excerpt from Colliers magazine 2011:"von Braun described a fifty-person expedition on a six-week reconnaissance of the Moon. Technicians in space suits, von Braun proposed, would assemble three very large spaceships in the vicinity of an orbiting space station. Each spaceship would measure 160 feet in length and, fully fueled, weigh more than 4,000 tons. Two of the ships would carry sufficient fuel to land on the Moon and return to the Earth orbiting station. The third would carry a 75-foot-long cargo container to the lunar landing zone." Wonder why McGowan left out the fact that von Braun was talking about a 50 person team when referencing using 3 spacecrafts?I would love to know the source of the quote that Fetzer used at the beginning of the show.I could not find it.However, if this statement is factual. The notion put into question would be has any space missions been real events. Seems that the Voyager missions would not have been possible or the probes sent to the moon, Mars, and Saturn.
history.nasa.gov/Apollomon/apollo3.pdfThe link above provides a letter written by van Braun to the Vice President in 1961.I quote from page 4 item d):we have an excellent chance at beating the Soviets to the first landing of a crew on the moon (including return capability, of course.)The reason is that a performance jump by a factor of 10 over their present rockets is necessary to accomplish this feat. While today we do have such a rocket, it is unlikely that the Soviets have it. Therefore, we would not have to enter the race toward this obvious new goal in space exploration against hopeless odds favoring the Soviets. With an all-out crash program I think we could accomplish this objective in 1967/68.
We went to the moon. Of course we went to the moon. Geesh. Going to the moon is as American as apple pie. Thousands worked in top secret on the Manhattan project and the atomic bomb was born. Thousands worked on the Apollo missions and we landed men on our orbiting moon. It's not that difficult a mission when the whole nation is behind it, and it was. Of course we went to the moon silly!
If we put a man on the moon back in the sixties, why can't we do it in 2013 with much more advanced technology? This doesn't make any sense at all. How did they do it way back then, but can't do it now? I look forward to the Laurel Canyon book. Fascinating and intriguing information. What was really going on there?
If man went to the moon then why did they fake all of the evidence rather than show us real evidence? We cannot say for certain that man did not go to the moon, but we can state with absolute certainty that the evidence is all faked.
This comment has been removed by the author.
In answer to your question they may have had to fake some of the footage due to the archeology they found up there. They couldn't show that to the world in the 1960s as they didn't want to upset people's core religious values. So yes, parts of it was staged but you can bet your bottom dollar we went there. We may have even gone there long before the Apollo missions. NASA has for a long time now had anti gravitational technology which is really the only way it can be done. The Apollo missions were just a cover for something that NASA had been doing for a long time - visiting the moon and Mars as well, I believe.
What you suggest may be true, but it may also be the case that you relate "leaked" disinformation that they want us to believe. They are always trying to make themselves look more powerful than they really are.
NASA's alleged moon exploits, plus all the planted "contradictions" in the official record, are at the heart of a very long-range, world-domination plan to seduce (then coerce) the public into embracing a "new" religion (of abject submission to the "elite") based on a ficticious "ancient" Sirius-originated civilisation that supposedly first colonised Mars and the Moon, before founding their "secret societies" here on Earth. Cleverly designed "clues" just keep trickling out of the mendacious agency's propaganda mill, as we keep learning of new "scientific" discoveries about the long-ago sustainability of life on our planetary neighbours.NASA = NAZIThe acronymical similarity is no coicidence.
I always enjoy Dr Fetzers progs...but...I didn't hear anything about the Laurel Canyon stuff...it was skipped over...of course I can go find it myself...but...what's the point of having a guest and not asking him the obvious questiosn as some listeners might like an introduction to the material.
It is all on McGowan's website "Center for an Informed America." Maybe Fetzer will have him on again to go into more detail regarding the Laurel Canyon subject.
I couldn't wait to find out about Laurel Canyon; The whole book is there. http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr94.htmlInside the LC: Part II In the first chapter of this saga, we met a sampling of some of the most successful and influential rock music superstars who emerged from Laurel Canyon during its glory days. But these were, alas, more than just musicians and singers and songwriters who had come together in the canyon; they were destined to become the spokesmen and de facto leaders of a generation of disaffected youth (as Carl Gottlieb noted in David Crosby’s co-written autobiography, “the unprecedented mass appeal of the new rock ‘n’ roll gave the singers a voice in public affairs.”) That, of course, makes it all the more curious that these icons were, to an overwhelming degree, the sons and daughters of the military/intelligence complex and the scions of families that have wielded vast wealth and power in this country for a very long time.
Yep...I think a McGowan 'radio revisit' might be in order, to further whet the appetite on the Laurel Canyon Insiders story...
Being a full time musician myself...If DMcG / JF had mentioned the following...I would have been all over the info like a 'cheap suit' :From DMcGs website ..."The question that we will be tackling is a more deeply troubling one: “what if the musicians themselves (and various other leaders and founders of the ‘movement’) were every bit as much a part of the intelligence community as the people who were supposedly harassing them?” What if, in other words, the entire youth culture of the 1960s was created not as a grass-roots challenge to the status quo, but as a cynical exercise in discrediting and marginalizing the budding anti-war movement and creating a fake opposition that could be easily controlled and led astray? And what if the harassment these folks were subjected to was largely a stage-managed show designed to give the leaders of the counterculture some much-needed ‘street cred’? What if, in reality, they were pretty much all playing on the same team?"
Best Link So Far:Laurel Canyon - David McGowan report http://www.mygen.com/Laurel_Canyon-David_McGowan_report.htm
http://www.skolnicksreport.org/awm1.html ANT-WAR MOVEMENT Part 1by Sherman H. Skolnick 3/17/04~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1. Background and finances of the "Chicago 7". Unknown to the public, Rennie Davis, Tom Hayden, and the others who became the "7", and persons connected with them in the National Mobilization to End the War in Viet Nam, wer e funded by federal money, channeled to them through pass-through organizations connected with the government. $192,000 in federal money and $85,000 from the Carnegie Foundation, acting as a conduit for the Central Intelligence Agency, were funneled to Hayden, Davis, et al., through a front calling itself the Chicago Student Health Organization. To maintain the deep "cover" of this latter group, stories were planted in the press describing the group as being "communist" inspired or directed.
Best link so far Joan?...most definitely...thanks...(http://www.mygen.com/Laurel_Canyon-David_McGowan_report.htm)another prog please Dr.Fetzer !!
We didn't go to the moon. As McGowan shows in his series, NASA does a good job of disproving their contention that we went to the moon. The radiation was too great and we can't go 'back.'
To Jim Butterfield. What does anti-gravity technology have to do with NASA's admission that we don't have the technology to deal with the radiation, the lunar dust and the temperature extremes on the Moon? I'll answer my own question - absolutely nothing.
SUBSCRIBE to the iTunes feed
STREAM premieres on Revere Radio
5pm CST (2300 GMT) M-W-F:
DONATE to Scholars for 9/11 Truth: