Re: that show was on again
- From: BradGuth <bradguth@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:35:08 -0800 (PST)
On Feb 25, 11:15 am, "Al G" <agerha...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<P...@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:f5c0s3l9reuaqcrhpt25774ktm2pc27qnn@xxxxxxxxxx
the moon landing conspiracy was on agin last night. I just don't
understand. they think all 6 landings were faked. why would they do
that? why not fake the first one, pretend to lose interest and just
quit. split the $40 million among the crew.
NASA knew the constellations would give their location away. So they
didn't photograph stars. How do you intentionally NOT photograph
something that's there?
NASA even had a ceramics lab? they were able to fake all the moon
rocks. they thought of everything, didn't they?
Also, How many people must have been involved with the fakery, and have
managed to keep quiet for all these years. Dozens? Thousands? Keep in mind,
a lot of these alleged people were politicians. (Unlikely/Impossible to keep
quiet. Our own Pres. couldn't even keep a blowjob quiet.)
Al G
We're not talking about all that many liars and puppet-masters,
because each nation was in fact trying their level best at getting
their moonsuit butts onto our physically dark moon. So, a few dozen
to perhaps at most a few hundred well enough paid and fully benefited
individuals is all it took, especially with those MIB as fully
licensed to either kill-off or otherwise neutralize anyone that did
not follow the Skull and Bones rules of our mutually perpetrated cold-
war(s).
It's what most any good government of global domination expertise
along with its faith-based partners in crimes against humanity does
best.
.. - Brad Guth
.
- References:
- that show was on again
- From: PP
- Re: that show was on again
- From: Al G
- that show was on again
- Prev by Date: Re: Do we have enough rockets and launch pads yet?
- Next by Date: The Pioneer Effect, and a New Theory of Gravity
- Previous by thread: Re: that show was on again
- Next by thread: Re: Trends in space station design, weight versus volume
- Index(es):