Saturday, November 25, 2017

Moon Landing Hoax: Why the faked Kubrick Confession matters

Jim Fetzer

As it happened, I ran across a compelling "confession" by Stanley Kubrick to having faked the moon landing, which I knew he had done and therefore found highly plausible. It turned out to be a cleverly staged piece of fakery, where the man conducting the interview is also the director, offering him instructions as to how to respond to questions he is asking in order to convey the intended impression of this actually being Stanley Kubrick actually confessing to having faked the moon landing, when it's an actor who is simply playing a role. I sent the original out to a large list of correspondents, which I had to retract when I discovered that I had been played by a hoax about a hoax.

"Stanley Kubrick Moon Confession Exposed as Hoax"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aUHMVTxODM



Some replies I have had about this suggest that I need to clarify what was up lest I inadvertently contribute to the belief that the moon footage was not faked.
The purpose of the fake confession was to cast doubt on reports that Stanley Kubrick had faked the moon footage, which was true. But, by producing this phony confession, we are supposed to infer that, since the confession was fake, that he filmed the footage must be false. This was just to create uncertainty. We did not go to the moon and Stanley did fake the moon landing footage. It's was a hoax about a hoax to sow further confusion. Here's an interview of Jay Weidner on Red Ice Radio, in which he recounts how it was done:

"Kubrick's Odyssey: How he Faked the Moon Landings":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_mjDA9pI04



where Jay also has a chapter about this in AND I SUPPOSE WE DIDN'T GO TO THE MOON, EITHER? (2015),

A previous parallel case was the Dan Rather sting over the George W. Bush Texas Air National Guard Fitness Report. Dan Rather had verified the content of the report word-for-word with the commanding officer who had dictated it and with the secretary who had typed it. But Karl Rove and Karen Hughes were onto the problem and had it retyped using an IBM ball font that was not available when it was originally typed and replaced the original. When Dan Rather broadcast his report, they objected (much too quickly to have been real) that it was fake because it was typed with a font that did not then exist. Most of the public concluded that, since the document was fake, its content must be false, which was not the case.

Here are some videos about the moon landing and how it was faked. The first, "Conspiracy Theory: Did we land on the moon?", was the program broadcast by the BBC that caught my attention during a visit to London with my wife, Jan. I was captivated by one scientific argument after another, which demonstrated that we had indeed not gone to the moon but had faked it: 

"Conspiracy Theory: Did we land on the moon?" (2001)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIy8ZqqK5G8



Here are more recent interviews I have done with Dennis Cimino about the fraud:

"The Great Moon Landing Hoax"


"The Real Deal: More on the Moon Landing Hoax"

In a nutshell, we had neither the propulsion power to escape low Earth orbit nor the computing power to navigate to the moon and back nor the communication capacity to contact Earth from the moon. Here are three relatively recent confirmations.

(1) The Van Allen Radiation Belt  


The first confirms we have been unable to overcome the Van Allen Radiation obstacle:

(2) Destruction of moon-landing footage


The second is inexplicable unless these tapes would have revealed that the program was a hoax:

(3) The "Space Poop" Problem


The third reflects the necessity to dispose of human waste products, which NASA has not solved:


Each of these is accessible on-line by searching on their titles. Since the moon missions, such as Apollo 17, consumed vastly more time than these "space diapers" could manage:


we seem to be confronted with insurmountable proof that the whole moon landing program was nothing but a gigantic pile of "space poop". I have friends of long standing who still believe we went to the moon. I did not want to contribute to confusion by sending out the fake Stanly Kubrick confession interview and not clarify what it was intended to accomplish. Jay Weidner has explained in many venues how Kubrick faked the footage. Those who want to believe the impossible are going to continue to believe the impossible. The moon landing myth, like The Force, can have a powerful affect upon the weak-minded.

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus on the Duluth Campus of the University of Minnesota and co-editor of Moon Rock Books. 

27 comments:

  1. I'm a card carrying "conspiracy theorist" but din't start out that way. I woke up around January of 2017 after researching all the biggest conspiracy theories. I now know 9/11, Sandy Hook, Oklahoma City, Pulse Night Club and many more were carried out by the US Government. Although in the case of Sandy Hook all the latest mass shootings no one died.

    I did extensive research and found no real evidence they faked the Moon landings. I'm almost positive the "Faked Moon Landings" story like "Flat Earth" are disinfo to give conspiracy theorists a bad name. I'd advise further research on this one Jim. You've got such a good name in the truther movement I'd hate to see it tarnished.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. WOW! For those who have done the research, there is no doubt that we faked the moon landings. It was a piece of cake. See "Capricorn I" for an illustration of how easy it was to manipulate. We could not have gone to the moon. It was far beyond our technical competence and the Van Allen Radiation Belt continues to pose an obstacle to manned missions to Mars. Do more research. State with "Conspiracy Theory: Did we land on the moon?" The answer is emphatically, "No!'

      Delete
    2. Yes, the footage was faked. But there is more to the story. There is the secret space program. That is a whole other area of research. Exopolitics.org is a good place to start.

      Delete
    3. If this is the, "Yes, the footage IS fake, but we really did go to the moon!", gambit, I am not buying it. If we could have gone, we would have done it with great fanfare. And it seems to be that it would have been impossible to photograph the landings, because cosmic rays would have corrupted photographic plates and it could not have been done. There are around 100 proofs we didn't go to the moon in AND I SUPPOSE WE DIDN'T GO TO THE MOON, EITHER? (2015), moonrockbooks.com.

      Delete
    4. We went to the moon via. secret space program technology, which is extremely advanced. We have a base on the moon. Please consider what I'm saying, and start from square one studying the secret space program. You are an indispensable asset to the public with the tremendous work you've done regarding 9/11 and JFK. It sounds to me that you simply have not had time yet to consider the massive amount of work that has been done regarding UFOs and extraterrestrials/extremely advanced technology. Please check out the work of Dr. Michael Salla on exopolitics.org. If you and Ole Dammegard could join forces with Michael Salla, we the people would be the beneficiaries!

      Delete
    5. I wonder if Jim Fetzer believes that the erupting Bali volcano is a government hoax done on a sound stage with crisis actors?

      https://coconuts.co/bali/news/agung-eruption-hoax-video-bali-volcano-erupting-actually-sinabung-sumatra/

      Delete
    6. DarkMath ... I agree with you. I've been a victim of secret political gang operatives in ordinary civilian life. People don't understand what is happening without seeing the kinds of people involved. ... Personally, I guess the VIDEO of the Moon landing may have been fake, but that may have been because a broadcast from the Moon may have been of unacceptably poor quality, or impossible. .. Otherwise, jews hate NASA bitterly, because of the amount of German scientists in it. If you don't know jews, they forever try to get rid of anything that they hate and envy. They likely originated any fake landing ideas.

      Delete
    7. "there is no doubt that we faked the moon landings" James what are your top two pieces of evidence it was faked?
      Thanks in advance.

      Delete
    8. Major proofs: We did not have the propulsion power to escape low Earth orbit; we did not have the computing power to navigate through space; we could not overcome the Van Allen Radiation Belt.

      Lesser proofs: No blast crater under the lunar lander; photos with shadows cast in different directions (implying more than one source of light); too many photos in too little time (where I am skeptical that any photos could be taken on the moon, because cosmic rays would have obliterated the photographic plates).

      Delete
    9. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    10. Absolutely Jim - maybe add the temperature control issue - extreme heat and cold - micro-meteorites would have blown holes in landing craft and space suits, etc. I'll get the book - but, are you absolutely sure Kubrick was involved ? Likely candidate - but, I'm not aware of any proof for that - and, if not, it should be left aside, imo.

      Delete
    11. DarkMeth
      Long time no see. You are still a fool, as is Beefaroni Jim. I still enjoy the silly banter with you.
      BYW the lawsuits are building on Vegas. (Although I don't see how they can prove Paddock did it)

      Delete
    12. Sorry DarkMeth, I forgot to add that you are right on this one. Broken clock and all...

      Delete
  2. At the time of the "moon landings", it was easy to trick us with the technology of that time period.
    But watch the videos now. Oh my gosh. We are so much more sophisticated.
    So obviously faked. Terrible. Embarrassingly bad. How does this lie continue to be pulled off?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Because Mike Rivero steadfastly claims that the landing was real, I emailed Rivero and asked if he had any proof to support his position.

    In response, he sent me an email attachment that he claimed was a photo of the lunar module on the moon made by a Japanese spacecraft.

    The photo (I still have it) was taken from a long distance and the "module" appeared as a little more than a discolored speck on the photo.

    I was incredulous that he would accept this as any sort of proof a manned lunar landing. When I told him that, he abruptly, and without explanation, cut off all contact with me -----apparently forever.

    Draw your own conclusions.




    ReplyDelete
  4. All international space programs are fake. Nothing but Hollywood and stage magic illusion. NASA didn't need Stanley Kubrick to fake anything. There were and are plenty of Hollywood technicians who can accomplish the visual feats needed to convince people outer space is a real place one can visit.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interestingly, Buzz Aldrin, allegedly the second man to walk on the Moon, has now been reduced to appearing in adverts for porridge oats on British TV.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oops, there are two of us posting here as 'Anonymous'. I'm the one who posted about Buzz Aldrin. I'll select a different name, if you can explain how to go about it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. A true conspiracy would never be broadcast on BBC. Just like the continual UFO alien cable shows, it's what "they" want you to believe. It's the opposite of the truth. You won't hear real conspiracies in the mainstream. ... Also, I don't trust Weidner. There's a lot of big names that get interviews, like supposed ex-CIA. They are disinformation. You don't leave the CIA. They kill you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are entitled to sweeping claims of that kind, which the BBC video, "Conspiracy Theory: Did we land on the moon?", obviously refutes. If you are not going to base your beliefs on evidence, then you can believe anything you want. I was impressed from the beginning that that video presented so many good reasons--scientific proofs!--that we had not gone to the moon and that the landings had been faked. You are maintaining a position that this examples shows is not the case--an exception, no doubt, but a real counterexample to your professed position.

      Delete
  8. Most of the alleged "confessions" by "whistleblowers" are fake. They are limited hangouts that don't reveal anything new, and only reaffirm long held suspicions by truth seekers. Real revelations would most likely happen in fragments, such as the Sandy Hook drill manual.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sandy Hook Hoax? LOL! Has Fetzer shared how he got his ass kicked on this blog?

    http://sandy-hook-hoax.blogspot.com/2014/05/hooker-fail-shamed-by-school-board.html

    Fetzer, conspiracy grand hoor, hops into the comments to whine but refuses to answer some interesting questions:

    The inventor of the Sandy Hook Hoax has graced us with his presence. A couple of questions while you're here, Mr. Fetzer:

    1. What happened to your first "theory" that the Sandy Hook shootings were a Mossad operation?
    2. Why didn't you call out the school board for being "in on it" and tell them no kids were killed and all the survivors are fakes and actors?

    We expect answers round about when hell freezes over.


    And sure enough Fetzer is never seen again.
    But what can anyone expect? Fetzer is a veteran conspiracy loon, engaged in more link farms and paypal scams than you can shack a chemtrail at. He's also a Holocaust denier, and his best pal is a Nazi wanna be. This is all important because for years Fetzer pretended to be a liberal, going as far as playing a Beatles clip before each of his programs. But he's an alt-right fatassed Nazi like the rest of his friends. I hope the investigations blow Russian financial dealings in the states so wide open, the major conspiracy alt-right fronts collapse. Russian whorebot Abby Martin and her sleazy brother Robbie aka "powered by Ron Paul" Martin are already feeling the heat....

    Suck it up, Buttercup.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Another day, another shill.

      1. I was asked by Gordon Duff, the Editor in Chief of Veterans Today, to write about two men dressed as nuns, the white van he said had been traced by to a Mossad safe-house in Greenwich Village and the apparent slaughter of kids at Sandy Hook, which I did in the belief that what he was telling me was true. Further research by James Tracy, Dr. Eowyn and others showed that was not the case and that no kids had been killed. I was played by someone I trusted at the time. That was one article of perhaps 50 I have published. Because you want to cast me in a bad light, you focus on the one and ignore the other 49.

      2. Wolfgang Halbig and I traveled to Newtown to confront the School Board years and years ago. We were given three minutes to speak, with notice that the board would not respond to any questions. I asked, "When were the parents notified that their children were attending school in a toxic waste dumps?" I have published many articles, made many videos and published a first and second edition of NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015, 2016). When it comes to exposing the fraud, It can fairly be said that I am doing my part. People like you who trade on lies, deceit and deception belong in a special region of hell for betraying truth and justice and the American people. You are as disgusting as they come.

      Delete
    2. So you bash Jim what is your view on sandyhook do you think anybody died enlighten us don't we all want the truth

      Delete
    3. Chris, go to http://www.crisisactorsguild.com/tag/james-fetzer/

      You will see how absurd many of Fetzer's claims are and how shoddy his research is.

      Delete
    4. Carny Jim is a disgrace. Having said that (credits to Larry David) he serves as an anchor of sorts for the trailer-dwelling lunatic fringe that needs to blame their failure in life on something out of their control. Maybe it is better for the rest of us that he provides that outlet. We all know Uncle Beefaroni Jim is nuts.

      Delete