What Happened On the Moon: Part One and Part Two; Each professionally produced segment is over an hour long. Based on the book Dark Moon: Apollo and the Whistle-Blowers. What do we really know to be true? See if you can bear to sit all the way through this documentary. Shocking, very thought-provoking stuff for the uninitiated.
See also a 51 minute synopsis documentary that shows contradictions of live astronaut video interviews, and also two astronauts getting really angry and physically assaulting the interviewer.
"A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon" (10 min, 11 sec video) analyzes alleged mid-space earth scene deception described in the other videos.

A brief editorial about "Dark Moon"

First, before reading this editorial, please watch "What Happened On the Moon." This editorial assumes that you have already familiarized yourself with all the arguments made by the Apollo critics.

One reason why I am over-weighted on both the anarcho-libertarian as well as the racial nationalist viewpoints here at America First Books is that both perspectives can provide valuable "models" to help explain this type of hoax, if in fact it the hoax thesis turns out to be true.

Let us try to explain the hoax thesis from an anarcho-libertarian perspective first.

Libertarians believe that government tends to be a predator, that if left unchecked, grows like a cancer and serves itself first before the people. So then, why wouldn't a "we know best" big government and self-serving bureaucracy which felt that it had to be "zero defect" in order to preserve "national pride" be willing to fake space achievements to hedge its bets and preserve its generous Federal budget allocations in case something went wrong with its real initiatives?

Knowing "Why Government Doesn't Work," why would we allow ourselves to be overawed or particularly trusting towards any bloated Federal bureaucracy, to include one that costs taxpayers somewhere between 100 to a 1,000 times more to get payloads in orbit than, say, SpaceShipOne? Why would anyone expect a government that has consistently lied to us about the London Gold Pool, the Federal Reserve, the Vietnam War, the Iraq War, JFK Assassination, border control, racial realities, attack on the U.S.S. Liberty, 9-11, irresponsible Holocaust exaggerations, secret radiation experiments on large U.S. populations, abandoned POW's, protection of civil liberties, depleted uranium (see also my "Critical Issues" discussion) --the list is almost endless-- to be a choir boy about the space race? Perhaps the better question might be: "In regard to what major project or public policy issue has the government not lied to us?"

Now let us try to explain the hoax thesis from a racial nationalist viewpoint.

The really big question is how anyone at a high level could be so depraved, cynical, criminal, or filled with hatred to try to foist a hoax like this on Americans? I think that I have an answer, but unfortunately the underlying realities I need to address are not very pleasant for most Americans.

And of course the hoaxers know this. Part of their power is the emotional unwillingness of most Americans to fully come to grips with their criminal mentality. Or at least not under normal social and economic conditions. But this will change our society continues to deteriorate and social pressures climb to the boiling point.

I believe it extremely likely that the decision to hoax the public must have come from President Lyndon Baines Johnson and his Zionist handlers. It seems to "fit the pattern" for the period he was in office from 1963 until 1968. These same handlers ran the national media cover-up of Mossad involvement in the JFK assassination and the deliberate nature of Israel's attack on the U.S.S. Liberty. Sustaining an Apollo hoax would require similar media power. Therefore, we have to talk about the nature of Zionist power in America as well as LBJ.

It is true that Richard Nixon was inaugurated on Jan 20, 1969 and that the alleged moon walk took place on July 20, 1969. There is quite a lot that he inherited, to include the unresolved JFK, Martin Luther King, Robert F. Kennedy assassinations, that he chose not to touch. If James Turk's source is correct that Johnson sold off most of America's gold, Nixon did not touch that either. Instead, he played along when he delinked the dollar from gold. It is possible that Nixon was a collaborator in the hoax. It is far more probable that Johnson and his handlers were the instigators. The more significant issue, which also applies to the JFK assassination, is who controlled the national media cover-up.

One important racial nationalist viewpoint, explained in greater detail in Wilmot Robertson's Dispossessed Majority, is the concept that throughout the 20th century America has been run by a Jewish media and financial elite that bears the same deep-seated, quasi-racist animus towards white America that Shylock holds towards Antony in Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice or Iago holds towards his boss in Othello. (See also Jewish Supremacism and My Awakening by Dr. David Duke). While there might be such a thing as "good Jews" on the street level, the overall Jewish community seems to lack checks and balances necessary to prevent the worst schemers from rising to the top. Zionist leaders tend to be highly criminal in nature and are master hoaxers to boot.

What a sad situation, indeed, for those Jews who genuinely try to be good people. Even David Duke tries to distinguish between Zionist criminals and good Jews in his forward to Jewish Supremacism, in which he dedicates the book to Israeli activist Israel Shahak. Daryl Bradford Smith and Eric Hufschmid also try to make this distinction at The French Connection (at iamthewitness.com), which otherwise goes after Zionist criminals with no holds barred.

According to certain racial nationalists, Zionist wise guys absolutely love it when they can join white Americans at the hip and pull us down to their level. So, for example, they degraded the CIA, FBI, and Secret Service when the Mossad pulled off the John F. Kennedy assassination, as explained by Michael Collins Piper in Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy. More recently, Jewish neo-Cons have dragged America into an aggressive war against Iraq, as explained in Mike Piper's High Priests of War.

The unprovoked invasion of Iraq, the 9-11 hoax, the combined government and national media cover-ups --all of this has degraded every classical liberal tenant of America's Founding Fathers -- and they love it.

Furthermore, if you listen to former Brig Gen Janis Karpinski on Republic Broadcasting Network, and other sources, one learns that there were plenty of Israeli advisors involved in the Abu Ghraib scandal, as well as involved in advising other branches of the U.S. Armed Forces regarding brutal methods to use against the Iraqi population. All of this has helped to degrade the U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Air Force down to the barbarous level of Israeli treatment of Palestinians --where bombing attacks against helpless civilians and the use of torture is routine --and they love it.

White America has also been continually degraded through affirmative action programs in force since the 1960's, which subordinate and marginalize talented straight white males before floods of illegal alien Third immigrants. Jews lead the pornography industry in America that degrades white women. On MTV and elsewhere sick Zionist media masters try to popularize inter-racial dating and marriage, particularly where they can show blond women mating with negroes. Jewish producers also create movies that degrade American masculinity icons such as cowboys through transparent efforts to "mainstream" homosexuality. One good example is the film Brokeback Mountain, deservedly lambasted by Jewish neo-con commentator Michael Savage (aka Michael Wien) with the following comments on the Jan 5, 2006 broadcast of Savage Nation:

Lastly, as John Embry explains in his report Move Over, Adam Smith: The Visible Hand of Uncle Sam, they have fixed our markets to make it appear that America is economically healthier than it really is while debt is rocketing out of control --and they love it.

We know that Lyndon Johnson was one of the most corrupt Presidents in U.S. history. According to Final Judgment by Michael Piper, he set the precedent for unlimited aid to Israel (p. 68, 6th edition). In his book Passionate Attachment, former Undersecretary of State George Ball stated "...by permitting a cover-up of Israel's attack on the Liberty, President Johnson told the Israelis in effect that nothing they did would induce American politicians to refuse their bidding. From that time forth, the Israelis began to act as if they had an inalienable right to American aid and backing." (Ball, p. 65-66).

LBJ not only covered up the murder of a U.S. President and a deliberate effort by Israel to wipe out a U. S. ship on the high seas, but he also lied America into the Vietnam debacle. He created out-of-control social programs, foolishly sold off most of America's gold supply (according to a source quoted by gold expert James Turk), and gave Israel everything it needed to build atomic bombs. Does it get much more lower or more treasonous than this?

As an aside, I remember watching a PBS documentary about Lyndon Johnson, in which a personal associate claimed that while he was still in the White House, Johnson voiced highly paranoid fears that the American public would find him out and come in off the streets and lynch him. One associate said that Lyndon Johnson hated himself so much after he left office that he literally smoked himself to death within a few years, consuming pack after pack of cigarettes all day long.

We also know that the space program reflected the pride of white America's traditions of pioneering spirit, valorous exploration, scientific free inquiry, and the Faustian search for knowledge that has characterized Western Civilization. Racial nationalists believe that America's Jewish oligarchy has always secretly envied, hated, and sneered at this quality in white America, and felt that these qualities can be dangerous because they can help to incite white racial pride or forms of white separatism. Therefore, by having Lyndon Johnson order NASA to fake the lunar expedition with equipment that was never intended to be more than highly experimental, proof-of-concept, very early phase prototypes, they could quietly degrade our astronauts, sully our research and development community, and tarnish German scientists such as Dr. Werner Von Braun who ran the space program --and they love it.

Simultaneously, in the short run by pulling off this hoax they can keep up appearances that America is the most technologically advanced country in the world, when all the long term demographic, manufacturing, and educational achievement indicators began to show in the late 1960's that America was really beginning to rot inside. (See my Critical Issues section). Nevertheless, maintaining the appearance of a successful lunar project would help to keep America propped up long enough for America to destroy Israel's enemies in the Middle East and accomplish other items on the Jewish supremacist agenda.

Please allow me to insert a personal note here. If there was any kid growing up in America who idolized the Space Program, it was myself. It was one of my favorite topics for school reports. I subscribed to NASA Facts, launched model rockets with a grade school rocket club, and stayed glued to the TV set throughout the first moon landing expedition.

The scene in the What Happened On the Moon documentary where Dr. Werner Von Braun claimed in the early 1960's that a single manned voyage to the moon and back would require a rocket more than twice as tall as the Empire State Building really resonated with me, and let me explain why.

While preparing school reports, I remember running across many lunar exploration studies created in the 1960's that advocated using a successive base camp strategy similar in concept to standard mountain climbing plans for Mount Everest.

In regard to Everest expeditions, climbers typically require the help of dozens of support personnel to preposition in several logistical base camps such things as oxygen bottles, food, water, bridging structures (for crevices), and other equipment. Everest climbers do not just simply start out from a Tibetan village and keep walking until they reach the summit.

I recall reading exploration plans that first called for the creation of a large space station in low earth orbit, inside the highly radioactive Van Allen belts. Here, a relatively large, armored, deep space vehicle would be assembled that could deal with meteorites and high levels of deep space radiation from solar flares and the Van Allen Belts. It would be large enough to provide adequate crew comfort during long periods of isolation. It would never come down to earth, but would instead only operate as a perpetual deep space, earth-to-moon shuttle.

With its armor protection against radiation, a deep space craft would probably look a lot more like the Millennium Falcon in Star Wars than the relatively tiny and thin-skinned Apollo modules. In fact, the large earth orbit space station, massive deep space vehicle, and large lunar lander depicted in the movie 2001 A Space Odyssey probably comprise more accurate representations of the level of infrastructural investment required to pull off successful manned lunar missions than the thin little single-voyage vehicles involved in the Apollo story.

To build all this would require hundreds, if not thousands of rocket launches from earth to amass enough parts and other material in space required for final assembly of the vehicles, equipment, and stations required for a successful lunar expedition.

Why would any rational planners feel a strong need to carry everything needed for a successful lunar expedition with just one rocket launch from earth anyway? That places unnecessary constraints on time and payload. Instead, it is much smarter to use however many rocket launches from earth and as much time as it takes to assemble in space everything required. In fact, the latter approach allows one to overbuild, oversupply, and create back up systems to dramatically reduce risk.

These outer space building projects would include not only space stations and an earth-to-moon deep space shuttle, but also lunar landers, lunar base camp modules, and lunar surface vehicles.

Getting back to the Mount Everest analogy, it bears emphasizing that professional climbers are not shy about the number of local people they hire to transport material to their base camps, what they spend for oxygen bottles and other equipment, or the number of days they spend consolidating their operations at different base camps en route to the summit.

In addition to an earth orbital station, it would also be a good idea to create a permanent space station orbiting the moon with plenty of supplies. The lunar orbiter would provide a docking station for the earth-to-the-moon deep space craft, complete with spare parts and back up systems in case of malfunction. It could carry an additional crew that could provide navigational and communications assistance for a lunar landing party. They would have an additional lunar landing vehicle as a back up in case a landing expedition got into serious trouble. If the lunar orbit station crew itself ran into trouble, they would have adequate food, water, and oxygen to await rescue by another deep space craft sent from the earth orbit space station.

Before any humans touch down on the lunar surface, America would be wise to pre-position on the lunar surface a modular building complete with plenty of food, water, power generation equipment, fuel, oxygen, and miscellaneous equipment. One could also preposition inside the lunar structure space suits with thick radiation shielding, and long umbilical cords that could extend from the lunar shelter to enable lunar walkers adequate power supplies and ventilation to handle the extreme temperatures of the lunar surface. The shelter would also require robust air lock devices for crewmen to transfer from a landing craft into the shelter, or from the shelter to the lunar surface for their lunar walks. Last, but not least, given that "crew comfort is a major factor in crew survivability" (a motto used by American M-1 Abrams tank developers), the lunar shelter would require adequate living amenities, to include toilets, showers, and bunks as well as a kitchenette. All of this requires vastly more interior space and infrastructural investment than what was contained in the Apollo modules.

In addition, back at the permanent space station orbiting earth, one would need to build a very robust lunar landing vehicle, and then tow it to the moon with the deep space vehicle.

A major problem in landing on the moon is that the lunar surface is likely to kick up enormous amounts of dust from landing rocket thrusters. (Conspicuously absent in the Apollo footage). A real lunar landing vehicle has to be capable of successfully coming in for a visually blind, radar-guided, quasi-crash-landing. To dramatically reduce the risk of flipping over, it needs to be a lot wider than the relatively tiny Apollo lunar landing vehicle.

Using the base camp method, I truly believe that America could have done it. It may have cost America ten to a hundred times more than the alleged "hoax," but it still would have been a relatively small expenditure compared to the money America has wasted in its Great Society programs and foreign entanglements.

Perhaps the greatest damage of the hoax is that it cheated America out of making the real achievement. Admittedly America's technology was more primitive in the 1960's and 1970's, however, when one is willing to go to the expense of creating successive "base camps," one creates huge margins for error. Each logistical outpost can hold many "fail-safe" redundancies for each stage of the operation.

I believe in America and love this country. I believe in what it can accomplish when run by honest people. It seems intuitively reasonable to me that while America's capabilities may have been relatively "clunky" on a technological level back in the late 1960's and early 1970's compared to today, American scientists still could have devised strategies to have successfully accomplished the man-to-the-moon mission during that period.

Then again, getting back to the racial nationalist viewpoint, the hoax cheated people like Dr. Werner Von Braun, whose lifelong dream was to accomplish a successful manned expedition. In fact, they not only cheated von Braun, but this schmiel also quietly degraded and defiled him just like the astronauts and the rest of the American scientific community. America's controlled national media has remained complicit in the cover-up, just as it has sustained the JFK assassination and the 9-11 cover-ups.

Remember, Werner Von Braun was a former S.S. officer whose V-2 program was personally supported by Hitler. His early 1960's statements about the rocket requirements to get to the moon were honest, suggesting that the deception orders came from a higher level. I would not be surprised if behind the scenes the Zionists threatened him and other German scientists with war crime trials if they dared to open their mouths and expose the hoax. Perhaps they thought that some day if this thing blew open they could pin all the blame for the hoax on von Braun and his German associates --and they would love that.

As a last comment, please be aware that many libertarians might observe that the Space Race was actually a schmiel wrapped inside an even bigger schmiel, which involved the arms race and other Cold War competition between two overweening super states. Without America functioning as a neo-Jacobin global welfare-warfare super state, Israel could never get the support it needs to survive. Therefore American big government statists needed to pump up reports from the CIA overstating the Soviet threat, and then after the Soviet Union collapsed, find a new enemy amidst alleged Arab terrorists.

Libertarians might ask what is the point of making deep space infrastructural investment if it is way ahead of any legitimate free market payback on investment?

My response is that whatever we do, we are best off in the long run by being honest about it. Politicians needed to explain to the public that going to the moon might really cost $300 billion to a trillion rather than somewhere under $50 billion in 1969 dollars. (These figures I am providing are pure guesswork on my part). If the psychic gains and scientific spin-offs from having a real space program are worth $1 trillion to the majority of Americans --and all the real risks, costs, limitations, and plausible gains are adequately and honestly disclosed to the public and debated through a viable democratic process -- then I personally support a space crusade. As much as I despise big government projects, and would want to privatize space initiatives as much as possible, all of this would still be a lot healthier than the extremely costly aggressive war crusades America is currently waging in the Middle East on behalf of Israel.

Sadly, the reality in America today is that we are effectively bankrupt and can hardly afford any type of grandiose government project for any purpose any more.