Was Comrade Fidel a fraud?

The Cuba story makes no sense

First some background.

My wife and I went to Cuba in 2011 and toured the whole island. We visited all the key “revolution” locations too. It is a paradise at the coast, but undeveloped and mono culture [sugar] inland. There were horses and carts on their M1 equivalent. The development potential is enormous. The people are great, very diverse ethnically, and are highly educated; to a better standard than most Americans. There is a far better Health Service too.

Cuba is the only place that I have ever had an official, in uniform, beg from me. I gave her a Convertible peso, worth about a dollar. To put that in context a doctor gets the equivalent of about 100 Convertible pesos per month. The Local peso is worth one twenty seventh of a Convertible peso. So a doctor gets about 2,700 Local pesos a month, worth about $100. The locals, including the doctors, are all paid in Local pesos which are not convertible.

Only well connected Cubans are allowed to travel abroad. Cubans cannot buy and sell houses either. So there are often 4 generations living under the same roof.

There was nothing much to spend money on so I was very generous with the beggars who were everywhere that the tourists were; inland anyway. The system means that everybody wants to earn Convertibles. So it is no wonder that the black market is probably bigger than the official economy, it’s the only way to live comfortably. Our guide was quite explicit about that; so everyone is on the make. It was the same when we backpacked through Vietnam in 2000; another so called “communist” country.

Next, some interesting facts about Comrade Fidel:

First, he was an actor with his own IMDB page. He was an extra in some Hollywood movies, including two in 1946. That was the year that the CIA was formed.  Do you know of any other revolutionary communist leaders who had, or have, pages at the IMDB? Thought not.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004242/

Second, he played baseball in the USA. In 1951, Castro tried out for the Washington Senators baseball team. Wtf???

Third he was a rich lawyer who married a very wealthy woman. Castro was born to wealth (sugar plantations). His first wife Mirta Diaz-Balart was also from great wealth. She was a relative of Batista the Cuban dictator that Castro "overthrew"! Rich lawyers often become revolutionaries and overthrow the in-laws, don't they?

Fourth, he lived in New York City on many occasions, and he even spent his honeymoon there. He and Mirta were married in 1948, and her father gave them “tens of thousands of dollars to spend on a three-month New York honeymoon”. Could any other real revolutionaries of the time could say the same thing?.

Fifth, he was imprisoned by the dictator Batista but soon released. Conveniently in time to lead the "revolution". Do you think that this is a common mistake of many brutal dictators? Of course not, they wouldn't stay in power long if they did.

Now, here are some facts about the US military and security services:

1. The US military budget is about $750 billion per annum

2. The US security and intelligence agencies have a combined annual budget that is even greater than that of the military. So it exceeds $750 billion per annum

3. Therefore the combined annual budget for US security, intelligence and military exceeds $1.5 trillion per annum

4. The US has 750+ military bases [as of 2015] spread all over the planet. Guantanamo is just one of them

5. The US military has been in almost constant action for over a century. It has been at war somewhere on the planet for pretty well every single day of my life. The Korean War started just before my birthday in 1950 and the US has been fighting a war, somewhere on the planet, ever since. So it has lots of very experienced military and intelligence people

6. The U$ dollar has been the world’s reserve currency since WW2, the petro$ since 1970’s

7. The US is the world’s leading historical proponent of geopolitical coups and covert destabilisation actions in foreign sovereign nations. I think that it is fair to say that the US has well and truly outstripped Perfidious Albion by now

I am confident that all these facts are easily verifiable. You will find confirmation of most of them direct from the US government itself. The US establishment controlled Wiki will no doubt confirm them too.

Fact 7 excluded of course. But even here most of the older events are now freely admitted by the US government. They always wait a few decades before admitting their foreign misdeeds to their great unwashed.

Now let's just think about some aspects of the official US part of the Cuba story for a minute or two. They are asking us to believe some incredible stuff as real "history":

1. That the massive US could not swat the Cuban, half-starved, fly on its belly. Cuba is only 90 miles away from the US and is totally undefended

2. That the so called "Bay of Pigs" CIA operation "failed". That the US couldn't organise a coup in it's own backyard. The same US who are experts at organising successful coups, they’ve done it all over the planet. They've been doing it for ever too. It would have been easy as well, Florida is full of potential recruits

3. That the US couldn't over run an island where they already had a massive military base, at Guantanamo, which predated Fidel and his "revolution". All they had to do was drive out of the gate

4. That the US tried to assassinate Fidel hundreds of times, but failed every time. The US spooks are just so incompetent

We are talking about the biggest military and intelligence operation that ever existed. Yet they somehow can't organise anything effective in their own backyard. Try telling that to one of their South American or Middle Eastern victim countries. It is utterly ridiculous.

How can one accept their official propaganda about Comrade Fidel and Cuba?

That the massive US, with these almost unlimited military and financial resources at its disposal, could not defeat this undefended little island, that is only 90 miles away, and that has virtually no resources at its disposal.

What was stopping them?

Was it concern for human rights?

Was it concern for public opinion?

Was it concern that those pesky Rooskies might not like it?

Was it just incompetence?

Of course it wasn't, those never stopped the US anywhere else.

So what was it?


One can only conclude that the US must have wanted to maintain this so called communist place nearby. Because they could have swatted them like a fly if they really wanted to get rid of them.

This might seem incredible if you have swallowed all their ongoing propaganda about "communism". But once you know that all the big "communist" revolutions were funded by the US banksters then perhaps not. The Russian and Chinese communists certainly were funded by the banksters. See my last post "Who pulls the strings?" for confirmation of this.

http://petefairhurst.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/who-pulls-strings.html

So is Cuba just another one of their illusions?

Finally, back to Common Sense based on direct experience. When you see the “revolution” story close up, like we did in 2011 then, if you give it some thought, you realise just how ridiculous the story is. We drove from Havana to Santiago, visiting all the key revolution locations on the way. Locations being the operative word it seems in hindsight. Certainly they were all tiny

We then flew back to Havana, in a light aircraft, along the whole island. So we saw the whole of Cuba, from the ground and the air. I can assure you that the island was then, probably still is now, effectively defenceless and there is minimal infrastructure of any form.

It’s like a fairy tale. A fairy tale delivered by a very rich lawyer/actor/baseball player who was clearly not what we were told he was. It was Captain Mainwaring, and Sergeant Wilson, and their Dads Army platoon overthrowing the nasty and brutal, US supported, dictator. How likely is that?

The corporate media, and the "on the payroll" historians, just keep repeating the same story, over and over again.

So it must be true hey?

Who pulls the strings?

How the trillionaires screw us all

I posted about the book "Tragedy and Hope 101" as an addendum on my "Vote Brexit!" post.

Having read it more fully now then, I realise that it deserves it's own post.

In fact this is the most important post that I have made so far.

If, like me, you are a student of history, real history I mean not the, seriously dodgy, official academic version then, this post is for you. It is primarily centered on the pivotal 20th Century and it reveals some essential truths about how the world operates today.

It is a very different story to the one that you were taught at your state school.

Very different indeed.

Here is a very revealing free book by Joe Plummer. Some of the best info that you never paid for.

http://joeplummer.com/tragedy-and-hope-made-easy.html

As a taster then, I quote below the introduction. Followed by my own short comments.

Sections in italics are my emphasis.

"Introduction

by G. Edward Griffin

If you have ever watched an illusionist perform up-close magic, you know the power of misdirection and sleight-of-hand. Even in a room full of suspicious and attentive observers, the illusionist can fool them all. By exploiting known weaknesses in the human mind and employing his tools of the trade, he will deceive the crowd whether it wants to be deceived or not.

Imagine what an equally talented “network” of political illusionists can accomplish. Performing before an audience of mostly trusting and casual observers, exploiting known weaknesses in the human mind, and employing their tools of the trade, they, too, will deceive the crowd whether it wants to be deceived or not.

Having spent nearly sixty years of my life researching and writing about the illusionists who control our world, I can say without reservation that you are about to learn some of their closest-held secrets. Joe has done an outstanding job of weeding through Carroll Quigley’s book, Tragedy & Hope. He has captured the essence of what Quigley referred to as “the Network” and made this important information accessible to the average person who simply doesn’t have time to read a 1,300-page history book. Even for those who intend to read the entire volume, Joe has created an introduction and study guide that will serve the serious student well.

Knowledge of who Carroll Quigley was and the deceptions that he revealed is essential for understanding the real world of today. His close relationship with the Network and his approval of its aims made it possible to provide an insider’s analysis of the minds and methods of the global elite. Without this knowledge, the actions of those who dominate the U.S. government and the Western world do not make sense. With it, everything falls into place.

Be forewarned. The journey you are about to begin is not for the faint hearted. If you are comfortable with the illusions that currently pass for political reality, this book is not for you because, once you discover how the deceivers perform their magic, the comfort of ignorance is no longer possible. Once the bell is rung, it cannot be unrung.

The bell starts ringing on the next page."

This book explains how modern financial monopoly capitalism was created during the early part of 20th century, by a small group of very powerful people based in the UK. How these private individuals gained the power to create and control the worlds money supply. How this power is used to control politicians, and all governments. How it is in fact used to control society, and a lot lot more too.

The section on money in chapter 5 is necessarily simplistic. But it still provides essential reading for the financially "challenged", ie. most of humanity.

The section on the lead up to WW2 in chapter 7 will be particularly uncomfortable reading for Brits. The only comfort that I can offer is that the machinations of the British based financial monopoly capitalists, who deceived the world and effectively created WW2, were not carried out on behalf  of the ordinary British people. Far from it, ordinary Brits were as deceived by them as much as the peoples of any other nation. It was exactly the same for the ordinary Germans too, they were manipulated even more. And they suffered far higher losses than Britain, France and the US combined.

So I strongly recommend that the student should try to put aside all their previous learning, and instincts, when reading this short book. Try not to be put off by the, often counter intuitive, insider information. Open your mind and assess the sense after reading each section; use your common sense. If you do then you will be very well rewarded, you will receive one of the best free education lessons that you could ever have.


Amongst many, many, other things this book demonstrates two very important fundamental points as follows:

In the main, politics is a front. The illusion of public input through the voting system is a form of mass mind control. Like religion the political process is based on faith.

Also that money is a faith based phenomenon. They print the money. They assign its value. The note is infused with their power. They giveth and they taketh as they see fit. And in their limitlessness they can assign value to nothing more than a key stroke. Money is not wealth. Money is a tool to herd the sheep. Wealth is the power to wield that tool.

[Thanks Tyrone McCloskey]

Of course, officially, there are no trillionaires. Forbes list billionaires only, Bill Gates being the richest on their, very incomplete, list.

But just do the math: this small number of people who actually own the banks, and also the Fed, have been earning interest on every single dollar that has been in circulation since 1913. That is an awful lot of dollars. Of course they are trillionaires.

http://joeplummer.com/tragedy-and-hope-made-easy.html


If your appetite is whetted and you want to do some even more detailed study of Tragedy and Hope by Carroll Quigley then, here is a detailed series of lectures from an excellent independent analyst:

https://jaysanalysis.com/2016/05/30/jay-dyer-on-tragedy-hope-1-bankster-revolutions-half/

Each lecture is split into 2 hours, the first hour free, the second is for subscribers only [$4.95/month]. There are 8 lectures so approx 16 hours in total. I started with the free but soon subscribed. I guess that you could listen to them all in only one month and then cancel if you are a tight ass. But I am taking my time, the info flows thick and fast. I found that taking notes as he speaks is a good way of capturing the essence. [This technique takes me back to my student days of the late 1960's. But I guess that the younger listener may not bother with that, far too 20th century]

For the full picture you could always buy the original book, but it is a very very long read at 1300 pages and 600k words. It is also notoriously dense and hard going.

Who said this about 9/11? Read this

Plus some thoughts on our false politics

Verbatim quotation:

“It wasn’t architectural defect. The WorldTradeCenter was always known as a very, very strong building. Don’t forget that took a big bomb in the basement [in 1993]. Now, the basement is the most vulnerable place because that’s your foundation, and it withstood that, and I got to see that area about three or four days after it took place because one of my structural engineers actually took me for a tour, because he did the building, and I said, ‘I can’t believe it.’ The building was standing solid and half of the columns were blown out, so this was an unbelievably powerful building. If you don’t know anything about structure, it was one of the first buildings that was built from the outside. The steel, the reason the WorldTradeCenter had such narrow windows is that in between all the windows, you had the steel on the outside, so you had the steel on the outside of the building. That’s why when I first looked, and you had these big heavy I-beams, when I first looked at it, I couldn’t believe it because there was a hole in the steel, and this is steel that was… You remember the width of the windows of the WorldTradeCenter, folks. I think you know if you were ever up there, they were quite narrow and in between was this heavy steel. I said how could a plane, even a plane, even a 767 or 747 or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through this steel? I happen to think that they had not only a plane, but they had bombs that exploded almost simultaneously, because I just can’t imagine anything being able to go through that wall. Most buildings are built with the steel on the inside around the elevator shaft. This one was built from the outside, which is the strongest structure you can have, and it was almost just like a can of soup.

“I just think that there was a plane with more than just fuel. I think, obviously, they were very big planes. They were going very rapidly, because I was also watching where the plane seemed to be not only going fast, it seemed to be coming down into the building. So it’s getting the speed from going down hill, so to speak. It just seemed to me that to do that kind of destruction is even more than a big plane, because you’re talking about taking out steel, the heaviest caliber steel that was used on the building. Well, these buildings were rock-solid, and you know it’s just an amazing, amazing thing. This country is different today and it’s going to be different than it ever was for many years to come.”

It was Donald Trump, here is the proof:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt-ldMj9y9w

Yes "The Donald", the newly selected US front man. Whatever you might think of him, he is not stupid. And he knows about skyscraper construction. That is for sure.

Did you know that all the votes in the US "presidential" election are made, and counted, by computer? The so called voting machines.

And that there is no effective supervision of the software used by the machines and no audit trail from these machines. They are black boxes that provide no verification of individual votes. So there is no proof possible that any individual vote was counted properly. And so no proof that the declared election numbers are accurate.

The voting machines are provided by 3 or 4 private companies. One of which is owned by George Soros! Yes him.

The machines were introduced after the 2000 "election" that gave us George "W" Bush as US "president". The halfwit Bush scion who was obviously not intelligent enough to decide anything important. He was proof positive that they are all puppets I think.

The 2000 election ran a psyop that led to the introduction of the voting machines. Florida was the key state. Remember the "hanging chads" that the lamestream media hammered on about for weeks after the 2000 "presidential election"? That was the psyop. In fact Florida had been a Republican gerrymandered state for decades before 2000. They could fix any election result that they wanted. They usually did too, so there was no need to make all the fuss about the chads.

So why did they fuss about "hanging chads"? It was to discredit paper ballots and facilitate the introduction of the voting machines. And it worked. Machines are used in all the US states now.

The lack of an audit trail means that the bad guys can declare any number that they want for the votes cast and counted. There is no proof at all! Do they even count the votes? I doubt it. They can sit in their penthouses, or in their country estates, or on their private islands, and declare any number they want. Why bother to count at all?

The winner is selected, not elected. It is obvious if you really think about it. There are many, many, reasons why it is obvious. This is just one of them.


Yet US people, and even UK people, fired up by the relentless media promotion, get very excited about the charade. And surprised when the unbelievably corrupt, psychopathic, war mongering, allegedly "progressive", social justice warrior, favourite loses "unexpectedly".

And what about all those hilarious predictions of doom, wailing and gnashing of teeth, from all the "progressive" supporters when the TV actor, cartoon character, far-right madman unexpectedly "wins" the race. Come on - he's an actor ffs! He reads a script. No prizes for guessing who wrote the script either..... Ok he can ad lib very well, but he's appointing NeoCons to his administration it seems. Which will ensure continuity, as always.

It is all an obvious, blatant, charade for tv and media. None of it is real. None of it. Donald Trump and Bill Clinton are actually the best of mates. Donald and Bill both flew on Jeffrey Epsteins "Lolita Express". His paedophile orgy "fun plane". And visited his paedophile "sex slave" island. Google "Lolita Express" if you don't believe me, you will find plenty of links.

As for "progressive" Killary, Bills missus, she is a real piece of evil, in some ways worse than Bill. And with similar sexual preferences according to many accounts. Google "Clinton body count" and "Mena airport" and "Clinton foundation corruption".






The US president has been a very well remunerated US front man/teleprompter reader for decades, probably far longer. Most of the recent ones have been closely associated with the Bush crime syndicate. Certainly all of them since Reagan.


You think its really any different here in the UK? Of course it's not. Thatcher, Major and Bliar all made tens of millions, maybe more, after they left office. Pay offs for services rendered? Who knows. Cameron will probably do the same. But he has no real need, he is already stinking rich, Sam Cam is an Astor ffs.

Currently we have:

Exhibit #1 in the "right" corner - Terry "no balls" May. He was selected, not elected. He's gonna give us Brexit.

Exhibit #2 in the "left" corner - Tony "war criminal" Bliar with his new best pal John "grey man" Major. They are surely selected, which normal person wants anything to do with Bliar? They're gonna save us from Brexit.

Ha ha ha ha ha........ It's all bullshit

This selection by elites of the public face, the teleprompter reader, is yet another reason to ignore the false left/right dialectic that their media pumps 24/7.

Here is the first rule of corporate media promotion:

If it's heavily promoted in the corporate media then, it's probably bullshit. It's probably not true.

So the most important issue is not the constantly media promoted: left v right.

It is something that they rarely talk about in the media: us v them.

The people v the hidden elites and their placemen.

Finally, listen to Larry. He tells it like it is:

"Say No to the System" - Larry Pinkney

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAZmmExQqZk

Wagging the Moon doggie

Was it an earlier psyop? Read this and judge for yourself

Most half awake people now realise that we are constantly being manipulated by The Powers that Shouldn't Be, via their corporate, and other, media. They run psyops on us all the time.

ISIS being a current case in point. It was created, and it is fully owned and closely managed, by the Western bad guys and their proxies. It is an Empire brand. Same as Al Qaeda was. This is all thoroughly documented if you care to do the research, as usual mainly not in TPTSB media of course.

So how long have they been doing this sort of stuff?
Was it just since the internet era?
When did all this actually start?

Well, it has gone on for centuries I think Certainly in the 18th & 19th centuries, and very likely a lot earlier. The form of media used was different then, but they still ran their psyops.

The British elites are past masters. They taught the Americans all their techniques too. The British elites "Security Services" even set up the CIA for the US in 1946.

The British are not known as "Perfidious Albion" for nothing.

So, in truth, all of our official, academic, ie. TPTSB, "history" needs reappraisal.


By way of illustration lets have a look at one of the earliest "Conspiracy Theories" the very problematic "Moon Landings" of the late 1960's and early 1970's.

Please read all the following and then think it through for yourself:

Truthers do not usually believe that the moon landing story is true. Probably because they have been exposed to the plentiful logical analysis, which is freely available, and which shows numerous anomalies.

A cursory study of the science of the story is troubling. There are far too many scientific impossibilities for the story to be true.

NASA now admits that, for human travel through the intense radiation in space then extensive, and very heavy, lead protection is required for a human to survive.

On June 24, 2005, NASA made this rather remarkable admission: “NASA's Vision for Space
Exploration calls for a return to the Moon as preparation for even longer journeys to Mars and beyond. But there's a potential showstopper: radiation. Space beyond low-Earth orbit is awash with intense radiation from the Sun and from deep galactic sources such as supernovas …Finding a good shield is important.”

So how did they get through in the 1960's in their tin cans? How did they land in their tinfoil lunar module?

This is the real story killer. If they could go to the moon in 1960's then why can they not return in the 2010's?


The moonsuits were ridiculous as well. The temperatures on the moon are literally boiling in sunlight and freezing in darkness, with nothing in between. It is very hard to believe that the suits would last 5 minutes on the inhospitable lunar surface. Particularly when you realise that the suits had to be battery powered, there was no other power source. They must have had great batteries in the 1960's! Not. And especially with all that radiation, and all those high speed particles, bombarding down. Maybe they just got lucky and none came during the many hours that each mission spent on the moon, much of it outdoors in their suits.


And what about the, literally, tinfoil lunar landing craft with its one "lunar module descent engine" to slow it's descent? Rockets are not aircraft, they cannot be "piloted", they are far too unstable, especially single engine rockets. Modern hover drones all have multiple stability systems don't they.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_Propulsion_System

In fact the inherent impossibility of "piloting" a rocket was the subject of an in-joke about the first astronauts; as revealed in Tom Wolf's 1979 book "The Right Stuff".

The very first US astronauts, both Mercury and Apollo, were all ex-test pilots from the US airforce. And all US test pilots had very, very, big cajones. They were truly brave, very intensely trained, very cool under pressure, very high risk taking people when at work. They lived on the very edge, and many died in accidents when piloting dangerous and unstable planes that were under development by the military industrial complex. They were a breed apart. It is impossible to imagine any current air jockey accepting the risks that they routinely accepted.

Tom Wolf was spot on with his title. They certainly were made of the "Right Stuff".

Anyhow, the joke was that the non-astronaut test pilots labelled the astronauts "monkeys in a tin can". Why? Because they were not pilots when they went into space, they were passengers. The monkeys refers to the earliest passengers who went into space, before humans.

But we are expected to believe that all the lunar landing modules were piloted down to the moon's surface using a single engine propulsion system, like a rocket with a throttle. Does your common sense tells you anything?




There is another massive clue. That is the later life demeanor of Armstrong, the first man on the moon. If you look carefully at his late life interviews then you can see that he is very unsettled by the telling of the official story. He really looks like he is lying. He is very uncomfortable. Very. Some very interesting body language analysis has been done. His body language screams: "Lie!"


Most of the key aspects of the story could easily be false. They would have been quite easy to fake if necessary. Hollywood has essentially been under shadow government control since it's start in the early 20th century, certainly since the CIA was founded in 1946. Hollywood is an important component in the endless bullshit stories that they spin. It softens people up for their psyops by introducing ideas into mainstream consciousness. It is notorious for this. It constantly prefigures future scenarios. It is an integral part of their control system. Cue Stanley Kubrick.......

People certainly saw the big rockets take off from Earth, and millions saw the returning capsules land in the ocean. But this start and finish, and everything in between, was only shown to us all on TV, by the corporate media and BBC . The only part of the story that was actually witnessed live by ordinary people was the launch from Earth. The return landings were in the middle of the ocean miles from all civilians. And all the rest was from inside the capsule in space, or on the moon, so obviously no witnesses there!

It was all "top secret" and "national security". The same old stale bullshit excuse that they always use. So it was all on a "need to know" basis. A hoax could in fact have been pulled off with a very small number of insiders. How do we really know that the astronauts ever left Earth orbit? In fact how do we really know that they ever left the Earth?

"Those pictures were taken on the moon"
"That film was taken on the moon"
"Those rocks came from the moon"
"They are from the moon because we said that they are"

We already know that the scientific establishment, and particularly the corporate media, lie to us all the time.

So why would we trust known liars when it comes to the moon landings story? Do you really think that they were more honest in 1960's? Really? I already told you that the CIA was founded in 1946.

In fact NASA has become so notorious for lying that it is often referred to as:

Never A Straight Answer


There are at least 2 other obvious questions that follow from all this:

How might they have done the fraud?
Why might they have done the fraud?


I already told you about the How. That would have been easy. The tv images that they broadcast were ultra low definition. I know that because I saw them "live" myself and they were very indistinct. Very. The available cameras in 1960's, both tv and others, were much higher definition than we actually saw on the "live" broadcasts. Rather than use a direct tv feed from the control centre, they actually filmed a tv set showing the "live" feed, to broadcast their images to us all, via our tv's! Thus ensuring ultra low def. No high def for the plebs, they might spot something.

NASA now says that it has "lost" the tapes of all of the "historic" video record too. Thousands of spools. So no way of doing any modern image analysis. How convenient!

The still photos were good old style lens and film. Leaving aside the effect of all that radiation on unexposed film, how did they actually take the photos? Well, the cameras were mounted on the chest of their moonsuits. They were high def and the resulting snaps are freely available to view at various websites.

But htf did the moon walking astronauts focus their cameras so well wearing those massive moon suit gloves? All the stills are in good focus ffs, all of them. And htf did the astronauts frame their photos so well from inside their space helmets? All of the photos are well framed. It makes no sense.....

As you would imagine then there has been lots of, independent, thorough analysis of these photos. And numerous anomalies have been revealed as a result. Like why did the lunar lander rocket engine not stir up all that lunar dust? The lander should surely have been covered in dust? Not even the feet of the lander have dust on them. There are lots of shadow anomalies too, indicating multiple light sources. You know, a bit like a film set........

If you are interested enough to want to know more then, this book is a good starting place. Well it is far more than that in truth. It is a thorough demolition job of the official story. It is a great read, and very funny in parts too:

http://www.whale.to/c/Dave%20McGowan%20-%20Wagging%20The%20Moon%20Doggie.pdf

The highly respected Dave McGowan sadly passed away recently. But his work is still out there for free.


As regards the Why then read Dave's theories about Vietnam in Part III of the above link. He gives as good an explanation as I've read anywhere else. It was a distraction from lots of other nasty stuff that was happening at the same time. Same old, same old then.......


In conclusion.......

The fact that you saw a grainy black and white image on a tv in the middle of the night doesn't make the story true.

The fact that the mainstream media was unanimous in its promotion of the story doesn't make the story true.

The fact that nobody in the media properly questioned any of the numerous scientific anomalies doesn't make the story true.

The fact that those in academia, and elsewhere, who did properly question these anomalies, did not get any airtime, anywhere, doesn't make the story true.

In fact the media, and academic, unanimity in the moon landings story reminds me of 9/11. The same absolute adherence to a ridiculous story is evident.

The 9/11 hoax was so ridiculous that it stunned many people into looking at our "history", as taught to us all in our state schools, in a much more inquisitive way. The media curtain was ripped away, and the little men behind it were revealed to have no clothes.

Many of their numerous lies have been revealed, and continue to be revealed. And there is no way to un-reveal them, short of 100% control of the internet, and social media.

And that is surely impossible. We are not dumb enough to allow that to happen are we?

Addendum 2nd April 2019

https://www.unz.com/article/the-moon-landing-a-giant-hoax-for-mankind/


Addendum 13th July 2020

Proof that the moon landings were fake in a few easy steps

First look at this link:

https://www.universetoday.com/20489/moon-compared-to-earth/ 

Quote:

"Let’s take a look at the diameter first. The diameter of the Moon is 3,474 km. Now, let’s compare this to the Earth. The diameter of the Earth is 12,742 km. This means that the Moon is approximately 27% the size of the Earth.

What about surface area? The surface area of the Moon is 37.9 million square kilometers. That sounds like a lot, but it’s actually smaller than the continent of Asia, which is only 44.4 million square km. The surface area of the whole Earth is 510 million square km, so the area of the Moon compared to Earth is only 7.4%."

So the Moon is 13 times bigger than the Earth measured by surface area, which is what we see [100%/7.4%=13.5]

Now look at these famous images from Apollo 8:

https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk00d58UDIWhMC6T3_mC3NSxURKA0CA%3A1594641808632&source=hp&ei=kE0MX8yQJIO1gwfblq2QBQ&q=moonrise+apollo+8&oq=moonrise+apoll&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQARgAMgIIADIGCAAQFhAeMggIABAWEAoQHjIGCAAQFhAeOgcIIxDqAhAnOgcILhDqAhAnOgQIIxAnOgQILhAnOgsILhCxAxDHARCjAjoICAAQsQMQgwE6BQgAELEDOggILhCxAxCDAToFCC4QsQM6DgguELEDEMcBEKMCEIMBOgIILjoICC4QsQMQkwI6CAguEMcBEK8BOgQIABAKUKoUWLxYYJh5aAJwAHgAgAFkiAGmCZIBBDE0LjGYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6sAEK&sclient=psy-ab 

See a problem?

Why doesn't the Earth look massive from the moon?

It should look 13 times bigger than the Moon does from the Earth because the surface area is 13 times more

So the famous 1968 Apollo 8 "Moonrise" photo is a fake then

[It's not as if there is only 1 Moonrise photo either, there are lots of them as you can see. They say that men landed there 6 times]

Why would it be fake if they had really been there and done that 6 times?

QED

But don't tell anyone about this, they will think that you are a tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist 

ps

In the 1960's NASA owned and ran a massive film studio at Lookout Mountain Laboratory, the intelligence community’s top-secret, state-of-the-art film studio nestled high in the Hollywood Hills. Overlooking Universal Studios in fact 

Why would they need to do that? See above for the answer to that 

This is why NASA is now known as

Never

A

Straight

Answer