Brother Bart's at it again...

[benparry]

OBM which Facebook group is this on. I've been blocked from a few so i might not be able to see it

[onebigmonkey]

It's the Moon-Landing Hoax one. Jarrah is a regular contributor:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1842692022608212

He, by the way, has raised a quizzical eyebrow at a paragraph in the FOI response, one which basically says "If you aren't Sgt Akers, you can't have the full details". He fails to notice the rest of the letter that says "If Sgt Akers is dead, his living relatives need to give permission". He's implying some sort of nefarious motive, when really it's just standard data protection. Akers' widow is still alive, ask her!

[benparry]

Ah ok yeah i do chat on that one. I commented on Mike Chaplins post the other day

[onebigmonkey]

Ah ok yeah i do chat on that one. I commented on Mike Chaplins post the other day

My mistake, my search history confused me - the one to which I was referring was the very similarly named one here:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1090895674258943/?ref=share

The site admins are making a lot noise, and have opened a youtube channel to store their Facebook live streams. They're very intolerant of trolls (ie anyone who disagrees with them), and post the usual regurgitated easily debunked tripe.

[benparry]

Ah ok yeah i do chat on that one. I commented on Mike Chaplins post the other day

My mistake, my search history confused me - the one to which I was referring was the very similarly named one here:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1090895674258943/?ref=share

The site admins are making a lot noise, and have opened a youtube channel to store their Facebook live streams. They're very intolerant of trolls (ie anyone who disagrees with them), and post the usual regurgitated easily debunked tripe.

Ha i am actually blocked from that one. It's amazing that somebody like me who is very lacking in the technical aspects of Apollo and has only learned what i know mainly from this site and others would be blocked whilst lots of other who are much more educated are ok to view. In my opinion it's because hoax people don't like those who argue with them all the time and i go back to my comment on a thread before when i said the hoax issue is a mental one.

[onebigmonkey]

Bart's doubling down on his story and adding juicy embellishments. In this youtube interview

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeL9IoC6roc

He now claims that Cyrus Akers murdered a co-worker in order to maintain the cover up. Straight up, honest as the day is long Cyrus Akers killed someone to cover up a lie. He then confessed this on his deathbed to Gene, who (naturally, being a similarly honest and straight up guy) called the police and military police and then changed his name out of shame.

Earlier in the interview he boldy insists that he's the kind of guy who would 'turn over a million stones' to find answer, but after this big reveal says that he's "tired of it" and wants other people to go out and search archival sources to see if they can find a missing person that fits the bill. We all know what kind of conman trick that is. Not tired of it enough not to endlessly promote his book though.

He also claims that an FOI revealed no evidence of Akers' air force service (not true, the FOI shows where he served in 1968, just not where we he wanted him to have served), that Bill Clinton's autobiography confirms the hoax (not true, he just relates talking to someone who was scpetical of where the rockets were going as a metaphor for something else), amd that one of his named individuals claims in an autobiography that he was at Cannon AFB for 'undisclosed security reasons' (no such autobiography exists), and that Akers lived 'within walking distance across from the main entrance to the base' (no such housing existed at the time).

Grifters gonna grift.

[bknight]

It's the Moon-Landing Hoax one. Jarrah is a regular contributor:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1842692022608212

He, by the way, has raised a quizzical eyebrow at a paragraph in the FOI response, one which basically says "If you aren't Sgt Akers, you can't have the full details". He fails to notice the rest of the letter that says "If Sgt Akers is dead, his living relatives need to give permission". He's implying some sort of nefarious motive, when really it's just standard data protection. Akers' widow is still alive, ask her!

Since I don't do FB/Meta, please give me a Cliff notes on what was said?

[onebigmonkey]

That group's gone private now, so sadly not. Having googled what "cliff notes" are, I can only say that it's alreay in my post! The FOI response gives broad details of Akers' service but no specifics. Jarrah found this to be suspicious, when really it isn't.

This was the actual FOI return posted, which at the time the post was made was on a public forum:




(the blue highlight was by the original poster, the blocking of the sender is mine).

The long and short o fit is: at best, Sibrel is passing on unsupported hearsay evidence and presenting it as fact without doing any kind of background checking at all. At worst, he's knowingly putting out false information to sell copy.

[bknight]

That group's gone private now, so sadly not. Having googled what "cliff notes" are, I can only say that it's alreay in my post! The FOI response gives broad details of Akers' service but no specifics. Jarrah found this to be suspicious, when really it isn't.

This was the actual FOI return posted, which at the time the post was made was on a public forum:




(the blue highlight was by the original poster, the blocking of the sender is mine).

The long and short o fit is: at best, Sibrel is passing on unsupported hearsay evidence and presenting it as fact without doing any kind of background checking at all. At worst, he's knowingly putting out false information to sell copy.

Being in England you may not use Cliff Notes but it was a short hand version of books, rather like Readers Digest.
Anyway, I listened to the droll for about 20 minutes before giving up and closing the vid. It is too bad Buzz wasn't around to punch him in the face, again.
You are correct grifters always grif, its in their genes.