Conspiracies & False Flags
20 Ways to Question Your Reality Tags: Conspiracy Empowerment GMO food Pharmaceutical Vaccinations

By Makia Freeman

To question your reality in today’s world is a sure sign of sanity. In an ever delusional world where lying newsmen tell fake news, where mendacious politicians spin every event, where mass murder is conducted under the guise of a fake war on terror, where mass-produced food poisons and where medicine kills, it is a sign of great strength of character to challenge the supposed authority figures around you. It is a sign of something pure and special if you can preserve your open mind and curiosity in the midst of so much propaganda. It is a sign of courage to ask the tough questions that mainstream journalists fear to touch. Here are 25 ways to question your reality:

1. If the point of water fluoridation is not mass medication of the population, and really to help people’s teeth, why is fluoride added to baby nursery water when young babies have no teeth?

2. Why is fluoride, which is really a combination of hydrofluorosilicic acid, sodium fluorosilicate, and sodium fluoride, pure and healthy enough to put in municipal water, yet is an unpurified industrial byproduct considered a toxic hazard by the EPA and used in rat poison, pesticides and Big Pharma antidepressant drugs like Prozac and Paxil?

3. If vaccines are safe, why do they contain known carcinogens such as mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde and MSG?


4. If vaccines are safe, why do they contain so many toxic and dangerous adjuvants, such as acetone (solvent used in fingernail polish remover), ammonium sulfate, glycerol, phenoxyethanol (antifreeze), polysorbate 80, tri(n)butylphosphate (a neurotoxin) and squalene?

5. If vaccines are great medicine, why do they contain human diploid cells, i.e. aborted fetal tissue?

6. Speaking of cannibalism and the forced ingestion of aborted fetal tissue, why do huge corporations like Pepsi use aborted fetal tissue in testing (and possibly making) their sugary drinks?

7. If vaccines are so effective, why did the scientific journal The Lancet publish a study that found that flu vaccines were only 1.5% effective, i.e. they only worked on 1.5 people out of 100?

8. If vaccines are so safe and effective, why does the Government grant legal immunity to Big Pharma companies that produce vaccines, so there is no way you can properly sue them for damages when vaccines produce horrific side effects?

9. If GMOs are “substantially equivalent” to non-GM food, why do they cause organ disruption and organ failure as found by 19 studies?

10. If glyphosate (the main ingredient of Monsanto’s RoundUp) is perfectly safe for humans, why did the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) of the WHO (World Health Organization) recently categorize it as a class 2a carcinogen, i.e. a probable carcinogen?

11. If the ultimate purpose of GMOs is not to genetically modify humanity itself, why do GMOs lead to horizontal gene transfer, where the modified genes in GM food jump to bacteria in the human gut and change their DNA structure?

12. If UFOs and ETs don’t exist, then why have the BritishFrench and other Governments released their UFO files showing thousands of photographs and other documents proving their existence?

13. If cancer were really a terminal disease, why have so many people completely cured themselves using natural methods such as Vitamin B17 (laetrile)DCA, the Gerson Therapy, the Budwig Diet and others?

14. If the point of all the draconian laws passed since 9/11, including the Patriot Act and other means of mass surveillance, is to keep you safe from terrorism, why are almost all of the FBI’s “successes” in capturing “terrorists” the result of sting operations the FBI engineered itself?

15. If so many of your rights and freedom are being taken away under the guise of saving you from terrorism, why are you 58 times more likely in the US to die from a policeman shooting you than a terrorist?

16. If the mass surveillance grid being set up is really to keep you secure, then why has the NSA failed to foil a single terrorist plot, despite having access to every electronic transaction (call, text, email, etc.) made by every American?

17. If false flag events like 9/11, 7/7, Sandy Hook and the Boston marathon bombing were really carried out by bogeymen like “Islamic terrorists” and “lone nutter” shooters, why do they all share the common thread of occurring alongside a government-executed drill – at the exact same time, at the exact same place, for the exact same purpose?

18. If the world really were undergoing manmade global warming, why did so many scientists fudge, conceal and distort the data as exposed in the ClimateGate emails?

19. If you are crazy to question your reality and not believe everything the Government tells you, then why did scientific studies like this one reveal that those who actively question their reality (dubbed conspiracy theorists) are less hostile and more fact-based than conventional believers?

20. If all the main things that happen in the world are really by chance (coincidence theory) as opposed to being planned (conspiracy theory), then how can we explain the existence of many New World Order accounts and documents (click here for the 3 most chilling) which have laid out the plan for world domination, in astonishingly accurate detail, 30 to 50 to 100 years ago?

Question your reality. It’s the solution to the global conspiracy. If enough of us keep doing it, we will grow in awareness in unstoppable numbers, and the conspiracy will collapse like the house of cards that it truly is.


Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the global conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.


The Bob Dylan Conspiracy Tags: Art and Music Conspiracy Forbidden Knowledge Social Engineering

Miles W. Mathis

Some readers apparently believe I enjoy yanking the rug out from under anything and everything, but the truth is these papers are as hard for me to write as they are for you to read. Although I do enjoy learning the truth—whatever form it may take—that doesn’t make the loss any easier. I grew up in the same world you did and took as gospel most of things you did. Despite my recent paper on the Beatles, I still own—on vintage vinyl—most of their records. I also own several of Dylan’s early records. I thought a lot of the lyrics were brilliant and I still do. I no longer believe Dylan wrote them, but that doesn’t change my opinion of the lyrics. His early performances are also often very good, and nothing will take that from him. I will show you a lot of leading evidence here, but none of it leads us to the idea he lip-synced. What would be the point of that? Like John Lennon and T. S. Eliot and some of the others I have exposed, Dylan was not without talent. But also like them, he is not who you thought he was.

The latest clues we have of that are very recent, and rather than start at the beginning, I will start at the end, with them. In 2012, Dylan was given a medal by President Obama. He accepted it with a grin. The Dylan we were sold in the 60’s wouldn’t have done that. You will say that he got old and lost his ideals, and I wish that were so. It isn’t. He is the same person now he always was, he just lost his pretty face and his lyricists. The same can be said of Joan Baez, pictured above. She is still an Obama supporter. She has kept up the fake-liberal façade a lot better than Bob, but she is the same person she was back then. That is to say, a controller of the opposition. A phony. An actor. A person hired to play a part.

Even more recently, Dylan has been doing Chrysler commercials. Don’t blame me for tearing out your heart with this paper, when your heart should have already been bled dry by watching those commercials. It is sort of like watching Gandhi as the spokesman for Monsanto, or Martin Luther King schlepping pharmaceuticals for Pfizer.


But let’s go back to the beginning, when Dylan was supposed to be the voice of his generation. Once again, the evidence is pretty easy to compile. As usual, Wikipedia—which you would expect to be totally whitewashed—is full of red flags. All you have to do is open your eyes. Most people know Dylan was born Robert Zimmerman, to a prominent Jewish family in Duluth, Minnesota. Most don’t realize how prominent they really were. I didn’t know until recently, when I read that his “uncles and great grandfather owned movie theaters around Hibbing.” With more research, that fact grew:


His great-grandfather and uncles owned the biggest movie theaters in Hibbing, Minnesota, allowing a young Dylan to watch films for free.

Hibbing had a population of only 17,000 in 1960, so maybe that still isn’t saying much. But it isn’t the size that is the first red flag, it is the business. They were Jews in the movie business. No, they weren’t making the movies in Hollywood (as far as we know), but they were still selling fiction. One of the fictions they are still selling is the one above, about Dylan’s great-grandfather. The lie can be spotted by any clear eye at Wikipedia, where they also tell us

Dylan’s paternal grandparents, Zigman and Anna Zimmerman, emigrated from Odessa in the Russian Empire now Ukraine, to the United States following anti-Semitic pogroms of 1905.[6] His maternal grandparents, Ben and Florence Stone, were Lithuanian Jews who arrived in the United States in 1902.

Do you see it? His four grandparents didn’t arrive in the US until 1902 and 1905, so his great- grandparents must have been back in Odessa and Lithuania. And yet 55 years later, his great- grandfather is supposed to co-own movie theaters in Hibbing? We are told that Zigman Zimmerman was born in 1875, so his father would have been born around 1855. That would make him 100 years old in 1955. The dates don’t work.

You will say the great-grandfather in question was on the other side, but the dates don’t work there, either. You can see that generation is too old to have owned anything when Bob was old enough to be going to movies. It was B. H. Edelstein who was supposed to own the theater, but he should have been almost as old as Zigman’s father. Bob’s mother Beatty was born in 1915, so she was 26 when Bob was born—not young for the time. She was just four years younger than Bob’s father, who was born in 1911. So if we put Zigman’s father’s birth at 1855, we can put B. H.’s birth at around 1860. The dates simply don’t work. My great-grandfather might have still owned a business in the 1950’s, but Bob Dylan is 22 years older than I am. My guess is they are trying to downplay the Zimmerman holdings and influence in that part of Minnesota by moving it back a couple of generations and telling you only a partial truth. Given Dylan’s career, it is clear the Zimmerman’s were extraordinarily well-connected, and not just in Hibbing or Duluth. They had already created Bob’s welcome in New York long before he got there.

Before we move on to the big cities, let’s look a little closer at Hibbing. A list of prominent people from Hibbing throws up some real head-scratchers, including Vincent Bugliosi, Bruce Carlson, Gus Hall, and Chi Chi LaRue. Gus Hall is the former leader of the US Communist Party. If you want to know why I see that as a red flag here, consult this recent paper, which exposes Marx himself as an early Intelligence asset. Bruce Carlson is a 4-star general and director of the NRO. The NRO is one of the big-5 Intelligence agencies, along with CIA, DIA, NSA and NGA. Carlson is also one of the heads of the Mormon Church. And of course Vincent Bugliosi was the attorney who prosecuted Charles Manson—who we now know was just an actor. [If you haven’t read those linked papers, you won’t get far into this one. Read them, come back to this one, and you will feel differently than you do right now.]

So some strange things appear to be coming out of Hibbing. We find more strange things from the Zimmermans. Bob’s father Abe worked for Standard Oil. That is Rockefellers, of course. You will say, “So what, maybe that means he owned a gas station.” No, we are told he was management level by 1941. Besides, any link to the Rockefellers is a red flag. I suggest this was the main link to New York City.

But let’s skip ahead a bit. In Bob’s highschool yearbook, next to his picture, it says, “To join Little Richard.” That’s curious phrasing. Not “To be the next Little Richard,” or something like that, but “To join Little Richard.” To join him in what? Wearing mascara? Being a drag queen? Remember, these phrases aren’t chosen by the kids themselves. They are chosen by the yearbook writers, who are usually making a joke. So the choice of Little Richard is both strange and telling. It appears his classmates knew something about Bob we didn’t and maybe still don’t. But even if we assume Bob wanted to “join Little Richard” in the ranks of famous musicians—as the phrase is usually read—the choice of Little Richard is still strange. As with the Bobby Vee connection a few months later, it doesn’t really make any sense. What did Dylan ever have in common with Little Richard or Bobby Vee? We can see the connection to Woody Guthrie, which we are sold in 1961, but Little Richard and BobbyVee? C’mon!

In 1959, Bob Dylan was 18 and Bobby Vee was 15. You should have a raft of questions at this point, like, “How does a 15-year-old boy from Fargo, North Dakota, sell a song to a record company, and then get a contract with the even larger Liberty Records in that same year?” Do you really think the record companies were that desperate for talent? Or do you think maybe Vee had some connections due to his family? Of course we aren’t told what those connections were (although I would bet good money someone in the Velline family {Bobby’s Vee’s real name} had married a Rockefeller or Vanderbilt or something). According to his official bio, Vee’s career started in 1959 when he was chosen to fill in for Buddy Holly, etc. on “the day the music died.” But that was in Moorhead, MI. Why would they choose a 15-year-old boy from Fargo to play in Moorhead, across state lines? Vee was a minor and couldn’t even get across state lines legally without someones help. He couldn’t drive himself, and anyone but his parents could be stopped for transporting a minor. Yet we are told Vee and his band volunteered to fill in, and were accepted. Is that at all believable? Age 15 isn’t even high school. That is middle school. This is a middle-school band filling in for Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens and the Big Bopper. Do you think the ticket holders would stand for that? We are told the gig was a success. Is that believable? Three major stars dead in a cornfield, and the show goes on with a middle school band? Who writes this stuff?

Want to hear something else weird? What did these middle school boys supposedly call themselves? The Shadows. Cue Twilight Zone music. Here are Vee’s own words on this, from the liner notes to his 1963 tribute album I Remember Buddy Holly:

About a week before this, I had just organized a vocal and instrumental group of five guys. Our style was modeled after Buddy’s approach and we had been rehearsing with Buddy’s hits in mind. When we heard the radio plea for talent, we went in and volunteered. We hadn’t even named the group up to that time, sowe gave ourselves a name on the spot, calling ourselves “The Shadows”.

What a lucky coincidence, right? A week before Buddy Holly dies in a plane crash near Fargo, ND, a group of middle school boys in Fargo, ND, start a Buddy Holly band and begin rehearsing his hits. Their lead singer memorizes all his lyrics in just one week, and when Holly dies, this 15 year old fills in for him at the local dance, becoming an overnight sensation. You may buy that, but I don’t. This is just a cover story for something underhanded, the least sinister of which is that some rich family used the Buddy Holly tragedy to promote their kids, and the most sinister of which is that they made it happen.

That was February of 1959. Before the year is out, Bobby Vee will have cut his own record—a Buddy Holly copy called “Suzie Baby”—sold it to a company capable of releasing it, and scored a hit with it. In that same year, he will be signed by an even larger record company, and will be touring. In that same year, Bob Dylan will play with the band in Minneapolis under the stage name Elston Gunnn.

You should not only ask yourself how Vee scored all that action as a 15-year-old boy in less than a year, but what the connection between Dylan and him was. Dylan was a rich Jewish boy just out of high school. Why was he chosen over all others to play keyboards with Vee? Liberty records didn’t know anyone else in Minneapolis/St. Paul who could play the keyboards?

And what is Elston Gunnn? Is that supposed to be clever? You should ask yourself this: does the cleverness of that stage name match in any way the cleverness of the person who wrote Shelter from the Storm or Like a Rolling Stone? The greatest folk lyricist in American music history starts out his career as El Stun Gun? That would be like finding out John Keats first choice as a nom de plume was Holden McGroin.

That name doesn’t match the later Dylan hagiography, but it does match other things Dylan was doing at the time. He spent a short time at the University of Minnesota, where he pledged Sigma Alpha Mu. Yes, Dylan was frat boy. Surprised? You shouldn’t be. It fits his medal acceptance from Obama in 2012. Dylan was never the rebel you thought he was. Rebels don’t pledge fraternities, it pretty much goes without saying.

Then we are fed the line about Dylan going to New York to visit his hero Woody Guthrie, who was in the hospital with Huntington’s disease. What we are never told is why Guthrie agreed to see him. Dylan was a college-dropout nobody. If you are a famous guy in hospital with a serious disease, do you want to see every stranger kid who knocks on the door? Does the hospital even allow it? I doubt it. And why would Ramblin’ Jack Elliott “befriend” Dylan? Elliott was already a famous guy in the folk music scene at the time, and Dylan was a 19-year-old nobody. I don’t care how talented you are, it doesn’t work that way. High school kids don’t just go to New York City and hook up with famous people. It doesn’t happen now and it didn’t happen then. You have to have some sort of entrée. You have to be introduced. In the bios, they always skip over that. You are expected to believe Dylan just met these guys in a coffeeshop or something and whipped out his harmonica, blowing them away with his soul. Again, it doesn’t work that way. They make you think these older guys are just sitting around stoops looking for new young talent. They aren’t. Older guys are normally trying to snuff young talent, since it is the young talent that will displace them. That is how the world really works. If Elliott was really promoting Dylan, it is because he was being paid to promote him. It appears Dylan had already been chosen as the front for a big enterprise at that time, and people like Elliott were simply used as cogs in that enterprise—to give it ballast and legitimacy. Elliott is also Jewish, the son of a wealthy New York surgeon, so it is not hard to find the first connection.

We see the same connection to Allen Ginsberg, who was also from a wealthy Jewish family. These people were connected in ways we aren’t told, and it isn’t just a Jewish connection. If you want to know why I think Ginsberg is a red flag, you have to read this recent paper on the Beat Generation, where I show it was also manufactured by US Intelligence. So just seeing Dylan hobnobbing with Ginsberg was enough to give me the clue. Ginsberg, like most of these people, was a big creep and a towering phony, and no one would be hanging out with him who wasn’t seeking promotion by the entertainment mafia (which wasn’t just Jewish—see, for instance, Joseph Kennedy). We don’t know who was really writing Dylan’s songs (yet), but I assume it wasn’t Ginsberg. Ginsberg couldn’t write for sour apples. Ginsberg was in desperate need of ghost poets behind him, but he was stuffed too tight to use them. The songs attributed to Dylan most often aren’t that great as poetry, either, but they are top-notch as songs and are way beyond anything Ginsberg ever wrote. I will flesh out that opinion below, where we will look at a few of the songs line by line.

We see more red flags early on, when in 1961, at age 20, Dylan scored a review in the New York Times. As with Ezra Pound’s meteoric rise in London in 1908, Dylan’s meteoric rise in New York in 1961 simply isn’t believable. He had been playing in Greenwich Village for only about six months, had no original material, hadn’t written any of his great early songs yet, and somehow the New York Times does a review of him? He was the opening act for the Greenbriar Boys at Gerde’s Folk City. There probably weren’t ten people in the audience. So let’s ask the question begged. Who wrote the review? Robert Shelton, who was really Robert Shapiro, from another family of wealthy Jews. Who was booking Gerde’s at the time? Charlie Rothschild. Does that name ring a bell? Do you think he might be Jewish also? Wealthy family? Also remember who is behind the New York Times. The Sulzberger family, extremely wealthy Jews who also founded the New York Stock Exchange. Even before the New York Times and all other media were taken over by the CIA in the 1950’s, that paper had been controlled by extremely vested interests, to say the least.

So clearly, someone had a plan for Dylan. Or, we should say, he was the front man for some operation. We will call it Operation Rolling Stone.

We know Intelligence was running all sorts of secret operations in the 1960’s. Many of them have since been partially de-classified, like Operation Mockingbird, Operation Bluebird, Operation Chaos, MKULTRA, and many many more. But there appears to have been an even larger, more fundamental Operation beneath all of them. This was Operation Rolling Stone. It was the promotion of change in all forms. To what end? The promotion of trade. The Jews and Gentiles that would run the 20th century were masters of trade. They were money lenders and money changers and money makers. These families had always been very good at making money, but in the 20th century they discovered a way to accelerate this money making beyond even their own dreams. They discovered that accelerated trade depended directly on accelerated change. The more change of any kind they could introduce into

society, the more money they would make. This is simply because change can always be accompanied with new products. New products = new wealth. More products = more wealth. Therefore, the fundamental and underlying Operation of the 20th century has been CHANGE.

This was revolutionary in every way, since humans don’t really like change. Like cats and all other animals, they prefer things to stay as they are. Living creatures tend to equate change with discomfort. So to promote change was to go against human nature. It wasn’t something that would happen on its own. It had to be manufactured and constantly sold.

It was revolutionary in another way, since it went against all tradition. Tradition had always taught that change was something to be avoided. All the major religions sought balance and harmony, neither of which could be maintained in times of rapid change.

It was revolutionary in a third way, since traditionally trade had been considered dirty. Thoreau was still teaching in the 1840’s that “trade curses everything it touches.” Gentlemen in the early 19th century looked down on trade, as we see from reading Dickens or Austen, or watching Downton Abbey. The English aristocracy mocked American wealth, since it came from trade. So you would think it would be difficult to flip the world 180 degrees, taking us to the present where most believe that trade sanctifies everything it touches.

Well, it was difficult. It required hiring millions of people and spending vast amounts of capital over more than a century. But the investment paid off, as we see. Accelerated change has made the billionaires into trillionaires. They are now so rich they have to hide their wealth. The wealthiest families won’t even allow their names to appear on the Forbes lists, the totals are so obscene. For instance, the Rockefellers are hundreds of times as wealthy as Bill Gates, but we are told they only have a few billion. The truth is, the Rockefellers had made their first trillion by 1930 (in today’s dollars). We are told they gave most of it away and are now worth less than then. Don’t believe it.

But what does this all have to do with Bob Dylan? Dylan was just one player in a vast operation of change. And one of the clues is the “Rolling Stone” meme. We see it coming up several times, in things that don’t appear to be related. We see Dylan’s famous song, we see the band the Rolling Stones, and we see the magazine Rolling Stone. All came out in the 1960’s. Why? Have you ever asked that question? Maybe. Has anyone ever explained that to you? I don’t think so.

To understand it, we have to go back to the maxim that started them all:

A rolling stone gathers no moss.

More Here>>


If the Moon Landings Were Real, Then Why is NASA Stumped by This? Tags: Brainwash Fake moon landing globalist agenda he awakening

Buck Rogers, Staff Writer
Waking Times

During the cold war era the Soviet Union and the United States were locked in an arms and technology race, each nation wanting to prove their dominance over the other, each striving to be the next reigning superpower in a world still shattered by the second world war. The Soviet’s took the lead when in April of 1961, cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin successfully orbited the earth and returned home safely. In May, president John F. Kennedy made his special message to Congress on urgent national needs, declaring America’s intention to send a man to the moon.

“I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space.” -President John F. Kennedy, Address to Congress on Urgent National Needs, May 25, 1961

And so we did. In 1969, under the leadership of President Johnson, the entire world watched in grainy, black-and-white awe as the ‘giant leap for mankind’ was broadcast on television sets around the globe. Neil Armstrong planted the American flag in the coarse lifeless dust of the moon, and the space race was over. America victorious. Take a look at this marvelous achievement here:

Fast forward 45 years to a much more technologically advanced and interconnected age, where ideas spread like wildfire, and questions that have gone unanswered for generations are easily put to millions of people. One person’s ideas and understanding of our world can swiftly be supplemented by the knowledge of many others, dots are easier to connect, and truth is more freely revealed.

Were the Apollo moon landings faked by the government to gain political advantage at a time when it was not technologically possible to land a man on the moon then bring him home safely?


Many alternative researchers and skeptics of government and cultural narratives have put together a substantial and rather captivating case that the moon landings were faked with the help of emerging television and film technologies.

They posit that the government hired acclaimed film director Stanley Kubrick to stage the landings by creating a convincing movie set in a secret location. Evidence to the support the idea that the video is indeed an elaborate forgery includes anomalies such as the appearance of multiple sources of light in the footage, the flag planted by Armstrong seems to be waving in an environment with no wind, there does not appear to be an impact crater from the lunar landing module, unexplainable objects appear in reflection on helmet visors, the unusual slow-motion effect of the astronauts walking on the lunar surface, the lack of visible stars in the background, and more.

The footage is one thing, but many point to the existence of a dangerous concentration of solar and cosmic radiation that surrounds the earth as proof that Apollo never made it to the moon. Between the earth and the moon lie what is known as the Van Allen radiation belts.

“The Van Allen radiation belts are a torus (doughnut shape) of energetic charged particles circling Earth around its magnetic equator and held in place by Earth’s magnetic field. The main belts extend from an altitude of about 1,000 to 60,000 kilometers above the surface in which region radiation levels vary. Most of the particles that form the belts are thought to come from solar wind and other particles by cosmic rays.” -Robert A. Braeunig

VanAllenProbes Decal2012_4Print

In order for the Apollo, or any lunar mission, to be successful, the equipment and crew aboard the spacecraft would have to be adequately shielded from exposure from the intense radiation surrounding planet earth.

Robert A. Braeunig, author of Rocket & Space Technology has put together a compelling scientific refutation of the Apollo hoax theory, making the scientific case that the trajectory of the Apollo spacecraft allowed the vessel to avoid the highest concentrations of energy in the torus shaped Van Allen belts which do not fully encircle the earth. With the right trajectory, he purports, it would only be necessary to shield against the possibility of an unexpected increase in solar activity, something Apollo was indeed prepared for.

This makes sense and would seem to close the case, but for many the question still remains, especially so in light of the fact that there have since been no more lunar missions, and almost 50 years later NASA’s Orion mission is apparently just now trying to solve the challenge of the Van Allen belts.

In the following video clip a NASA engineer working on the Orion project explains the challenge of bringing a ship and crew into space well above low earth orbit, and beyond the radiation belts. Speaking about their effort he remarks, “we must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space,” implying that this question had not already been solved by the research and accomplishments of Apollo.

If in the 1960’s we were able to successfully overcome the challenge of reaching the moon and beyond, then why is it an issue now?

In addition to the questions raised by the Van Allen belts and the footage of the moon landings, there are many other interesting scientific and political anomalies surrounding the authenticity of the Apollo lunar missions. A quick look down this rabbit hole can easily suck you in all the way.

For a more comprehensive view of the information supporting the theory that the moon landings were faked, take a look at the following presentation or search online for more resources. And for a reasonable refutation of some of the alternative theories on this, take a look at the work of Robert A. Braeunig.

About the Author

Buck Rogers is the earth bound incarnation of that familiar part of our timeless cosmic selves, the rebel within. He is a surfer of ideals and meditates often on the promise of happiness in a world battered by the angry seas of human thoughtlessness. He is a staff writer for



Search a Blog

April 2015 (15)
March 2015 (400)
February 2015 (374)
January 2015 (454)
December 2014 (457)
November 2014 (524)
October 2014 (543)
September 2014 (509)
August 2014 (462)
July 2014 (447)
June 2014 (405)
May 2014 (500)
April 2014 (538)
Blog Categories

Support B.O.L.E.

Thank you for supporting the BOLE

Your support to have the B.O.L.E. (incl.all articles) open and free for everyone is much appreciated.

NEW *** We also take



Products for your Wellness


Important: For all products chose at the top of the page the  language (English or German) and currency!

 click HERE to reach all products

TATWellness deliver worldwide.

In Your Service



This website is powered by Spruz

Live Support