard those historic words from the astronauts, "THE EAGLE HAS LANDED!"

Shortly thereafter, these same throngs of well-wishers saw Commander Neil Armstrong step out into the lunar environment and state the historic phrase, "One small step for man. One giant leap for mankind."
A Clarion Call to Global Unity

A fitting and politically correct epitaph to a remarkable journey, was it not? A clarion call to global unity. No acknowledgement to the United States of America, the great nation that made it all possible. No patriotic mention of the military veterans who, over the centuries, fought and died to keep our nation strong and free. No thanks was given to suffering taxpayers whose dollars had paid for the nonessential, but propagandist, moon shot. And certainly, no honor was given, nor homage paid, to Jesus Christ, by whose love, ransom and sacrifice on the cross the whole world has been set free.

No, the Illuminati script called only for a nebulous acclaim for the human collective, of the "giant leap for mankind."
A Strange Ritual and Secret Ceremony

True, a small replica of our proud U.S. flag was dutifully carted off the Eagle lander and posted for all to see. But, then, a strange ritual of an entirely different sort, of a dark and ominous character, took place at Tranquillity Base on the moon. It was not beamed to the earth via television, for this ritual was carefully crafted beforehand as a secret ceremony, to be hidden and seen only by the eyes of the adepts of the Illuminati and its Masonic fraternity.

Astronaut Neil Armstrong carefully took out his Masonic apron and held it up for the cameras over his space suit as if to cover his genitals area-the power center, or dynamo, of Luciferian energy in Masonic ritual. Today, a photograph of Armstrong holding his occultic apron hangs on a wall at the House of the Temple, the sanctuary of the Scottish Rite, in Washington, D.C.

Next, brother Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin, at the time a 32� Masonic initiate, planted on the moon's surface the real flag  intended for honor, the flag the Apollo 11 had carried in its storage compartment, the flag with the Scottish Rite's emblem of deep and mysterious spirituality, the doubleheaded eagle.
The Phoenix Bird�The Doubleheaded Eagle

This, then, was the esoteric, but hidden and encoded meaning of the name "Eagle" for the lander. The cabalistic ritual script called for elevated man, initiated god-man, to "ride" the black phoenix bird, the "Eagle," to glory, upward toward the sun. God-man was to make his nest among the stars which decorate the black-garbed night, amidst the day-time canopy of the blue sky (the blue lodge).

And so, following their occultly prescribed pagan psychodrama ritual to the letter, the astronauts claimed the moon for their Sovereign, whom they, the Masons, majestically address as The Great Architect of the Universe, known more simply as The Builder.

Just as Christopher Columbus, Hernando DeSoto, Ferdinand Magellan and all the great explorers had planted their flag and had claimed the land and territory they had discovered to be the legal possession of their respective monarch and country, the astronauts declared the celestial body of the moon to be the property of their own Noble and of his fiefdom. In their warped minds, the moon belongs to Lucifer, with title held by his high servant and potentate, the Sovereign Grand Commander, Supreme Mother Council, 33�.

NASA Manager a Mason

cont'd: http://www.texemarrs.com/032003/eagle_has_landed.htm

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

BTW, not that I agree with everything Texe said here. I certainly dont think anybody ever went to the moon.

[Whaler]

First let me state that I believed the moon landings were faked. I held this belief for many years. Over the past few days I have been looking into it. Actually, Tab's mythbusters vid made me re-examine my position on this matter. I also have been reading all of the conspiracy forum's moon hoax threads as well as other forum debates. I have to say that every single hoax believers piece of evidence can be thoroughly debunked. Every debate I have seen in regards to the moon hoax has been handled easily by Moon landing believers. I mean...it's not even close...the moon hoaxers get destroyed...a complete bloodbath. I don't know how you guys can be so sure of this. I'm still not completely convinced that we did land on the moon, I still have an open mind but I now lean heavily towards the moon landings being real. I am far from an expert on this so I am not interested in debating the evidence...In fact I would love to see some smoking gun evidence that can't be debunked. So far I have seen none.

Also, instead of dismissing the Mythbusters videos because they are from Hollywood...can any of you actually dispute the claims? Just dismisiing them as nonsense without actually addressing the claims reminds me of showing a Jewish shill Israel did 911 All the Proof in the World and having them respond "oh..that's from a hate site, it's nonsense"

Sorry but it strikes as a similar behavior.

[Ognir]

:lol:  What I've noticed over the years, not just online, but in real life,  people go nuts if you don't believe we landed. Personally I don't believe we went there yet but it's always a good way of annoying people  

[/tab]

.

there yet but it's always a good way of annoying people

Couldn't we instead focus & unite on bringing people to the light without first dazzling them/annoying them  blind  ?





Annoying is pubertal, Is this MTV or TiU, the "Anti Zionist ThinkTank" ?

Sometimes we are just so far away . . .












.
.

[Ognir]

I have a buddy and when I email him new so-called facts about the hoax, that the rock given to the Dutch that turned out to be a piece of wood, he will spends 3 days, morning, noon and night trying to debunk it,  and that shit with him makes me laugh  :lol:

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

You will find that the same ignorance of the 9/11 conspiracy is equal to ignorance on the moon landing hoax, Ruby Ridge, Waco, the Mossad-engineered Oklahoma City Bombing, etc... None of these were an accident. They were all planned.

[/tab]

You will find that the same ignorance of the 9/11 conspiracy is equal to ignorance on the moon landing hoax, Ruby Ridge, Waco, the Mossad-engineered Oklahoma City Bombing, etc... None of these were an accident. They were all planned.

All of the things named above are just pure speculation really, WHY DON*T CONCENTRATE INSTEAD ON ALL OF THOSE ISSUES WE KNOW FOR SURE ARE PRODUCT OF THE ENEMY AND IN WHAT WE HAVE PLENTY OF PROOFS? Sure you can speculate on this or that, but the main points in wich we already have clues & more clues, clear and easy to verifie for everybody, so much data in our favour with names and dates in some many operations from this cosmopolitan criminal gang, and don't be foolish basing our main arguments on unsure/speculating issues, so let's take a look to a smart strategy here and why don't publish your speculations/moon hoax in the Speculation part of the Forum instead ?



Because the enemy surely knows very well how to use the stygma weapon and how to create Tabú and then the defamation element gets on place, the "art" of mental control is very useful to the elite, one thing is for sure, if you are just gonna talk about the unsures issues to spread this news messages to new people the worst thing you can possible do is introduce them to all this deception by taking first up the unsure "theories" to demostrate the points without doing your homework properly, why do not base our case with the base of known Bulletproof facts for everybody to see, but if no, if you are doing so and use the above point at the first line of argument and column of this new perspectives for the UNKNOWING, IGNORANT MASSES ? then if you insist doing this, putting this speculative issues in front, well, principaly is one of those two things maybe going on= either you are a unplanning character and careless lacking tactical skills, naïve approach and with a rookie's behavior in the matters of this strugle OR you are just an agent provocator with appetite for destruction and  aiming to spread confusedness, discombobulation, muddiness, mixing-up, disarray the hard talks: in 3 words distraction,  disorder & diversion. In military tactical theory "a feint intended to draw off attention from the point of main attack". One of those " IS MUCH MORE POSSIBLE going on here, because you must know first what to say and when to say it before going into writte/speak mode, otherwise you are misleading the message and doing sabotage against our efforts, capice, förstår du, entiendes ? Or I am wrong, what do you think ?



.
.