Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

Very Interesting....

This drunk confession of film producer Stanley Kubrick confirms of a FAKE Moon landing.

Filmmaker T. Patrick Murray interviewed Kubrick three days before his death in March 1999. He was forced to sign an 88-page NDA to keep the contents of the interview a secret for 15 years.

Find a realistic picture taken FROM the moon. There is none! In 2016, drones, ion thrusters, 4k digital images and zero clearly real pics FROM the moon
So yes... Nasa is a Hoax and don't believe a thing they feed the main stream media.

A stunning new film "Shooting Stanley Kubrick" has emerged 15 years after Stanley Kubrick’s death in which Kubrick admits that the NASA moon landings were faked will wikileaks 2017 reveal this?

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

lmao

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

Lol. I thought this scripted hoax was thoroughly exposed when the videos of the interviewer feeding the fake Kubrick lines surfaced. Guess not.

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

Nice try but that's not Stanley Kubrick in the video.
Remember when Stanley Kubrick

Only proves if you say something enough times in an echo chamber then you'll eventually believe it's true or not true.

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

WHAT????

Are you accusing me of fake news? I don't even work for CNN. :D

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

It's a sad state that a lot of people are in right now. Anything that gives them a chance to blow a whistle and make noise about the government, they will jump without any research.

And I say that knowing that our government has been anything but clean throughout the years. But it's become common practice to just assume that everything is a lie. You can't even be proud of anything your country did without someone telling you it was a fake. There have been some government hoaxes, but all this moon landing and 9/11 "inside job" hysteria is just total bunk.

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

9/11 "inside job" hysteria is just total bunk?

http://www2.ae911truth.org/images/infoitems/janes.jpg

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

Yes, my friend, I'm afraid so.

World Trade Center numbers 3 and 5 were also destroyed as a result of falling debris and subsequent fire damage, along with over a dozen other buildings that were either destroyed or damaged.

So, given that all of these buildings were being destroyed, it's not difficult to imagine how a foreign reporter who likely had no idea which buildings are which, could have mistakenly stated the wrong building. How many of us had any clue about any of the other buildings, aside from the twin towers, before that day? Probably not many, because no one really cared. That reporter should have been more careful to make sure she got the right building, but we all know the media wants to report first and fact check later. If they ever fact check at all.

So that is hardly a smoking gun, certainly in my opinion. But the bigger issue I have, is what does the collapse of building 7 prove to anyone? If the twin towers were supposedly blown up (which is equally lacking in facts) and the planes were just flown into the buildings to distract people from "the truth", then why cause building 7 to fall WITHOUT any planes? How is that supposed to help their cause?

I've heard theories about the government wanting to blow it up to destroy evidence of their plot that might have been hidden there... Couldn't they just use a shredder or a burn pile, without blowing up an entire building? It makes no sense.

But there was zero evidence of any explosives found at that site. I have a couple of different sources that can pretty easily explain the collapse of building 7 as well as the twin towers. It really is common sense to me when it comes to the twin towers, but for conspiracy theorists, they want more, and when you show them more they say "that's what they want you to believe", without really considering the probability of what the reports suggest, and putting it to the common sense test.

They ignore it and come up with a different theory, instead. Here's one link, and if you wish to continue the conversation, I'd be happy to go further. World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

Explain how building 7 (STEEL) fell at the same speed as someone jumping out the window? :confused:
WTC 1 & 2 both fell as the same speed. IMPOSSIBLE.

That my friend is impossible to explain unless you have controlled demolition.

Sorry... I believe what is in front of my eyes. My dad was an architecture and was the VP of a steel building manufacture. He didn't believe it from the first day. When I talked to him, he said that was not possible.

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

The problem with saying that you believe what is in front of your eyes is that if you don't know enough about what you are seeing, or you are seeing an incomplete representation, your eyes won't do you any good. Let's not forget you posted a video that started this very thread, that was quickly proven false. I'm not trying to take a shot at you, I'm merely pointing out the problem with taking things at face value, because someone wants you to believe a certain narrative.

With all due respect to your dad, he might believe it was impossible, but unless he has built a skyscraper, built it the exact way WTC7 was designed, then set that building on fire and let it burn for 7 or 8 hours, then he couldn't possibly know or understand what happened. That's why people who DID know how it was designed, and who are trained to understand the dynamics of what those fires could do were sent to investigate. And they gave a very clear answer.

That video you showed is the same one all of these self proclaimed "truthers" on the internet always show. It is a blatantly dishonest attempt to deceive people into believing their narrative. That video begins at the final collapse, and leaves out the previous EIGHT SECONDS of footage that prove exactly what the NIST concluded. The video you showed was just several different angles of the exact same time span, that ALL left out the previous 8 seconds.

It leaves out the collapse of the penthouse that sticks out above the roof of WTC 7 on the left. Here's the video of the entire collapse.
Now you see what I mean by "incomplete representation".

I'm guessing you probably declined to read the link I left you previously, that described the thermal expansion due to the hours of uncontrolled fires, but I'll give you a quicker rundown of events. The sprinklers did not work because they were connected to the city's water supply that was damaged from the collapses of the twin towers. The expansion from the hours of intense heat caused steel girders, beginning on the lower floors, to disconnect from their supporting columns. The area where the initial failures occurred took place directly below the penthouse I mentioned before, and that is why you clearly see it collapse first. This created a cascade of floor failures that basically left just an outer shell of a building. It's at that point that others decide to begin their video where the rest of the building comes down with little resistance. It took 14 seconds, roughly, for that building to fall. A far cry from the misinformation others have given.

As a bonus, here's a video from a fellow who takes the time to animate these events and show just how the events described, occurred, and offers some very interesting analysis to rebut some of the theories.

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

Thank you burningmedal for posting all of that information. There is a ton of other information that pertains to that day that could be wrong on both sides.

For the record... This thread was about the Moon Landing and I did not say it was a hoax. Everything posted at the beginning of this thread was copied and pasted from Youtube.

Hey... Our season is over so I just wanted to make fun of something.

Thanks for the 911 stuff. That was good.

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

Thank you for taking the time to consider the information, and not shouting at me, as others do on this subject.

I wasn't sure whether or not you believed the moon Landing was faked, but I figured you were leaning that way, when I read "very interesting". I thought you wrote that. Also, it seems that very often when I debate 9/11 theories with people, they believe the moon landings were faked, as well.

At any rate, I don't doubt that there are government cover-ups. As a matter of fact, we know there have been some. But specifically as it pertains to 9/11, there are a lot of videos claiming this or that, and many of them deliberately leave things out. That bothers me, given the nature of what happened that day, that people (not you) would edit videos to try to stir controversy. I'm all for the truth, but some of these people have preconceived agendas when they selectively use only information that supports their theory.

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

And the truth of the matter for 911 is that we will never know the truth. The "Truthers" bring out many great questions and things that on the surface, doesn't make sense.

Dad and I biggest problem is that those buildings should have never fallen straight down much less that fast. This should be impossible because we are talking about steel and not cards. It should have shown massive resistance. Remember... unlike building 9 the bottom was still in tack. Both towers should have at least slow down when falling.... but instead you have free fall speed and massive clouds of concrete dust? Plus for 8+ weeks after you have fire of steel soundarya that burned at the surface? Wow...

Check out this video... In any case, we won't solve it. Just considering what really happened.

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

And the truth of the matter for 911 is that we will never know the truth. The "Truthers" bring out many great questions and things that on the surface, doesn't make sense.

Dad and I biggest problem is that those buildings should have never fallen straight down much less that fast. This should be impossible because we are talking about steel and not cards. It should have shown massive resistance. Remember... unlike building 9 the bottom was still in tack. Both towers should have at least slow down when falling.... but instead you have free fall speed and massive clouds of concrete dust?

Plus for 8+ weeks after... you have a fire of steel soundarya that burned on the surface. According to Google steel melts at around 2500-2750°F. What made that temperature? When does kerosene (plane fuel) and falling medal do that? Wow... I can't explain either.

Check out this video... In any case, we won't solve it. Just considering what really happened.

Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
 

Was that the first time.