Thursday, October 22, 2009

Arsenal of Hypocrisy- NASA and global domination through space

We have talked alot about NASA lately, and NASA has been in the news alot lately!
We have had the bombing of the moon. Yesterday, we had reports of a new rocket ARES. Including, talk of taking men to mars never to return to earth.

Realistically, NASA has always been an offshoot of the US military. The romanticism believed in by some is sheer myth created to obfuscate the reality of what NASA is about.
We would be foolish to not grasp this reality.
While the US has the Army for ground control, the airforce for control of the skies, and the marines for control of the sea, they have NASA for control of space.
I have linked to this document previously, and here it is again. Vision 2020. Look at it for yourself.
The refer back to it, as you spend one hour watching this documentary.
It will be a hour of time, well spent. You will understand and think about the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq differently and more fully after this. I have already seen it.
The first question I asked after I watched it? Why don't we see this stuff on tv?

Bruce Gagnon is associated with the website in the sidebar-
Global Network Against Weapons and Nukes in Space

Please take the time to watch: Arsenal of Hypocrisy

One hour, well spent. Then share your thoughts.

33 comments:

  1. Cheers Penny. Thanks for the link I'll have a look at that later.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Right at the front of Vision 20/20 it states that land, air and space weapons exist for the protection of commerce.

    It can't get any more blatant than that.

    For those that doubt the armies work for the banks, its right there in print from the US Space Command.

    Commerce is a free system, and its a great system. The problem with it is that we are being bamboozled by the banks and their "legal system" regarding how it actually works.

    ReplyDelete
  3. hey john and doug!

    I had forgot about this one, I had heard Bruce Gagnon interviewed on Meria Heller's show when this movie came out.
    I really should go back in the archives and relisten.

    Yesterday, I happened to be listening to someone else, and they were referring to this movie, and it was like lightbulb!!!

    This was done in 2003, so it will mention Bush and Republicans, since there were in power at the time.
    But, it is interesting with the benefit of hindsight, we can see how much of this has come to pass, one thing that caught my attention was the use of the Aegis missile system, the rampant use of drones in Pakistan and on and on.
    How much the weaponization of space depends on these recent events.
    It sort of ties alot together.
    Here Aegis is in the news tied to Israel

    http://www.reuters.com/article/newsMaps/idUSTRE59L3GC20091022

    U.S. sees Israel drill helping Europe missile shield

    "A major air defense exercise launched with Israel this week will help the United States craft its European missile shield, a U.S. commander said Thursday.

    Signaling the strength of their alliance against what they say is a threat from Iran's nuclear program, Israeli and U.S. forces launched a two-yearly drill Wednesday. Known as Juniper Cobra, it includes target practice against missiles, both real and in computer-simulated exercises.

    Featuring in the three weeks of maneuvers is Aegis, a U.S. Navy anti-missile system that the administration of President Barack Obama plans to deploy in the eastern Mediterranean as the first part of a missile shield for Europe announced last month."

    war games and and obviously threating to Iran.

    And yup vision 20/20 is obvious and blatant.

    never mind the booga boooga and the romanticism of space travels, just the facts!

    ReplyDelete
  4. And I like the unlabeled picture near the end with a beam weapon striking something in Irak from orbit. That was also a reason I made that comment last week
    http://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.com/2009/10/van-allen-belts-waggin-moon-doggie.html?showComment=1255964920577#c6299242425767789913

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hey Gallier, went to check the comment, and I can't tell which one it is.
    help?

    But, the documentary? Dish.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Exactly the one I gave as link. The one about vaporized steel on the WTC. But you're right, the one before gave the idea.
    Here the citation:
    "Just to tell,I'm not against alternative interpretations of events, I think the WTC was brought down by orbitting microwave-lasers, so my belief is even beyond the controlled demolition conspiracies on that subject.
    http://www.drjudywood.com/
    Which brings up good points (but messes a lot of others)."

    ReplyDelete
  7. Great video link, not too bad at all. Some disinfo in there (has to be with Chomsky there) but overall very good.

    For the "evolution of space" though, I stopped first at the quaint notion that military forces have evolved to protect national interests and investments.

    Protect? How about . . . attack and take away resources from weak sisters? Because the reality is, in history, that is how rudimentary and complex militaries came to be . . . taking from the weak by force through intimidation or attack. It started with the first hunters turned warriors, who would attack a helpless tribe and take away their food, taking with them women and even new technology . . . so much easier than the hard work to achieve things on your own.

    We humans are far less noble than most imagine us to be. We are a cruel, savage lot, as is the natural order of things. The strong prey on the weak, and in terms of paradigms, the military has developed no differently. I feel that we must all accept this fact and move on, making a better life for all, starting at home, and extending outward.

    Speaking of disinfo back there, I am beginning to think that is what Gallier is all about. All the points made about men not making it to the moon - double radiation belts, 40 years and lots of money, etc . . . and not one single concession made by Gallier. Not a one.

    That, coupled with the laser beams taking down the twin towers . . . I mean, his argumentation is all over the map to suit his point on so many levels . . . his claim about English being a third language sounds like bullshit from what I can read . . . and the polite way he dismisses all possible government conspiracy as bumbling is so typical of the disinfo crowd. And at every chance, trying to squeeze in his lasers brought down the towers nonsense.

    I have an A1 bullshit detector, and I smell a rat.

    You think men went to the moon 40 years ago, and just by coincidence we haven't gone since, even though it would be a MASSIVE advantage to anything connected to the PTB from a military, political, and propaganda standpoint?!?

    Prove it. Prove to me that men went to the moon.

    I believed it when I was a child, but I have grown up, having developed logic.

    ReplyDelete
  8. slozo

    I'm with you on your assesment of what the military is all about.

    This said I'm the real deal, getting as close to full revelation of identity as it gets, except for my name I've revealed almost everything here and at nobody's place. My geographical location in France near the German/Luxemburg/Belgium, me working for an international government like body (there ain't that much things) and the picture is me in 2003 during my Gabon vacation.
    As for the moondoggy points, there weren't any concession to make. No one cared to bring up irrefutable facts. Hell, even no one cared to fact check the things Dave told.
    And just for info, I read the other link from winterpatriot where he emit the hypotheses that the moon hoax stories were in fact started by NASA itself so that they can hide the full width of what they were up to, has a lot of merrit. Wouldn't surprise me at all, but please, stop following every bullshit argument even (especially) if it is brought up by your prefered author.


    And, thank you for your compliment on my english, didn't know I was so good.
    Sinon, on peut continuer en français, peut-être que cela pourra rétablir un peu de sérénité dans ce débat.
    Deutsch wäre, selbstverständlich, auch noch eine Möglichkeit, aber lassen wir das, es wird albern.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hey Penny,

    First off, the documentary. I took that hour out and watched it. Very compelling. Put into context how important Operation Paperclip was for the US post WW2. That part really intrigues me more than what NASA did or didn't achieve. As Goebbels himself said, going to war without a propaganda machine is a futile exercise (I'm paraphrasing, but you get the idea). With NASA being an extension of US military, and the militarising of space effectively being a war, albeit a subtle cold-type-war, one shouldn't be surprised that propaganda will play a big part. Perceived capability, and actual capability in these terms take on different meanings.
    That said, we could argue all day long with those that accept (or indeed fully understand) the technology NASA claims to hold, and until personal experience bites us on the ass, neither of us would be able to prove either a positive, or a negative.

    I've been following a series of essays by Trowbridge H Ford over at Codshit, titled "Glimpses of America's Man Made Disasters", there's 11 parts up right now, and I think this ties in quite nicely with what we're discussing.

    Here's a link to the first part
    http://tinyurl.com/yjzk9vm

    Just for the record, I don't see Gallier as a Winston Smith kinda character, he's far too sure of himself. That said, he does have a lot of 'faith' in what he believes.
    I have very little faith in anything prescribed by authority, I find things a lot easier that way.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Oh, speaking a second, or even third language isn't in itself something to be considered sinister.

    I myself speak Dutch, and write it poorly too!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Chomsky has his bad, and he has his good.

    But with the documentary, you can check the main points being made, that is why I posted the 20/20 report again, like a companion piece.

    Plus the ordinary news reports, the wars, satellite guided weapons, it's all there.
    That is why I included the few I did, i think it is general information that weapons are being satellite guided, that drones are, and that has been the point of it all. Weaponizing space.
    Full spectrum dominance.
    Glad you enjoyed it slozo, edo.

    Slozo, protecting national interests, and stealing the resources of others are one in the same. It is in the national interest of the US, in this case, to control the resources of others.

    And I agree, we are less noble then we like to imagine ourselves to be.

    ReplyDelete
  12. edo, I will check that out, thanks.

    the propaganda is part of the myth.

    for example the men in space mythology, romantically reinforced through the likes of star trek's to boldly go, but what NASa wants is to put people on Mars to work and die there. Not much romanticism in that.

    I noticed some of the comments wrt this latest rocket and attempting to go to mars
    like we are not inspiring the youth of today, and having kids build rockets for NASA, this is part of the propaganda.
    This gets kids emotionally caught up in the dream.
    That was the first thing that popped in my head when I read those comments.
    But, the reality will be far different, like it is for us caught up in the apollo missions, to realize that rather then some sort of higher calling, reinforced by bullshit on tv, the whole concept has been weapons and warfare.

    Myself, I don't think Gallier is disinfo, but, I take exception to the comment" no one cared to check the things Dave said" cause actually DAve provided links to back up what he said, and I spent way too much time looking stuff up myself.

    Which is why I was able to point out to Gallier the misinformation that abounds just on the van allen belts alone, and the time travel through them. From pro-apollo sites, I may add.

    But,we all have our own opinions.

    As for a second language, I pretend to speak french and sometimes use the odd Italian word, not just the swears either LOL, that isn't my style.

    My pronunciation is terrible, but, still I embarrase myself! ;)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Has anyone studied Esperanto ?

    This is a new language that came out in the 70's. It supposed to only take a week or so to learn.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The '70s, of the 19th century you mean?
    Zamenhof developped it between 1870 and 1880.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto

    ReplyDelete
  15. Penny said:
    Myself, I don't think Gallier is disinfo, but, I take exception to the comment" no one cared to check the things Dave said" cause actually DAve provided links to back up what he said, and I spent way too much time looking stuff up myself.

    Sorry got a bit overboard with that. I have also forgotten to thank you for the tremendous work you do on this platfrom.

    ReplyDelete
  16. thanks for that compliment gallier, I do try to keep it interesting, and informative.

    I had to channel my interests some where and this seemed a good place/means to do so.

    And I learn as I go, which is good too!

    ReplyDelete
  17. ぼくは日本語ができるだけどう。。。このへんでだれもそれできないよ。

    ReplyDelete
  18. ぼくは日本語ができるだけどう。。。このへんでだれもそれできないよ。

    That's funny! (at least, I hope it is)

    ReplyDelete
  19. "Slozo, protecting national interests, and stealing the resources of others are one in the same."

    When was protecting the same as attacking? Seriously, stop letting the insidious propaganda filter into the synapses and muddle one's thinking . . . to protect is not to go on the offensive, it is to keep what is already yours . . . even if the Empire says that 'protect' actually means to them so that they can invade other countries to keep up the raping and the pillaging. Poppycock!

    And while we're at it, what is your "national interest"? That would be the interests of a nation's people, if actually being fair and democratic . . . so, the majority of the public. That is not what has ever happened, despite the billing.

    IMHO, Chomsky is a disinfo guy, only set upon us to sound smart, state the obvious to anyone with their eyes open, and divert away attention from the fact that 9/11 was an inside job. That, and soft-peddle Israel. Why do you think he gets so much air time?

    Gallier - sorry, no dice, mein freund. Wo hast gelernt Deutsch alzo (ein bischen), und meinen francais sont pauvre, mais je comprend tout que tu direr.

    Ah well, my French and Kraut is shite as you can see, but the other three languages are just as good or better. Working on number 7, myself.

    Doesn't that me sound clever, hunh?

    Yes, cultured, polite, nice white collar job with lots of background in all the right things to discredit any argument away from a massive gov't conspiracy . . . except . . . I'm still not buying that you are actually here to partake, assist or educate or illuminate. I'm thinking more . . . obfuscate.

    I'm sorry, but Dave McGowan's pure logic kills all of your links. He is a very clever guy, and I give him heaps of credit.

    Think of a reason why it would be in the gov't's interests to stop going to the moon, testing rockets, have a vehicle for putting up more spy sattelites, death machinery, etc etc in the spacy skies of low and high orbit.

    Tell me how TPTB who can print their own money, or the gov't stooges who can borrow as much as they can print, can't afford it if they want it.

    Explain to us all, since you are a smart math guy with a calculator, what the failure rate was for NASA in test launches, rocket experiments, etc, translate that into a percentage, and then figure out the odds of going 7 for 7 were with 0 man made failures and 1 miracle fix-up in space. Are we in lottery territory here?

    Tell us what a coincidence it was that every launch was a Michael Jackson death diversion event of cosmic proportions that also coincidentally provided the public with a healthy dose of patriotism that just happens to be what one needs when selling endless wars.

    Tell me why not one astronaut jumped more than a foot, never mind three or four, that any human being would be inclined to do when confronted with 1/6 gravity. Check out every video of space training with future astronauts doing weightlessness for the first time . . . what is the first thing they all do? You test the physical boundaries, slowly at first to be careful - but you test them. I tell ya . . . it could have been 70 years since the last spaceman on the moon, but one effortless and realistic 5foot jump would have had me sold.

    Gallier - what you're selling, I'm not buying. Not a bit. I know you will respond at length to argue your position and your reputation . . . but just like a Chomsky, I won't pay you any mind any more.

    PS - There was no evidence of any lasers used on 9/11, so there is no reason to even think of it as a hypothesis, especially when it so completely mirrors a controlled demolition. You reek of disinfo.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Cute, I'm a bit in a hurry I won't respond immediately, cause it damands a little more elaborate answers.

    ReplyDelete
  21. gallier2:

    How do you think the lasers were able to get through all that dust, metal and rock and keep heating the buildings as they went all the way down ?

    (I like Bill Deagles idea on a mini nuke used)

    BTW I'm an EE.

    ReplyDelete
  22. National interest means USA inc. interest, not the interest of the American people. The wto are unrelated.

    ReplyDelete
  23. slozo:

    I am saying that in a double speak sort of way.

    like black is white and up is down.
    Protecting national interests for the US has always meant stealing what is others, because their agenda has always been one of entitlement.

    Go back to the Carter Doctrine, yes, that Carter, Jimmy Carter.

    See what he says about oil in the ME.

    I will paraphrase, he says it's the US's because it is in their interests and they will protect their interest.
    Protecting and stealing are not the same to you and I. Stealing is something you need protection from.
    But with empire or imperial agendas everything means something else.
    So, for the US protecting their interests does indeed mean stealing the resources of others.

    In the documentary Bruce Gagnon mentions the book by Brezinszki. The Grand Chessboard. Ever read it?
    If you haven't, I would suggest you do. It is full of that kind of stuff. And, it gives another good picture at the US agenda in the ME.


    As for Chomsky,he is a limited hangout kind of person, but he can at least spark, a more indepth thought then mainstream, and hopefully one can go from there?

    "And while we're at it, what is your "national interest"?

    I am not sure if your accusing or asking, or even what your asking.

    If you read my blog, you will understand my interests, my concerns etc., I raise them all the time. I try to inform, but I am just one person. Who happens to be a political current event enthusiasist.

    Hang around a while, I guess and then you will know.

    ReplyDelete
  24. oh and as for Dave McGowan, see his site in my side bar, been there since day one, I also own and have read all of his books.

    I often refer back to him.

    I do find him bright and hilarious also. I first heard him back in 2003 on the Meria Heller show.
    And, have been a fan since, long before Laurel Canyon....

    ReplyDelete
  25. Re Arsenal of Hypocrisy:

    The real purpose of the space program is to generate waste. This keeps the common man down with his nose to the grindstone (to pay taxes and work) unable to look up, see who he is and possibly threaten the existing English ruling elite control of civilization.

    This is explained in The Report From Iron Mountain and this document is key to understanding our world. The Report From Iron Mountain is a free download that you can find on the web.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Vielleicht werde ich das video anschauen.. spaeter.

    Ich glaube nicht dass wir an dem Mond gelandet haben.

    Und, ja mein Deutsch ist ein bischen rusty...

    *snicker*

    ReplyDelete
  27. Oh und Nobody - ZEHR KOMISCH!!

    ha ha ha

    ReplyDelete
  28. Sorry Penny, I know what you're about and respect and follow you too when I can . . . didn't mean to come off sounding so adversarial.

    I just missed the tongue in cheek thing about protecting interests, fair enough. About the national interests, was just trying to put out a rhetorical question to the population . . . as it is an oft-repeated phrase which actually means corporate interests, or, the interests of the tiny ruling class.

    Yes, I read the Grand Chessboard a while ago. Tough to know what he means to put out as half truth or total disinformation, but one must always tread the most carefully around a power player who is seemingly coming clean about high level plans. There is a reason why books like this are published, as high-level propaganda for the intellectual class (yes, that is a communist reference).

    Cute indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  29. ha, ha, ha all you funny language users!!
    dam if will be left out!

    hang on, I will use google translate and be right back

    Αστρονομία αναγκάζει την ψυχή να κοιτάξουμε προς τα πάνω και να μας οδηγεί από αυτόν τον κόσμο σε ένα άλλο.
    Πλάτων

    ReplyDelete
  30. slozo:apology accepted :)

    it is difficult to communicate on the blogs,the comprehension is not the same as if one was talking personally.

    about the grandchessboard:

    I am of the mind that the best place to hide is right out in plain sight.

    What difference if Zbeg writes a book about US foreign policy? How many people are actually going to read that book?

    It will not be a top seller, like all the Dan Brown books, as an example.

    So books like that and the pnac documents are going to be read by the very few, not the masses.
    Making it easy to hide out in the open.

    I also think that watching what is going on, following the events on the globe also let you and I know, wether the agenda spelled out in that book, as an example, or the PNAC docs, are being carried out.

    And it does look as if they are.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Gallier2 said "Cute, I'm a bit in a hurry I won't respond immediately, cause it damands a little more elaborate answers."

    and I was so looking forward to your elaborate answers... seems like you've gone a bit quiet there old chap? :)

    ReplyDelete
  32. Indeed, had real life work to do this weekend, sorry. I will come back.

    ReplyDelete

TROLLS & SPAM WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT HESITATION
KEEP IT RELEVANT. NO PERSONAL ATTACKS