Posted by: graemebird | August 30, 2012

(Fakemoonwalkers) Weakass Bastards, Queers, Cripples AstroNOTS ……. and John Young.

By his own physical testimony, John Young, pilot, astroNOT and fake moonwalker ….. is the lamest most unathletic cunt who ever lived.

Ironic isn’t it? It seem like John Young was old from the start. Must have had years in a sit-down job (Thats right. Weak-knees Johnny was a pilot.)

Go Johnny Go. Will you look at him leap!!!!! And the silly dweeb makes two jumps by way of physical confession that this is the very best the weakling can manage.

If you take your grandfather to the moon, and he cannot do better then John Young, whip his ass, send him back to his planet of ultimate origin, and think hard about the benefits of castration, because none of us want you passing the feeble-gene into the general population.

You may be needing some context here. You may be wanting to find out just how long and large you could leap if you were on the moon.  The fake moonwalkers have robbed two generations of kiddies of day-dreaming about such a thing with their ridiculous and (in the long run) oh so boring, fraudulent, moonwalking depictions. They wobbled around the studio and with a ridiculous side to side motion. A childish gait that only looks halfway dignified again with the help of slow-motion.

I’ve said this many times before. Real science is powerfully interesting. Fake NASA-science is boring. Real science fills you with a feeling of awe and a sense of magic. Fake science robs the magic out of everything. Fake science sucks the magic out of you and out of the entire Universe. Fake science fills you full of nihilism, making a complete cunt out of you.  If not for these fraudulent astroNOTS in the Apollo studios, the old bugger down the street, may be having what amounted to almost a second puberty, bounding around like a sex-crazed spring-heel-jack,  in a large retirement village, situated slap-plam in the sea of tranquility.

Here are the NASA specs for the lunar and earth surface gravity, taken from wiki. You will see that we have been sorely gypped by NASA’s lies, and that you would be a magnificent superhuman gymnast, if you were on the moon.

Gravity specs for earths surface: g = 9.80665 m/s2

Before you start doing calculations just look at that figure? Just look at what it takes to overcome gravity and make these big leaps like we used to see Michael Jordan doing. I still find him hard to fathom. What an athlete?

Michael Jordan: WHAT an athlete? … John Young: NOT an athlete!

The key thing here is to understand that from the time your toe pushes off the ground, that’s the acceleration specs you have working against you.

Gravity specs for the moon’s surface:

Equatorial surface gravity 1.622 m/s2

“The gravitational acceleration on the surface of the Moon is 1.6249 m/s2, about 16.7% that on Earth’s surface[1]. Over the entire surface, the gravity variation is about is ~0.0253 m/s2 (1.6% of the gravity acceleration). Because weight is directly dependent upon gravitational acceleration, things on the Moon will weigh only 16.7% of what they weigh on the Earth.”

I’m not going to do any calculus here. I could fake my way through it but it would take (me) too long. And it would detract from context.  What you ought to be thinking is that we have three “force multipliers” (as it were) for your jumping ability, at work.


How high could you jump on earth, with earths gravity, if you had your full power, but weighed only 16.7% of what you do now? Of course I cannot answer this for you, but I want you to think about it. You could jump a great deal higher then you can now.  But more importantly, you could TRAIN UP to jump a very great deal higher.  This is because, with so little weight, your time in the air, would depend, not so much on power, but on how much speed you could generate, at that point, when your big toe finally pushes off from the ground.

This is if you woke up, were 16.7% as heavy, trained up, and the gravitational specs were STILL g = 9.80665 m/s2

Now the second boost for your jumping ability on the moon comes not just with the idea that you will be one-sixth the weight. Its oh so much better than that.


You see why I hate these fucking assholes. Wobbling around the studio like ninnies, pretending to be on the moon, robbing the children of their better daydreams.  My generation had to fucking settle for Chinese movies and be stooged that the Kung Fu adepts could jump really well.  You’d have a whole lot more time in the air.  A great deal more time.  How much more time?

Well obviously I cannot say. But my third force multiplier is a correction factor for a mistake that Joe Public is intuitively going to make at this point. Admittedly this one can work against you on the shorter jumps. But will work powerfully for you as you train up and master the run-up jumps.


If you can train yourself to do a burst of low running, and kick off up into the air, and stay in the air for substantially more than a second, then the acceleration maths becomes so much more in your favour. Because the unit of measurement is based on the second. That is to say on ONE second.  This is a bit of an intuitive problem that the kids have in figuring out how impossible the Arabs-did-it blood libel is for 9/11. They keep thinking the fall time is substantially different from free-fall. Whereas gravity and force are about ACCELERATION. And the acceleration of the fall-front on 9/11 was as close to free-fall as the perps could get it.

So don’t think “speed of fall.” Think acceleration. Which is a big boost over the ratio:

g = 9.80665/1.622= 6.046

Now to be fair the third multiplier can be a bit of an UN-multiplier for the standing leaps, if you haven’t got it sorted to stay somewhat more than a second in the air.  But this is simply not enough to account for the feebleness of astrNOT weakass-Johnny.

Salute the flag you pathetic cunt? You should have been able to leap right over it and salute five times! How dare you rob the dreams of children and old men! (Jive-ass mother-fucker.)

So NASA had you thinking wrong.  Johnny leapt about knee height. Only the camera angle and the slow-mo made such feebleness look vaguely impressive. My stepson made my niece look like she was taking off on her broomstick merely by snapping the poloroid lying down. Marvellous shot. Much more impressive looking leap then Johnny and his studio hands could manage.  And she wasn’t pretending to be on the moon like John Young was.

So supposing in the first instance you could leap to knee height? You could then leap much higher with one-sixth the weight and the same gravity acceleration specs.  Lets say between your waist and your shoulder. Probably closer to your waist for most of us without some training.   Then you could leap a lot higher again, because of the much slower gravitational action from the time your big toe leaves the ground ….  lets say from your shoulder to twice your height ….. then lower your subjective estimate for the leaps that take a lot less then one second, make it higher for the leaps where you can stay off the ground for a lot more then one second.  So in this case lower it substantially again, because this was a standing leap by Johnny.  At least Johnny should have leapt between waist and shoulder height.  And we should have seen some truly awesome soaring through the air when they could get a short run-up.

How unedifying. These nutty little men warbling around the studio in that silly fake uneven moon-walk gait that they used.  Just speed them up from slow-motion and you see how foolish they look.

Someone in Hollywood has a sense of humour, inside knowledge, and perhaps didn’t understand the viciousness of the cut-throats he was back-handing. Because they really spilt the beans right there in that Bond movie. Sean Connery breaks into an Apollo studio, but in the film the astroNOTS are trying to do the slow-motion themselves. Perhaps equally as whacky as what the real astroNOTS were doing. But rather different.



  1. Its not quite how I remembered it. I’ll have to alter the thread a bit.

  2. Buzz Aldrin. Bullshitting old fraud. He keeps selling moon memorabilia. Ripping the buyers off. One hopes they follow Armstrong to hell as quickly as possible. So we can be spared from their nonsense.

  3. Armstrong. The greatest photographer who ever lived. A camera strapped to his chest, two hours before the most dangerous flight of his life, in a fucking tin can with a very difficult docking problem ahead of him …. and he takes perfect photos.

    At least the fakeass Armstrong had the decency to go into hiding for most of the rest of his life.

  4. I’m just watching these Aussies working on vaccine patches. They are calling it a nano-patch. Looks like a good idea. I’d give these people a break if it wasn’t part of the general vaccine ripp-off and poisoning attempt. I don’t think these guys will get by without a lot of obstruction. I certainly wish them well. I’ve never had a problem with the CONCEPT of vaccination. Only with the incompetence and wickedness associated with the PRACTICE of vaccination today.

  5. “GWB, in case you’re still lurking (and sulking because of your banned status), in your earlier rants you asked if the rantees were scientists. Well, I AM a scientist (although, not a rocket scientist). I have a Ph.D. from the University of California. I also happen to believe that Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and all the other Boy Scouts NASA convinced to ride a series of controlled explosions to the moon actually did so. No fakery; no voodoo, no conspiracy theory, no $hit.’

    You are not a scientist. Get that straight for starters. You are a public servant. At best a field worker. Being a field worker doesn’t make you a scientist. And believing obvious idiocy like Apollo means you could never be a scientist even if you died and were born again.

  6. Its just laughable who considers themselves to be a scientist these days. Every public servant that does hack-work and trumped up fundraising for his group of bludgers thinks he’s a scientist.




  7. Read the explanation a couple of times before you watch the actual video, in order to understand context:

    Astronaut Does a Pre-Scripted Ballet Dance at Ballet Crater.

    Astronaut Jack says at :07 “OK, that little set-up for samples”. Bob at Houston says at :16 “We hope it was worth the effort”(Play-Acting in the Fake Moon-Set). Jack says at :21 “Oh it’s all worth the effort, it just hurts”(Having to Lie about being on the Moon & Play-Acting & Stumbling Around).

    Bob says at :24 “OK, were ready now for your Dance, don’t forget your Scoop.”

    Astronaut Jack starts to do his pre-scripted stumbling Ballet Dance at Ballet Crater with the help of the Disney wire-men high up in the Fake Moon Bay Studio Ceiling.

    Bob at Houston says at 1:32 “Hey Gene would you help, would you go over and help Twinkle-Toes please, please.”

    Bob at Houston says at 1:49 “Hey Jack you might ah, worry about whether your ah, you might worry about whether your camera lens is dirty or clean Jack…..I know how you feel about it.” Jack replies sarcastically, “I’m very worried about that”(Jack laughs). Bob replies “I know how you feel about it,(Astronaut Jack doesn’t like wasting his time pretending to take photos in the Fake Moon Bay Studio) but you might worry about it”(At least pretending to care about making the Moon Faking look real). Jack replies “I don’t have a thing to do..(Jack pretends to clean the camera)….it’s clean.”

    Astronaut Jack says at 2:18 “I think you might be able to decipher this station Bob”(Jack doing a stumbling Ballet Dance at Ballet Crater) Bob replies at 2:25 “That’s the general idea, and be advised that the switchboard here at MSC’s been lit up by calls from Houston Ballet Foundation requesting your services for next season.” Jack replies at 2:38 “I should hope so.”

    At 2:47 Astronaut Jack jumps up in the air, striking a Ballet stumbling pose and says, “Hows that?”.

    This video as you hear & see it, is located for download at NASA site:
    Apollo 17 Video Library
    Geology Station 3 at Ballet Crater
    Journal Text: 144:50:23 RealVideo Clip: (3 minutes 50 seconds)
    Journal Text: 144:54:04 RealVideo Clip: (4 minutes 21 seconds)

    NASA did redacted editing & cleaning up of the text, to cover what they really said in the written records of the Astronauts conversations.

  8. Cambria, if we are to survive as a species we need to build up more and more infrastructure around the solar system. The reason being is that if we don’t an extinction event is going to take us back to the dark ages, supposing that fractional reserve gangsterism doesn’t do that first.

    And then from the dark ages we can be made extinct by another extinction event. These being typically close-passing planet-sized comets.

    So we’ve got to have all this real estate all over the solar system. The poor old guys still working, but in a weightless environment. The richer old guys hanging out in cool places like the moon.

    I’m not yet convinced of the benefits of having three 20 year old girls from Pattaya in a totally weightless environment. I think that would be a wasted opportunity. And I”m not fully convinced of the benefits one-man …. three-girl sex ……. on earth. I think no matter how lovable the idea is, you tend to lose momentum and it just doesn’t really work. You can put up a brave face with enough uppers but the reality is you aren’t so much built to take full advantage of that scenario.

    But sex on the Moon? Man that has just got to be the thing that all the teenagers are aiming at. All the traction you are after, and no more weight then you need. And don’t bother trying to get away young lady because I can bound like spider-man all the way across this spacious room.

    So it was natural to have the young kids, read their comics and if they couldn’t be superhuman they could dream about going to the moon. And it was natural for the teenage boys to take this thinking one step further.

    And the things you think about as kids and teenagers, tend to get locked in to a certain extent, if you have the drive and opportunity to actually fullfil some of your youthful ambitions.

    So what I’m saying is that if not for (!@#$%^&*) NASA it was only natural for the motivation to be present to save the species.

    And then came APOLLO. With these assholes stumbling around in slow-mo. Screwing up everyone’s understanding of the possibilities of extra-terrestrial living. Imagine a 19 year old lad telling a 16 year old lad: “You loser. You haven’t lived until you’ve been to the moon with three girls from Pattaya and dropped some acid in the huge Karaoke rooms they have there.”

    Fucking ay. By that standard, few of us have really, truly lived all that often. The species will die because NASA will suck the life out of it.

  9. Graeme
    Dirty Harry jhas delivered a kickass endorsement speech for Romney. Google it and check it out. Come on, you’re a Clint Eastwood man

  10. […] uncensored on “(Fakemoonwalkers) Weakass Bastards, Queers, Cripples AstroNOTS ……. and John Young.“ @ A Better World: Graeme Bird For High Office. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe […]

  11. Yeah okay. And I’ll enjoy it too. I had high expectations of Unforgiven. And you know you have high expectations of films and usually the high expectations wind up spoiling the movie for you.

    So all I wanted to do was watch Unforgiven. So I went in with my friend Sean (who incidentally, at his best, was a guitar-playing wizard), and we were watching it. And suddenly the shots reminded me of when we used to go duck-hunting when I was little. We’d hang out in this MAI MAI (sic) which was really just a crappy corrogated-iron hiding place and wind-break and you’d have these floating wooden ducks and a thing to blow which made duck noises.

    But of course other times you’d be walking around with a cousin and uncle, hoping to see something to shoot, and doing a bit of target practice and there would be “22’s” and shotguns. You’d think I wouldn’t have developed a really strong interim aversion to firearms but I did.

    Anyway I’m watching this movie and I think the only thing I said to my friend, and it was about halfway through was …………

    ….. “I thought this movie was going to be good. But I didn’t know it was going to be THIS!!!!!! good.”

    It was the only movie clearly better then Resevoir Dogs that year. And it was the only movie of that era that rivalled Millers Crossing.

    So my heart will not be biased against the speech.

    But here is another speech. And its a speech by someone calling himself “Lysander Spooner” on your blog. Lysander Spooner in real life was one of the greatest theorists of liberty of the 19th Century:

    “If you were a TRUE Libertarian you would accept the fact that Romney is very similar to Obama. As Obama has just about replicated many of Bush’s stupid policies. Someone said above “he has a nice mix of libertarian and conservatism” when this means he is a perversion of libertarianism (as is civil, or left-leaning, libertarianism). What departments are going to be shut down under Romney? What massive cuts are going to be made in government expenditure? What liberties are going to be re-enacted under Romney? Um….none! The Paul family was the only hope for the Republicans and the nation and we see what happens when you get in the way of “The Establishment:” They screw you over and change the rules.

    Romney has been delivered as President by the elites already; it has been predestined as it was for Obama. But they are the same elites so nothing actually changes; its just shuffling deck-chairs.”

    Well this is exactly true. But he’s a Mormon. Could he have rebellion in his heart? Could he have revealed to Clint that he has rebellion in his heart in some private meeting, not telegraphing to the ruling elite through any email traffic or mobile phone talk from his underlings?

    Could there be knowledge in his heart of the money-creation/covert operations network? And could he be playing possum and be ready to set things to rights when he gets in the big chair?

    A fucking slim chance and if there is no knowledge in his mind or rebellion in his heart, then Lysander is right, and Lysander has to be presumed right until proved otherwise.

    But Howard Hughes was a sort of rebel and near-class traitor from the ruling class. Never having had a family that was in the top three tiers and always being opposed by these people. He always turned to mormons to support his act because they were the only people he could trust. And he may have gotten around the asshole cronyists to the end and wound up richer then most of them. Even after he faked his death.

    So there is a tiny bit of hope there. And Clints appearance gives one just a tiny bit more.

    The Kennedy’s were a second-tier elite family and under Joseph and Jack they rebelled and Jacks line is fundamentally extinct. They murdered all or most of the kids.

    Reagan had rebellion in his heart so they put CIA-lifer Bush as VP and then shot Reagan and thank Jesus that the old man lived long enough to get the job done.

    Nixon rebelled in his own way, by actually winning the Vietnam war momentarily. But they got the FBI to shake him down and make him resign. Reagan was maybe 70% rebel. Nixon 20%. Jack was basically 100%, but to few good purposes, so they blew his brains out with as many cameras on him as they could muster.

    Lets hope that Romney has turned rebel. Slim fucking hope.

  12. Terrible terrible terrible. Everything perfect about that speech. Except WAY TOO SHORT.

    Now notice he didn’t dribble all over Romney and pretend he was some great guy or new messiah. Rather he had this big build-up, using all the old-doddering guy cover he could ….. to talk about the subject of how all these things about the Obama regime are just not getting done. And how there are so many things to get done right now (particularly with 23 million unemployed) …. and jokes about attorneys not getting things done ……

    “Oh lets say … a businessman”

    So he didn’t have to jerk Romney off or pretend he was the angel of freedom. So he maintained his dignity, even in his dotage, by supporting the least of two evils, without bullshitting a single one of us that Clint knows he Romney anything is more than that.

    Its almost never a dignified thing to support the lesser of two evils since in that case you are still supporting evil. But somehow Clint pulled it off.


    Lets dry our eyes on the one hand and stop laughing out loud on the other.

    Romney must have rebellion against the ruling class in his heart or his ability to get things done will merely pro-long the agony.

  13. Just Marvellous wasn’t it. Powerful inter-party diplomacy and so much so that really its all over now. Because Clint can reach everyone, and he’s done it so well with such a gentle touch to it.

    And he didn’t sell out because under Romney’s shadow he put out a snatch of Goldwater/Paulian thinking.

    On the spectrum Clint is more Goldwater then Paul. Because Paul is a student of Rothbard and a conspirationist. I’ve only been a conspirationist full-blown since 2008. But Goldwater wanted to stay away from war. But his feeling was that IF WE WERE AT WAR we must win and win quickly.

    So Clint gently rebelled against an whole swag of Romney positions, brought in a big snatch of Goldwater-Paul thinking ….. and came out saying that we need a new employee. We need a new person to get things done. Its a simple matter of letting the fellow go who cannot get the job done and wishing them well.

    True artistry.

    He effortlessly appealed to the Goldwater/Reagan and the Goldwater/Ron Paul types ….. The conservative businessman …. pretty much everyone. All under cover of this doddery old man act.


    And the best thing comes, at a time when we who know what’s going on and those who intuitively SENSE what is going on are SO FUCKING DEMORALISED……

    Clint comes along and says at about 11.17:

    “…. We own this country…”

    Since 2008 the shadow government has been stealing hand over fist so much and pushing their shit around, that the timing of Clint could scarcely be better.

    I put all my efforts to the reconstruction after the near total breakdown. But I could have it wrong. Its possible that everyone will come out of the shadows and prevent the breakdown.

  14. But Romney is just as tedious and boring as ever. I’ll try and listen to him. But I don’t think I’ll bear it very long.

  15. Is theer any whacked out conspiracy theory you DON’T buy into Bird?
    Seriously, if there is one, I’d like to what it is, and why you don’t jump on it.

  16. Yes lots of them. There is only ONE conspiracy I buy into. Because there is only one network in Europe and the US (ie the Nato countries) who can steal in this outrageous way, and get away with it.

    The moon hoax was one of the biggest ripoffs in history, until such time as Henry Paulson emerged to set off an even bigger ripoff. But its still only one conspiracy. Because we are talking about the same network. The modern vaccine industry, the modern cancer industry, the legal drugs system and the illegal drugs system. All presided over by the same criminals.

    • “All presided over by the same criminals.”

      Yes, Mr Bird.

      The Hebrew race.

      Yids, Kikes. You are so correct,

  17. Hi, I think you are double counting the effects of the difference in gravitational force. The concept of weight includes the gravity component (weight = mass x gravity). The mass of an object is the same no matter whether it is on the earth or moon. Gravity is the downward acceleration which you count again in your point 2. Comparing a jump on earth to the moon, the mass is the same (provided you include the space suit on earth as well) and the energy expended is the same (to keep it simple). The potential energy of the person at their maximum jump heights on earth and the moon will be the same. So using e=mgh gives h(moon) = h(earth) X g(earth) / g(moon) which is where the 6x height on earth comes from.

    That means an athletic person jumping 0.6 m on earth might jump 3.6m on the moon without a suit. With a suit however, I doubt it would be more than 1m. Try doing a vertical jump with 90 (earth) kilos on your back.

    One way I can see this reasoning being wrong is if somehow conditions on the moon allow the person to put more energy into the jump, e.g. by squatting lower but I suspect the opposite is more likely to be the case due to the restrictions of the suit. In fact, I imagine some energy will be absorbed by the suit due to it’s stiffness, therefore making the jump lower.

    • Sorry, I realised after my post that the energy directed into the jump will be lower on earth because more will be expended fighting gravity. That is too big a factor to ignore and probably more than the energy lost fighting the suit on the moon. Have to analyse the forces in more detail.

      • Right. Not so much a question of double counting, as having to add back the newtons due to inertia. You have to get used to producing slightly less Newtons at a slightly higher speed. Its easier to see how you could train up for much higher leaps on the moon, rather then if you could pull them off if put on the spot. One wonders how the technique would change also. Would you go into a deep crouch for a standing jump? Would that allow one to overcome most of the inertia, such that the end of the jump was (for practical purposes) a matter of pure speed.

        Certainly I can see what you are saying. You might feel next-to-weightless, but then when you accelerate there is inertia, perhaps at first seeming to come out of nowhere. You might feel indestructible, being able to jump from great heights, but if you were sprinting along at high speed, and were stopped dead by a vertical rock, the 1/2m(v-squared) formula tells us that this sort of mishap might be a good way to die instantly or become a paraplegic.

        People aren’t adding back the inertia when they are judging how credible it was for the lunar module to get off the moon. Its not credible at all. But one reason why they imagine incorrectly that it is credible, is that they forget to take into account inertia.

      • Second attempt:

        This time I analysed the forces i.e. what force is required for an athletic person on earth to jump say 0.6m. The force has to overcome earth gravity, plus give them sufficient velocity on leaving the ground to propel them 0.6m upwards against gravity before they stop. I then apply that same force on the moon where gravity is less so a greater proportion of the force gets applied to achieving maximum velocity and once leaving the ground the velocity is opposed by less gravity than on earth.

        I used the standard straight-line motion equations and force equations. There are of course still many assumptions to simplify things, such as that the forces are constant, that air resistance can be ignored etc.

        If we ignore the suit and equipment requirement for a moment, my result was that a 70 (earth) kilo person who could jump 0.6m on earth would be able to jump 5.7m on the moon. When we add in suit and equipment weighing 86 kilos on earth it comes down to 2.3m on the moon.

        That is still a substantial jump, however the big unknown is the effect of the stiffness of the suit i.e. apart from the energy lost lifting the suit, how much energy will be lost making the suit bend. Given that the suit had something like 18 layers of various materials, I suspect that would be significant. Finding out how high someone could jump in such a suit on the earth would go a long way to resolving this.

        Hopefully I haven’t made a blunder somewhere but I did check it a few times. I found it strangely enjoyable to dust off the old high school physics formulas.

      • Sounds like pretty good work. When young jumps he’s fairly flat-footed. That’s giving a lot away in terms of calf-muscle-to-toe acceleration. The forces won’t be constant, since its harder to exert the same force at a higher velocity. So you’d have to allow a lot for that in any on-the-spot jump, and even a little bit in the example of training up for it.

        Earths gravity is such that it seems to neutralise any gains that one may try to get from going to a full crouch. If sections of the jump are sort of taken out of commission in this way, it leaves room for much improvement in the lunar-gravity situation.

  18. Right. The suit would be a problem. Crazy suit by the way. No exhalation of CO2 from the suit. Clearly this isn’t going to work. The whole thing is childish.

  19. Arguing about Apollo over at Economist magazine. There really isn’t much to argue about. Its a verifiable fact that Apollo was staged.

  20. People openly admitting that the CIA is the world’s biggest drug-dealer.

  21. Philosopher tackling the matter of 9/11

  22. Bird, Have you established why the Russians never called out the yanks for having faked Apollo? I mean they had gear to track them. Who hushed them up?

    • That is not a scientific argument. But it does suggest that at the highest elite levels the bigshots on both sides are on the same side and their apparent differences were a conspiracy against the public at large. It was the shadow government of the US that set up the Soviets after all. Armond Hammer and David Rockefeller used to both land their private planes at Moscow. Rockefeller probably there to courier orders to the Soviets. All you need is for a network to be more powerful then any one man, and you have the country.

  23. Also any idea what is making the indians back up the hoax. Are they getting tech for nukes as a kick back?

  24. The Indians haven’t found any Apollo remnants. If they had its NASA covering its tracks post 1969. Attempt a scientific argument. NASA can dump gear on the moon. What it cannot do is go back in time and make Apollo real. Indians are human beings too, and they were railroaded into believing this Apollo rubbish like the rest of us.

  25. “PANAJI: A camera on board India’s maiden unmanned lunar mission Chandrayaan-1 has recorded images of the landing site of US spacecraft Apollo 15, a scientist said on Wednesday”

    So where’s the pictures? Edney taken in again. Just some people typing about someone who will not be named, and doesn’t exist, talking. You don’t know the journalist or his make-believe friend, and no-one has the photos. What could be more obvious then this bullshit? How much do journalists get paid in India anyway?

    No footprints, no orbiter, no rover, no pictures. That adds up to a lot of nothing. All we had to do is point a telescope at the alleged sights and yet no-one is going to do it.

  26. Goodness me. I cannot even find the make-believe journalists name. No journalist talking about a non-spokesmen, talking about no pictures to no-one who isn’t there. Its all very reminiscent of the Osama non-hit that didn’t happen just prior to them not dumping his body in the ocean.

  27. Think of how corrupted the practice of modern science has become. Here is Edney. Formal training as a scientist. Always trying to hang things on a sociological argument, where the data is behind closed doors. Never turning to analise the scientific data, of which we all have access too.

  28. Here we have an artists symbolic representation of the history of NASA; The most pathetic and dishonest organisation the world has yet seen.

    I was going to call this installation: “An Ode To Nasa” but during the process the title evolved to “Cheats Never Prosper In The Longer Run” then onward to the final name of “Cheats Never Prosper.”


  29. “Here is Edney. Formal training as a scientist. Always trying to hang things on a sociological argument, where the data is behind closed doors.”

    Formal training as a science worker. And I turned bank fraudster long ago now.

    Anyway the point was about the conspiracy ,which is of course sociological. Can such a big conspiracy be conducted across time and countries? I doubt it. Even small conspiracies leak like mad.

    A few scientists (important ones granted) trying to suppress opposing view on climate science was tumbled in a short time, I don’t see an wide ranging international conspiracy holding up for 40+ years. Someone on the inside would have blabbed by now. Given up documents.

  30. “Anyway the point was about the conspiracy ,which is of course sociological. Can such a big conspiracy be conducted across time and countries?”

    We know for an absolute fact that they can. What we don’t know is if the spell can ever be broken.

    So for example with the Kennedy hit we have the actual name of the operation. We have confessions of some of the participants. We are pretty sure of the name of most of the shooters. We have motives on several levels. We have the video footage only slightly altered. We have video footage of the stand-down. We have clear evidence of media-force-feeding. And they wiped out his brother and his kids too.

    But still. The spell has not been broken.

  31. With 9/11 we have media force-feeding of a conspiracy theory that is physically impossible. We have saturation video evidence. We have audio evidence and on-the-spot witness evidence raw data all pointing to a false flag. No evidence points to anything BUT a false flag.

    Still the spell is there.

    With the death of Patton, we have the confession of the man who shot him in the neck with a small pillow, busting his neck. We have his name. A book detailing the matter. The name of the person who persuaded him to do so. The reality of him recovering before inexplicably dying. The motive.

    With the financing by Wall Street of three forms of socialism (Soviet/Nazi/FDR) at the same time we have all the evidence, including the full evidence of American banking aristocracy founding of the Soviet Union. Total saturation evidence ….. yet the spell isn’t broken and the real story isn’t told in the history books.

    With the Federal Reserve we have the entire story of its conspirational founding yet we cannot get so much as a proper audit.

    So you see you don’t have to speculate in the way you are speculating. We know they can get away with it. We don’t know that we can stop them or change official history.

  32. “Someone on the inside would have blabbed by now.”

    They have. They are posting video out-takes of the whole fake filming process. You get astroNOTS catching their wires in the wire of the lunar module. All sorts of fakery right there to be seen.

    If you mean one of the astronaughts, of course the mere suspicion would see them dead right away. If they were cagey about Neal they would have killed him now before it was too late. One astroNOT called Bill Kaysing and asked him to ring him back and he was dead in three days.

  33. About one third of the people being trained up to be astroNOTS have to be presumed murdered. Certainly you have Gus Grissom and two others, plus the fellow, his wife and stepdaughter who wrote the safety report that went missing. These are mass-murderers we are talking about. They won’t put up with a strategic person blabbing.

  34. ““Anyway the point was about the conspiracy ,which is of course sociological. Can such a big conspiracy be conducted across time and countries?”

    Its still a case of you putting sociological speculation (ie your presumed gift of second sight, liver quivers, extra-sensory perception) above the evidence. So its pure Woo that you are using. This is the Great Randi internet sewer version of the leftist-reversal.

  35. “its still a case of you putting sociological speculation (ie your presumed gift of second sight, liver quivers, extra-sensory perception) above the evidence. So its pure Woo that you are using”

    All those things *are” “evidence”. Get up to speed.


  36. Interesting you are now using language to block intelligence in all its forms.

    Why would you do that?

  37. Paging John H.

    Please define “evidence”.

  38. Evidence is a class of data. The data is to be very broadly considered. But its application cannot be implicitly vague. It must be applied to a specific hypothesis via a process of reason.

    Evidence is data (broadly considered) applied via a process of reason, in support of an hypothesis ….. narrowly considered.

    So for example, Myth-busters showing that after a lot of effort they can get non-parallel shadows, in a studio, from a single light ….. this constitutes no evidence at all in favour of the idea that people went to the moon as demonstrated by Apollo. Its simply not evidence for that hypothesis. Though at first blush it may appear to be, in an environment when the notion that Apollo was a hoax is subject to emotionalism and putdowns and so forth.


    • See the mythbusters example Edney. Simply showing that the suns shadows can sometimes (if you work real hard at it) be non-parallel appears to the emotionally committed, that its evidence for Apollo. But in sober fact it isn’t. Its not even ATTEMPTING to bring evidence in favour of them being on the moon.

  40. Your argument is unconvincing, Graeme. And “reason” is highly suspect for all the reasons we now know. It is so much more fruitful and rewarding to take into account in figuring out anything such things as chaos, intuition, complexity.

  41. Well reason is just poorly used. Sometimes its used in a mechanistic way by philosophers, who aren’t looking for truth via convergent evidence. But rather they are tendentiously and tediously putting over their views and expecting to prove them BY BIVALENT LOGIC EXACTITUDE or rather the pretense of it. To use logic in that way is indeed limiting and pointless. Its just a dog and pony show anyway, and they are throwing all the other tools away.

    But reason is a broader way of using logic and judgement. And if its used in a process of looking for convergent evidence, and weighing alternatives in parallel, then it leads to excellent results.

  42. Graeme, I don’t think you need to censor others’ words to argue your case. Let the other argument stand and address it. That way knowledge grows. I know it seems like words are bullets, But they are not really. They are toys.

  43. Are you saying my eyes lied Bird? That the building didn’t sag and tilt before it collapsed?

    I watched it live, commented before it happened that the buildings looked like they were going to collapse. Never seen a controlled demolition make a building do that.

    • But they were made to look like they were going to collapse by virtue of the girders being melted via thermate. Listen to what you are saying. The uniqueness of the matter that you perceived is proof of the thesis you are opposing.

  44. This subject is the topic of one of my first posts here, and I’ve been following my own prescription since.

  45. “But reason is a broader way of using logic and judgement. And if its used in a process of looking for convergent evidence, and weighing alternatives in parallel, then it leads to excellent results.”

    I don’t think there are rules abou this stuff. And therein lies the difference and problem.

  46. Here’s the proper epistemology Bob. I’m not saying you throw any of your tools away. I’m explaining the process by which you systematically apply all these other tools.

  47. “But they were made to look like they were going to collapse by virtue of the girders being melted via thermate.:

    This doesn’t make sense.

    • I’m guessing a bit. But you have to ask Edney why he anticipated a fall. You see you cannot anticipate a fall when they just blow up the buildings in a controlled demolition, unless you know when the setup is going to be detonated.

      But when they melt all the girders and then start the timed multiple (smaller) explosions …. then the building might take on a certain LOOK which could have tipped off Edney on an intuitive level that they were about to fall.

      Which of course has nothing to do with the planes but the mental association has been sort of stomped into us.

  48. 2006 seems like an age ago. i can remember suggesting to you (at Catallaxy or LP) that you start your own Blog, and your then mate Cambria defending you thinking it was an attack on you.

  49. If your tools are Venn Diagrams thats cool. Boolean logic is cool. Intellectual capital based on some of the things you were talking about is okay. But the idea is to apply them ranking and re-ranking alternative paradigms in parallel, the ranking process being affected by convergent evidence.

    You are probably reeling from the status quo who talk as if only statistical evidence coming from a peer reviewed paper counts, or alternatively only bivalent logic in the hands of a tenured professor of philosophy.

    If the credentialed crowd are right, convergent evidence will anticipate their results.

  50. “This subject is the topic of one of my first posts here, and I’ve been following my own prescription since.:

    It is true that we are set in our ways. Even from childhood. But then we can be on the wrong track too and not realise.

    I’m quite open to the suggestion that 9/11 was a put up job by US forces but arguing that by sole reference to tech references is besides the point, cannot be proved and thus is ultimately irrelevant.

    • Its not a question of being set in my ways Bob. I’ve only been studiously following that approach for five years.

  51. When was the thermite placed there. Before the planes hit? as afterwards it was all on fire. If so how did they make sure they hit the right spot?

    • Months in advance of course.

  52. Thermate Edney. The sulphur signature has been identified. Not thermite. It was thermate.

  53. It’s weird (to me) that anyone would focus on the techs of this.

    The real question is why.

    Why were the Twin Towers targeted is the question and by whom?


    • They were targeted by the money-creation/covert-operations network, as part of their eternal self-enrichment and empowerment activities. They are able to profit from all activities that have been taken on ever since. Share trading based on advanced knowledge, war provisioning, all sorts of pork, setting up new departments and putting their people there, breaking down the constitution and bill of rights further. Its about enslaving the many and enriching the few.

      Most of all they benefit from new countries to create credit and asset inflation in. If they go into Libya, it means that they can get everything in Libya that is good and add debt to it, creating new money out of thin air.

      • Can’t fault you on most of that.

        You have a way with words. And you care. Which places you way ahead of the pack. Even if you no longer want to be a leader.

  54. Edney the perps are going to make sure those military planes hit the exact spot that they plan. Thats the easy part. The key there is simply having a solid falling upper level as part of the alibi.

  55. David Crockefeller built the twin towers. He sold the twin towers. They could have not been destroyed without his approval. And he watched them fall from his office in New York.

  56. At a certain point I think the righteous outrage we all feel needs to be allowed to segue into understanding however dismal.

    People will sell their souls and the lives of many for money and power, It’s human. Sad but true.

  57. Its in the nature of fractional reserve leverage. If you are profitable under that setup you are a master of the universe. But if you cannot meet your obligations you take a big dive down to fraud and criminal. You see they have to keep shovelling their money into more and more power, because if they slip from power they go from god to turn in one easy swan-dive.

    That evil criminal Crockefeller keeps living. He may be immortal. He won’t die and he’s probably scared to die lest he lose his hold on power. Because then all his dirty laundry comes out. He’s really a more despicable man then Hitler.

  58. The were military planes? So much I didn’t know. What happened to the flights that went missing then?

    • How could I possibly know that? They weren’t the planes they were claimed to be? Why would they be? They didn’t even look like them for starters, and there was no reason why they would use the planes that they said. If you are knocking over some buildings why use the same planes that you are going to tell the public were the ones?

  59. “David Crockefeller built the twin towers. He sold the twin towers. They could have not been destroyed without his approval. And he watched them fall from his office in New York.”

    Eh? He can make buildings stand by his sheer force of will?

    • Fucking hell man. The buildings aren’t going down without his approval. He’s the biggest local gangster.

  60. Obviously as the longest standing and one of the most powerful US capos, no-ones going to be knocking over those buildings without consulting him.

  61. What is the evidence that they were the same planes? The people who knocked the buildings down? Are the mass-muderers to be trusted when they name planes?

  62. Obviously if you are carrying out a massively intricate and detailed false flag operation you are not going to confuse your cover story with your operational plans. Particularly not any part of the plan which requires great skill and reliability by lots of people, none of whom you can trust completely. So the chances of them actually getting Arabs to hijack the planes is next to zero.

    Even the footage of the Arabs at the various airports would have been generated well in advance. How can you be sure all your favoured Arabs walk past the camera at the right time, and the airport take the picture? The cameras might be down that day, and the Arabs might not walk in the right place, or may not even show up. The actual operation would have almost nothing in common with the cover story. That almost goes without saying. Only some detail in common that you are totally sure will pan out could you afford to have in the intersecting set between what you say happened and what you cause to happen.

    So just for starters the planes that hit the two buildings were not the planes that they said they were, were not the same models as the planes they claimed were hijacked by Arabs. Nor would there be any reason to believe this. To have some bizzare sentiment where you want the plan to match the cover story would almost guarantee that in such a complex assignment you would fail.

  63. Bird you used to passionately argue that the Iraqis were involved in 9/11 what happened to that?

    • That is what the evidence said. And still says.

      Just as the evidence places Oswald as a communist defector, a Castro enthusiast, and an assassin-wannabe, even before the shadow government launched the hit on Kennedy ….. which history knows under the codename …. “The Big Event….”

      You see you dumb lefties just believe what you are told. The shadow government spends most of its efforts doctoring up evidence for me, Reagan, CL, Mark Steyn, Victor Davis Hansen, and Donald Kagan to pick up.

      We pick it up and defend people like George the Younger, because the evidence left lying around could not be more than clear, while the rest of you are denying it FOR NO LOGICAL REASON.

      So the effort is to suck me in, whereas your crowd can be relied on to sucker itself. Leaving around all this evidence and then abusing people for picking up that evidence left lying around is one of the key techniques of these guys.

      They aren’t that smart. The number of key techniques they have I could count on my fingers and, have fingers left over and in storage, and these techniques are simple ……….. stupid ……. and even childish.

      But so far these techniques have always worked and these techniques have never failed the covert-ops/money-creation network.

    • How do you think the Jews and the Jew-dominated shadow government gets away with it? They put other peoples fingerprints on it, and then sideline anyone who dusts them. Do you get it now?

      So you had the OUTER LAYER for the really dumb cunts. That was the bin Laden idiocy. No evidence at all. Then you had the low-hanging fruit. The Iraqi, Iranian, and Saudi fruit. So people like me and CL pick that fruit up right? Then we are abused. And we spend all our time trying to urge people to use human reason to look at evidence. But the position of reason, context and evidence is made to be socially unacceptable. So I copped it from all of you. I had a fatwah against Quiggin because of it.

      So thats two layers of protection they have and its both sides of the spectrum that they’ve stomped, and they’ve bogged down anybody who likes evidence and reason.

      But the evidence and reason position is just the second outer circle. Produced by the Jews after years and years of patient planning.

      If we could have stuck with reason and jumped the first hoop of this bin Laden idiocy, then we could dwell on that second protective outer ring long enough to find out that it was carefully fabricated.


    Here you said it it was Iraq and Iran conspiring together to do 9/11.

    Here you say “Saddams fingerprints are all over BOTH those WTC attacks.”

    • Yes this is true. The shadow government put Iraq, Saudi, Iran, and Israeli fingerprints all over 9/11. It was a much bigger example of sheep-dipping then what they did with Osama and Oswald.
      All these people were made to be guilty. They went to a great deal of trouble putting Saddams fingerprints on it and at the same time denying and ridiculing that self-same evidence. Abusing their new East-European spook allies in the process. It was just so disgraceful then and so transparent now. And there is a list of people I could take to Guantanimo, under current legislation, and put straight into stress positions.

    • Of course. Israel and the shadow government made sure that there was Iranian and Iraq fingerprints all over 9/11. They made sure of it. More evidence that they have huge influence within the Iranian elite. They take years to get everyones footprints all over it before they go ahead. They had Saudi, Iranian and Iraqi fingerprints all over it and one fellow who seems pretty sound also linked the Pakistani intelligence. Which clearly was also necessary for that phoney bin Laden hit.

      Its all just so risible.


    “The libertarians of this ilk claimed that Bush the Younger lied about WMD. They went along with the ridiculous process of whitewashing Saddam and the other dictatorships of involvement with terrorism in general and 9/11 specifically.
    All this because they are anti-war.”

    ARe you now whitewashing Saddam Bird? because bush had to be involved in 9/11 if it was a conspiracy.

    • Right. He is in the family. When he first heard about the crash his reaction was that he knew it was part of a much bigger deal.

      Good management has wide spans of control. Secretive management is linear and there was a time when the Harriman’s served the Rockefellers, the Bushes served the the Harriman’s, and a Rothschild wouldn’t get caught talking to a Bush because of the social stigma of it.

      They picked him because on one level he was one of us. Now he’s off to South America securing water rights (ie taking access to water away from those who have a right to that water.)

      They chose him because he had a foot in our camp. But they knew he wouldn’t let down his family, and therefore the network in the end.

      His Dad was in Dallas when Jacks head was blown off and was part of the smoke-blowing if not part of the management. His Dad was meant to take over when they shot Reagan but Reagan lived and they let the old man be President, for the most part, after that, thank the Lord.

      They surprised him with 9/11. He clearly knew something was coming but I’m sure he was grieved and distraught by the extent of it. He was human. But he was part of the machine just the same and he has two daughters to worry about.

      The key to them blowing Jacks head off was that Jacks family was the one and only family to be inside the network and rebel. So they murdered Jack and all his kids and his brother and only Jackie herself was spared.

      George junior is no longer any friend of mine, but still we must be fair and appreciate the reality of the options he faced.

    • Well clearly Saddam was a big terror sponsor. On the other hand some of what we may have been wishing to blame on him could have been Israeli. Because since Mossad was the driving force behind the nuts and bolts of 9/11 its pretty clear that Israeli terrorism didn’t go out with Menachem Begin.

      Are you fucking even for one minute doubting the false flag of 9/11? What the fuck is the matter with you after all this time? This is what happens when you go soft on Jew-science. You cannot then get the simplest scientific matter right.

      If you had never bought into freaky Jew space-time and other bad Jew Science (like Quantum idiocy, wormholes, and other idiocy coming out of Jew-town) then for you 911 would be non-controversial. We even know a lot of the people involved.

  66. Here is a video, Edney, to give you a sense how much you and me have been OWNED by this fucking unilluminati.

    If you don’t like this song its because you aren’t playing it loud enough. Its only good when it hurts.

    The video game says “Play me”
    Face it on a level but it takes you every time on a one on one
    Feeling running down your spine
    Nothing gonna save your one last dime cause it owns you
    Through and through

    Says I gotta pay cause I made the grade last year
    Feel it when I turn the screw
    Kicks you round the world, there ain’t a thing that it can’t do
    Do to you

    Someone send me pictures.
    Get it in the eye,
    take it to the Y,
    spinning like a dynamo.
    Feel it going round and round
    Running out of chips, you got no line in a nak-ed town
    So don’t look down, no

  67. Just love that drummer. Sound as a metronome. I like to play this sort of thing to the Thai kids. Their country is better then ours now but its still good to show them really good hard rock.

  68. Its a great song bird. ACDC might not be my favourite band in the world but they were certainly quality.

  69. or with my gravatar,

  70. Edward Luttwak. People who would willingly miss a lecture of his on the net are just not serious about the subjects he deals with. The absolute stunning stuff comes in from about 14 minutes in, where he starts talking about the cold-hearted and morbid calculus of the English ruling-class, and what that meant for the German people, who were superior in almost every way imaginable.

  71. Another massive revelation comes in around the 23-25 and with the first question taking things along to the 27 minute level. It still keeps coming at 28. There is no choice but to keep listening and listen again three times or more.

  72. We really have a lot to answer for, for damaging so badly the German people. Yes its true we had to take down the national socialists and make their values unacceptable. But the way we went about it, destroyed so much potential for the human race, because these guys were superior. No no no not GENETICALLY. But on a cultural-technical level. Their superiority had been warped. Warped by their leadership sure. But that still doesn’t make it okay for us to break them so badly as a culture.

  73. One key thing to come out of the lecture is the need for Israel to use all its power to get tight with the Turks again. The Middle East will basically be workable if Israel and Turkey are tight and strong. The reason is because on a man to man level the Arabs and even the Persians will break into a cold sweat thinking about having to fight Turks. I break out in a cold sweat thinking about the prospect of it myself. Turks are famously committed fighters and no matter how crazy they are in some contexts, they usually seem to maintain a reasonable side to them.

    Edward really brings this idea home; Sometimes you’ve got to swallow your pride and work damn hard to get people on your side. Only a fool would be on the wrong side of the Turks, when they do have a reasonable side to them. If they were merely fierce, and they are, but irretrievably bad, irrational, not open to persuasion and so forth, well you’d have to stay away from them or smash them. These are people who you work very hard to be friends with.

  74. Luttwak making the case for peace, or at least forbearance, with Iran:

  75. But here he is saying the opposite a year later. So it would be interesting to know exactly what had changed. He seemed to feel that global deterrence against abuse of the Jews had begun to slip too far. These are judgement calls I guess. I hadn’t been reading the papers all that time and cannot myself judge the overall global attitude. But very rich American Jews particularly have definitely been letting their people down around the world.

  76. Mr Bird
    do you think the Jews are behind that video which is causing all those riots?

    • More recent answer:

      Yes of course.

  77. I haven’t been watching the news. So I haven’t kept up with the story. I’ll take your ethnic reference to mean “shadow government”. The shadow governments modus operandi is always to cause conflict so as to be able to justify departments which they can capture, spending which they can benefit from (particularly since you’d expect them to have inside information relevant to share-picking.) They will want to bring down anyone they cannot control, and then subject their countries to asset inflation and debt explosions. But generally they want one group fighting against another so the two groups never get around to figuring out whose been ripping both of them off. End the Reserve Bank.

  78. We have to be skeptical about these Mars probes. They may well be fake along with Apollo. They continue to alter the colour of alleged Mars photos. To be spreading disinformation of this sort after decades would seem to be cover for something. The Mars satellites aren’t staged. But the Mars probes may well be.

  79. Shocking expose of Jewish involvement in the slave trade:

    • Dirty jew bastards.

      • Well yes of course they were Ron. They were slave-traders. Part of the lecture is about how prominent Jews were in slave-trading and what a fuss a lot of other Jews put up when this was pointed out. Everyone else has owned up to it. But the role of Jews is a secret history. Whereas there were Christians in slave trading as well, there were also Christians in the abolitionist movement. In fact the abolitionist movement was basically a wall-to-wall Christian movement. But there were almost no Jews in the abolitionist movement.

  80. The problem appears to be with the Talmud. The Talmud appears to be a Nazi document. A document of racist supremacism, and a blueprint for a tribal crime syndicate. This problem appears to be made worse in the reformed-Jew branch. Here is brother Nathaniel on the problem:

    • Brother N. surely is a righteous Hebrew.

      I would love to hear him preach the gospel of Christ with Pastor Manning.

  81. My best Quiggin thread:

  82. Superb article by Clive Hamilton. Having a shot at weirdo nihilist and sacred Cow Peter Singer:

    Singer isn’t the genius people make him out to be. Really he isn’t that bright.

  83. After 9/11 people started looking into the Koran to see if there was anything in it that could be causing a problem with violence around the world. They certainly were able to find plenty of suras in the Koran to be able to make the argument that the Koran was part of the problem. But how about the Talmud? Why is it getting a pass? After all it was no Arabs that knocked down those three buildings with two planes, that was merely the false flag cover story. And we have at least one Jew involved. Silverstein, the building owner was involved. So the focus has to move onto the Talmud, JUST OUT OF SHEER EQUALITY and fairmindedness, the Talmud must come under scrutiny. Because while we have no Muslim suspects in 9/11 and never did have any, we have at least one Jewish suspect. And while Christians have the best credentials of any religion when it comes to getting rid of slavery, Jews have no such track record.

    The question of slavery is important in 9/11 since the people who did it were part of the money-creation/covert ops network. Fractional reserve money creation and the use of false flag operations, are attempts to enslave entire populations, when perpetrated by a giant network.

  84. Pings during the fake moonwalkers performances in the studio, when they are pretending to be on the moon. A “ping” is where their studio wire catches the light:

  85. Its been claimed that the Japanese exploded their own atomic bombs in August of 1945 to stop the Soviet advance. According to this story the Japanese were able to threaten the US with a nuclear arsenal as a bargaining chip even after the two bombs were set off in Japan.

  86. Japanese never really surrendered until 1951. 1945 was just a ceasefire. Japanese nuclear submarines would still port off Sao Paulo right up until then.

  87. Hitler believed to have used an atomic bomb operationally against the Soviet Union. This was subsequent to Operation Hannibal to get people out of the way of the nuclear explosion.

  88. Under this view the two atomic bombs were useless acts of terrorism. The idea that the Japanese surrendered at that date, and because of those bombs, is (under this view) a tendentious rewriting of history. Just a lie to cover over the terrorism and uselessness of the atomic bombs used in the targeting of civilians.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: