Evan Burton

Happy New Year Duane, and hoping you have a great next 12 months!

The Cairns lady: It happened, it was humour in the context of my post, but forget that and just have a good celebration. Cheers and beers!

Got your PM, and have sent a reply. If you don't get my original PM (quite long), let me know and I'll resend it.

Hell, I'll resend it in a few minutes anyway.

People! At this stage, we still don't really know too much what happened. There are a few vids available for the event itself, but they don't clearly show rounds hitting targets, tell us intentions, etc.

Although I am inclined to believe it was a "simple" assassination by her political enemies (i.e. no extra-national involvement) we simply don't know. Speculation at this time is expected and should be encouraged. Reasons in support of - or refuting - such speculation is also to be expected and encouraged. The problem is that there is little if any evidence for the speculation (at this time) so being asked to provided evidence to support that speculation may be quite difficult... even if the speculation is quite accurate. If you think the speculation is wrong, then by all means say so. If you think the speculation is correct, then please say so. The onus of supporting such speculation - at this stage - does not really apply (unless you make a really wild speculation, such as "It was actually Elvis who fired the fatal shot using a M61 Vulcan canon, which was mounted in a flying saucer to the rear of the car, but cannot be seen because it was covered by holographic projections of clear sky."

THAT sort of speculation requires at least some evidence to be seriously considered.

Greg,

After discussion, we have removed an accusation you made in one of your posts which was subsequently quoted many times. Please do NOT make this accusation unless you have undeniable evidence - and in those cases, you should ALWAYS check with a mod (or being such a serious matter, preferably an Admin) before posting the accusation on the Forum.

Please consider this a Formal Warning about the matter.

Please read the PM I am about to send to you.

Good point - Duane, you have tested Jack's claim?

No, his biography.

... Oh , that's even better !

Well, if it is not true, call them out on it. Wouldn't that be a coup for you? Having caught out Mrs First Moon Walker lying about Bart Sibrel?

It's in print, so there is no way it could be "erased".

Here is your chance for 15 mins of fame, Duane - shown them up as liars.

(Awaits the wiggle on this one)

Please pardon my humour.

No, his biography.

But it will never happen. He has not done so previously, so why expect him to change now?

Hi John, and welcome.

I'm normally over in the Political Conspiracies section, and I know nothing about the JFK section... but welcome just the same!

Modus Operandi... Make wild boasts to back up claims and go off topic...

What claims would they be? I am saying that it can be - in your words - "the most important thing you have ever accomplished in your life" and you are just so overwhelmed by it you don't remember how you felt. EXACTLY the topic under discussion.

Quite true. Duane is forgetting when Sibrel forced his way into the Armstrong house, with a large dog threatening Mrs Armstrong. A xxxx, dishonest, underhanded... that probably does make him the stereotypical journalist.

If you believe the need to undergo hypnotic regression to be able to speak about or remember what it felt like to be on the Moon is "normal" , then I can see why you believe these guys really went there .... It's anything but normal not to remember the most important thing you have ever accomplished in your life .. In fact , what would be normal , would be to remember every second of it and to also remember exactly how you felt while doing something that important .

This has nothing to do with Mitchell's inabilty to express how he felt , it has to do with his inability to remember how he felt ... Big difference .

When false memories are implanted , the "MEMORY" of what you allegedly accomplished will be intact , while the EMOTION of what you allegedly accomplished will be completely lacking .... It's called being brainwashed .

I like the way you assume you know how he felt... or how anyone else might feel. I remember my "wings" flight from my logbook; I have photos of me getting my wings... damned if can can remember anything about those days, though. Oh - except I scored with a lady the night we were in Cairns... that was memorable!

Most astronauts have refused to grant him interviews due to his questionable tactics used in attempts to obtain footage of them confessing to being conspirators in a hoax. The most infamous incident involved Apollo 11 crew member Buzz Aldrin, the second man to walk on the moon. According to Aldrin, he was lured to a Beverly Hills hotel under the pretext of an interview on space for a Japanese children's television show. When he arrived, Aldrin claims Sibrel was there demanding that he swear on a Bible that he had walked on the moon.

When Aldrin refused, Sibrel called him a coward, a xxxx, and a thief. Aldrin gave Sibrel a punch in the jaw, which was recorded. Sibrel's reaction was to ask, "Did you get that on camera?" However, it is widely believed that this question was dubbed into the video at a later time when it was posted online in an effort to make Sibrel appear as if he had not been phased by the punch. (Versions of the video available online lack the statement "Did you get that on camera," thus indicating that two versions of this video are likely to exist: the original and a studio-edited version.) Sibrel later attempted to use the tape to convince police and prosecutors that he was the victim of an assault. However, it was decided that Aldrin had been provoked, and (based on Sibrel's unfazed, nearly instant reaction to his camera man) did not actually injure Sibrel, and no charges were filed. Many talk show hosts aired the clip, making Sibrel the butt of jokes.

Jim McDade, writing in the Birmingham News, characterized A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon as "full of falsehoods, innuendo, strident accusations, half-truths, flawed logic and premature conclusions." According to McDade, the "only thing new and weird" in the 47-minute film is that the claim that video views of Earth were actually filmed through a small hole to give the impression that Apollo 11 was not in low earth orbit. "Bart has misinterpreted things that are immediately obvious to anyone who has extensively read Apollo history and documentation or anyone who has ever been inside an Apollo Command Module or accurate mockup," says McDade.

Aldrin's attorney, Robert O'Brien, says that Sibrel has a history of stalking other former astronauts, including Neil Armstrong, Alan Bean, and Al Worden. Buzz Aldrin's wife Lois summed up her feelings about Bart Sibrel: "He said things I can't repeat. He was not a nice man, and it really upset Buzz a lot."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_Sibrel

If somebody is making a film questioning the moral fiber of it's nations "heroes," you would figure some attempt at legitimacy and good faith would be maintained by the director as to not come off like some sort of ignorant hypocrite. I suppose Bart Sibrel feels that since he's decided that some people are frauds and , that gives him the right to be one too. Ambushes and interviewing under false pretense are scumbag tactics. It's further aggravating that he refuses to leave the people alone when they tell him to f**k off, and instead shove a bible in their face.

"SWEAR on this BIBLE under penalty of Perjury, Eternal Damnation, and TREASON that you walked on the MOON!!!!" Whoever chases people around this way doesn't not deserve compliance, they deserve to be beaten with that bible until they're in a coma or better. "Six astronauts REFUSED to swear on this bible, PROOF that the moon landing was a HOAX!!!!" Bullxxxx! Ever think that it might be great supporting evidence to the theory that you're an obnoxious f**k???

At no point does this film really give any convincing testimony to the directors "truth." Some conspiracy theory is touched upon, but is inadequately explained to be either compelling or very interesting. Probably the only reason to watch this is to see how much you end up hating the director by the end. You stop caring about what the people are talking about, and just watch a maniac annoy and provoke senior citizens... which is mildly entertaining I suppose.

http://frottage.blogspot.com/2006/03/proof...akes-worse.html

At this point in the story, it behooves me to ask: Short of taking No-Doz to avoid missing even a minute of a “Battlestar Galactica” marathon on UPN, is there anything that quite qualifies a guy for loserdom than setting up fake interviews with fake Japanese producers and then chasing an ex-astronaut onto the street with a Bible?

Sibrel is in such a deep orbit that even other conspiracy theorists complain that he’s giving conspiracy theorists a bad name.

“The claim that the moon landing is a hoax is completely crackpot,” Kevin Christopher, a spokesman for Skeptical Inquirer magazine, told the L.A. Times. “He’s just crazy. The scientific evidence is overwhelming” (Then again, Skeptical Inquirer recently examined the possibly that Bigfoot—a.k.a. Sasquatch, a.k.a. Yeti—is real.)

So if even the conspiracy theorists think we landed on the moon, where, exactly, did this conspiracy theory originate? (I mean, let’s face it, “Capricorn One” was not that good a movie.)

Sibrel didn’t return my calls, but his Website claims that if you look at photos supposedly taken on the moon, some of the shadows appear to intersect, which should be impossible considering that the Sun was the only source of light. And how come no stars show up in the lunar sky? And why didn’t the Command Module leave a blast crater? And what about the green cheese? Why is NASA holding out on us? There’s your conspiracy!

Of course, you’ll have to pay good money to see Sibrel’s “evidence.” NASA, on the other hand, offers its evidence for free.

This is the part of my story where I would typically call in a psychologist, who would say that in our stressful, complex world, conspiracy theories offer a neat-and-tidy explanation for things that may not be so clear. The psychologist would also talk about how conspiracy theories tend to circulate, especially now, thanks to the Internet because people of like minds tend to seek each other out, the better to feel that it’s “us” versus “them.”

But I didn’t bother to call a psychologist because the actual truth about the moon conspiracy theories is that it’s built entirely of manure.

http://gershkuntzman.homestead.com/files/Moon_Stalker.htm

(I disagree here - I really enjoyed CAPRICORN 1. Elliot Gould and Telly Savalas were terrific IMO.)

Perhaps it is telling to give a wider quote from MOONDUST than what you have posted:

There's a mystic edge to this observation, yet for the thirty three hours he spent on the surface, during which he and Shepard collected ninety-four pounds of rock, he felt constant frustration at being too busy to simply stop and look around, take in the feeling of being there. He also felt a powerful angst at leaving, knowing as he did that he would never return and once back, became worried by his irritation with the question "What did it feel like to walk on the Moon?". Unlike most of his colleagues... <snip> He realized that the tightly focussed training regime of the fighter pilot and astronaut is at odds with that required of the modern day shaman, which was how he was beginning to see himself.

Sounds quite normal for guy who is not a bard, but is being asked to speak like one.

"Did Bhutto's bullet proof vest extend to cover her entire abdomen, I wonder?"

That depends on the type of ballistic vest used. There is normally a hard plate in front and rear, and often thinner side plates. The plates vary in size according to the use. Aircrew are required to be seated, move their abdomen to manipulate controls, etc, so there are specific ones for them. Soldiers have to be fairly agile, so another for them. For just pure protection against an assassin, there is another type.

http://www.hagor.co.il/htmls/galleryW.aspx...2&BSP=12188

The ballistic plates are also rated to a standard, able to stop a certain sized round at a certain distance. Details here.

What is INVISIBLE? That is the same as DELETING them, isn't it?

Jack,

No, far from it. It just means the post is visible only to the mods and admins. Any one of them can make it visible, if it is decided that is the correct course of action.

If you delete it, it is gone for good. That's why I will normally make a post invisible (or unapprove it, as the term is). People can review my actions, and if found in error, the post can be restored. Same post, same time, same position in the thread, etc.

Read the words of the Apollo astronots , when interviewed for the film 'In the Shadow of the Moon '.

Buzz Aldrin: I found the most uncomfortable, disturbing question coming back was "what'd it feel like?" To draw an analogy, we have voice recorders, we have video recorders, but so far we have not invented emotion recorders other than maybe a lie-detector test, and we don't do that kind of measurement. Emotions and feelings. What does this open up? Coming back, and then when asked a feeling, manufacturing what you think they want to hear instead of accurately trying to remember what your feelings really were.

Edgar Mitchell: I agree with Buzz. One of the more disturbing questions we got repeatedly, "what'd it feel like to be on the moon?" and I realized very shortly I didn't know what it felt like 'cause I was too busy thinking and doing to concentrate on feeling. In order to do that, I went to one of my dear friends in the psychological community, Dr. Jean Huston, and said, "Hey, help me do some hypnotic regression. I get this question 'what'd it feel like?' and I wanna find out 'cause I don't know!"

They speak like Manchurian Candidates .

They speak like people who have a hard time expressing emotion - hardly unusual for a group of highly-motivated test pilots. They could describe the technical nature of the experience but the human experience? They had a hard time. One of the few to do it was Al Bean, who painted what he saw. Or perhaps the late Pete Conrad, who had a standard reply: "Super! I really enjoyed it.".

Ed is also repeating something he said long ago:

"People would ask what it felt like. I didn't know what it felt like. I could tell them what I did, and what I thought, but not what I felt. It pissed me off."

...and the last one from Greg Parker , who made a rather perceptive joke about Lamson's attack antics against Jack , by comparing them to a Monty Python skit .

<snip>

I would like to know which moderator took it upon himself to delete these posts and why ... No moderator should be able to display this type of bias on this forum by deleting anyone's post comments .

I made them invisible, after consultation with other Mods, and at Jack White's request.

Oh - beware Bhutto assassination video clips online. The major AV companies have warned that some hackers have inserted a script / CODEC into the file at some sites. See here:

http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/006132.html

http://www.avertlabs.com/research/blog/ind...eading-malware/

http://www.scmagazineus.com/Bhutto-assassi...article/100230/

I can't get either of those to work for me; my anti-script / popup-blocker sometimes does this.

The stills from the webpage are NOT from the video I saw on the news. The footage I saw was taken from the left-hand side of the Bhutto vehicle, and you see the gunman on the far right (i.e. just behind the Bhutto vehicle). In the slo-mo version they showed, a hand appears and you can see flame from the pistol as it is fired.

Re: gunfire...

There was footage shown on TV here where you could see at least one person firing a pistol at her. You could see it right before the assassin detonated.

I'll see if the footage is online somewhere.

Karachi, 27 Dec. (AKI) - (by Syed Saleem Shahzad) - A spokesperson for the al-Qaeda terrorist network has claimed responsibility for the death on Thursday of former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

...Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid ...

Very obliging. I wonder if he was paid in dollars - or euros?

Paul - neither you nor I can say with any certainty what happened. Speculation about a US-inspired / motivated assassination may be perfectly correct.... but you cannot discount a simple assassination by opposing factions who were not motivated / coerced / paid by / whatever US interests.

Karachi, 27 Dec. (AKI) - (by Syed Saleem Shahzad) - A spokesperson for the al-Qaeda terrorist network has claimed responsibility for the death on Thursday of former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

“We terminated the most precious American asset which vowed to defeat [the] mujahadeen,” Al-Qaeda’s commander and main spokesperson Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid told Adnkronos International (AKI) in a phone call from an unknown location, speaking in faltering English. Al-Yazid is the main al-Qaeda commander in Afghanistan.

http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Secur...=1.0.1710322437