Session 23 September 2023

There is another possibility. They may have seen things on the Moon, including alien space craft (remember the C's have said there are the remains of Atlantean structures on the Moon and the Greys occupy it) and because of their military code of secrecy and training to follow orders, they cannot say anything about it. If Armstrong and Aldrin did have an encounter with large alien craft on the Moon, this would certainly have shaken them up.

The claim that the two astronauts saw alien craft on the Moon and reported the fact on a closed radio link with NASA, which they used for medical reporting, is highly controversial. According to former NASA employee, Ken Johnston though: “While Neil and Buzz were on the Lunar surface, Neil switched to the medical channel, and spoke directly with the chief medical officer saying, they’re here, they’re parked on the side of the crater, they’re watching us.”

I attach a link to an article (there are numerous similar articles on the net) that covers the alleged alien sighting - see: Neil Armstrong Said Aliens Were on the Moon: “They’re Parked on The Side of the Crater – They’re Watching Us!”

I appreciate that the comments below come from Steven Greer, who to Laura's annoyance promotes the idea that aliens are are our benefactors and only want the best for us, but this does not of itself automatically mean that what he says here is palpably false:

Neil Armstrong became somewhat of a recluse after the moon landing, and rarely spoke of the historic event. His friends and family have told me that this is because he was a man of such integrity that he simply did not want to be put in a position to lie to the public about such a momentous encounter. How tragic that our heroes have been placed in this untenable situation!

When we were organizing The Disclosure Project a few years ago, I asked one of Neil Armstrong’s friends if Armstrong would come to Washington to brief members of Congress at the 1997 Congressional briefing we organized in April of that year. I was told that Armstrong wished he could – but that if he spoke about what really happened during the moon landing, that Neil Armstrong, his wife, and children would all be killed. It was put to me this bluntly.

If true, this might explain why they seemed so sullen and reluctant to speak about what they saw whilst on the Moon. I guess at the end of the day, it is a question of what one is prepared to believe here. I believe the Moon landings were genuine but much surrounding the landings was faked (photographs etc.) not so much to cover up that the astronauts never went there but to conceal instead what they found when they got there. Don't forget that NASA had obtained a report from the Brookings Institute only a few years before the landing, which dealt, inter alia, with the likely impact on the general public if their probes or manned missions were to discover evidence of alien life or artefacts. The report had advocated concealing such evidence from the public so as to avoid widespread panic and the collapse of religions and the economic order etc. If Armstrong and Aldrin had found such evidence in spades, then it makes sense that NASA would have implemented the Brookings Report's* recommendations and sworn the astronauts to secrecy. Military men are used to following orders but for men of integrity, who hated the idea of pulling the wool over people's eyes, this would have been a bitter pill to swallow. Moreover, if your families' lives had been threatened, what would you do?

*For more on the Brookings Report see: Brookings Report - Wikipedia

The report has become noted for one short section entitled "The implications of a discovery of extraterrestrial life", which examines the potential implications of such a discovery on public attitudes and values. The section briefly considers possible public reactions to some possible scenarios for the discovery of extra-terrestrial life, stressing a need for further research in this area. It recommended continuing studies to determine the likely social impact of such a discovery and its effects on public attitudes, including study of the question of how leadership should handle information about such a discovery and under what circumstances leaders might or might not find it advisable to withhold such information from the public.

I am relaxed either way whether people want to believe the Moon landings were genuine or whether they were faked. I only raise this alleged alien sighting theory as another possible explanation for why the astronauts appeared so sullen in the press briefing and in photos.
I agree, they must have been through a lot, seen a lot of things they were not allowed to talk about.
Maybe they couldn't get a live feed of the landing at the time, they have filmed it in the studio with a lot of mistakes, so many people came to the conclusion that the landing never happened.

I came across two videos from Apollo 20 about a huge spacecraft on the moon.

I can't confirm the authenticity of these videos, but with the help of our forum members we can surely get closer to the truth.


 
(Approaching Infinity) In the last session, the C's said that the number of undergrounders operating on the surface varied between two and 2.5 million. What is the total population of undergrounders, both underground and on the surface?

A: 4.6 mil
All the undergrounders look Aryan?
Q: (J) What or who - is the "Nation of the Third Eye?"

A: Terran civilization under the surface.

Q: (L) Now, wait a minute. I remember that when they said the Aryans were brought from Kantek, and that they were "sturdier," or something like that, and I remarked that it seemed that they would be less sturdy - and the C's answered "on the surface." Now, that has always bothered me. I don't think they meant "surface appearances." Have the Aryans been glorified as the "master race" because they are more suited to living underground?

A: Close. All types there are "Aryan."
 
I agree, they must have been through a lot, seen a lot of things they were not allowed to talk about.
Maybe they couldn't get a live feed of the landing at the time, they have filmed it in the studio with a lot of mistakes, so many people came to the conclusion that the landing never happened.

I came across two videos from Apollo 20 about a huge spacecraft on the moon.

I can't confirm the authenticity of these videos, but with the help of our forum members we can surely get closer to the truth.


Sorry to disappoint you but having researched these videos some years ago, I believe they are faked. What is true though is that NASA had budgeted for and lined up two more Apollo Moon flights after Apollo 17, which would have been Apollos 18 and 19. However, for reasons not altogether clear, they cancelled both flights. There was some nonsense about the US public becoming bored by the Moon landings, which I don't really buy into. Is it more likely that the US was warned off conducting more Moon landings after Apollo 17 by the secret government or the Quorum. Were the Greys finding the landings too intrusive on their territory? Had NASA discovered all it wanted to know or it wished to retrieve from the Moon? Anyway, as a child of the space age, after the initial euphoria of the Moon landings, NASA confined itself to low Earth orbit missions for the next 50 odd years. To my way of thinking, we have stood still for all this time. Perhaps it will take an Elon Musk to move things forward again where manned space missions are concerned.​
 
(Pierre) Laser.

A: Yes

Q: (L) All right, next LQB's asking this one:

(L) The spiral, yes. All right. We have a whole slew of questions. We better stop messing around. Oh Lord. Okay. Two-tents, and I don't know who this Two-tents is, but they submitted a question:

(Two-tents) What was the cause of the recent fire that destroyed the town of Lahaina on Maui Island in Hawaii?

A: Beam weapons.

Q: (L) What kind of beam? Does anybody know?

Q: (L) So many of 'em are doing all this stuff to stay in power - and of course that means getting money because money is power - and that is being manipulated by a higher agenda. In other words, their greed, and their power hunger is being used by 4D STS.

(Joe) Did any of the people in Lahaina notice the effects of this beam weapon?

A: Yes

Q: (Joe) Is that why 60 people were found a week later sheltering in a house in Lahaina?

(L) Because they were noticing the effects?

(Joe) Because they were terrified and didn't want to leave the house up to a week later.

(L) Oh, is that why? Was there something really scary going on?

A: Yes

Q: (Joe) More than just fire passing through.

(L) It could have had some kind of psychological effects even...

(Niall) Did the police in Lahaina deliberately send them back into the fire because they were instructed to do so?

A: Yes

Q: (Niall) To increase the terror, I guess.

A: Yes

Q: (Joe) Very nasty people.


(L) They're evil.

Lahaina

With over thousands of available rentals, overpriced, and remaining empty, the state and county are looking for other methods to remove victims out of hotels so their counts could go down.

Long story short. NOTHING HAS CHANGED, and Green keeps pushing back the inevitable outcome, which makes him look ridiculous, especially when he, in a suttle tone, tries to bribe the victims with a million dollar settlement. Now to quickly change the subject, let's talk about Red Hill


 
Lahaina

With over thousands of available rentals, overpriced, and remaining empty, the state and county are looking for other methods to remove victims out of hotels so their counts could go down.

Long story short. NOTHING HAS CHANGED, and Green keeps pushing back the inevitable outcome, which makes him look ridiculous, especially when he, in a suttle tone, tries to bribe the victims with a million dollar settlement. Now to quickly change the subject, let's talk about Red Hill


Indeed. They intend to eliminate the survivors. Or so it seems.
 
Q: (Joe) Is there a mold problem in this house that's negatively affecting our health?

A: To some extent, yes.

Q: (Andromeda) Is taking the Pau d'Arco helping with that?

A: Yes. Mold affects almost everyone. It is ubiquitous.

Regarding the mold issue, it's good to know the role environment variables play in its creation/prevention, like relative humidity and room temperature. For example, if relative humidity indoors is kept below 50-55% (by dehumidifier home unit for example) mold can't grow. Also, temperatures below freezing point and above 140° F will kill the mold spores.

More about mold handling using environment conditions:

Graphic table showing the interplay of environment variables and time needed for the mold to appear/grow:

Mold.Chart_.EnergyHandyman.SHS_.png
 
Regarding 'Jubilee", there has been a recent discussion of M. Hudson's new book "collapse of antiquity" here: Origins of debt: Michael Hudson's "The Collapse of Antiquity" and his work is centered around debt and debt cancellations (jubilees).
October will not be just interesting, but very interesting. Let's hope it's an enjoyable show while still prepared for the worst.
I can highly recommend the book. I'm halfway through it and it's been a real eye-opener. It's like a history of relentless greed, psychopathy and how modern history still covers it and romanticizes the "cradle" of the Western civilization.
 
A: Jubilee of Cassiopaea. Hair is important for tuning.

Q: (L) So why do you say hair is important for tuning?

A: Andromeda wants to wash hers.

Q: (L) Well I washed mine this afternoon.

A: Yes. Very receptive/perceptive of you!

(Andromeda) I was joking when I said I needed to wash my hair, but now that you mention it...

Q: (L) Yeah, now that you mention it... Yeah. Receptive. Are you saying my hair is receptive, perceptive?

A: Yes

Q: (L) Even with my curls?

A: Yes
After thought, I very often notice an attractiveness towards long curly hair, both from myself towards it + hearing strangers' remarks towards other people having it, or my own.
It's something that seems to innately catch the attention of some, like if there was an unconscious appeal towards it - which I think there is.
We now have an explanation.
 
(Uperios) Are the various CO2 sequestration plans that the PTB want to implement part of a terraforming process for a different species to inhabit the planet, their makeup being affected by CO2 in the atmosphere?

(L) So is this a part of terraforming?

A: Not exactly, more like making the planet uninhabitable for humans.

Q: (L) So all of this stuff about shutting down farms, clear-cutting forests, shutting down fuel, killing off cattle because they contribute to the CO2, all of that is basically about depopulation?

A: Yes

I found an article which made me remember that the C's recently answered about ... thus i searched a little bit, found that it was during this session, the extract above.

And here is the article that made me thought about this passage of the session :

Bonus in french, as i initially found it here :
 
C'est tout de même fou toutes ces découvertes que l'homme fait sur l'environnement de la Terre, alors qu'ils envoient régulièrement des sondes remplies d'instruments dans l'espace, vers la Lune et autres...Et que dire des missions Apollo... lol.
Ainsi en 2014 Une équipe de scientifiques dirigée par l'Université du Colorado Boulder a découvert un bouclier invisible de style "Star Trek" qui bloque les soi-disant "électrons tueurs" à 11500 kms au-dessus de la Terre.
Le bouclier, qui forme une barrière au mouvement des particules, a été trouvé dans les ceintures de rayonnement de Van Allen. Les ceintures de rayonnement, qui sont maintenues en place par le champ magnétique de la Terre, sont deux anneaux en forme de beignet qui sont remplis d'électrons et de protons à haute énergie.
« C'est presque comme si ces électrons couraient dans un mur de verre dans l'espace », a déclaré Baker, dans un communiqué. « Un peu comme les boucliers créés par les champs de force sur Star Trek qui ont été utilisés pour repousser les armes extraterrestres, nous voyons un bouclier invisible bloquer ces électrons. C'est un phénomène extrêmement déroutant. »
Les scientifiques ont découvert une limite "extrêmement pointue" au bord intérieur de la ceinture de rayonnement externe, qui semble empêcher les électrons de percer le bouclier et de se déplacer vers l'atmosphère terrestre.
Petit rappel pour un prochain numéro, le taux de radioactivité des ceintures de Van Allen est si élevé que les instruments de mesures de James Van Allen, qui les a découvertes en 1958, ont tous "explosé"....
Mais les astronautes d'Apollo les passaient facile avec leur bidule en papier d'alu... Mais LOL !!
1705571426720.png
It's amazing all these discoveries that mankind is making about the Earth's environment, when they regularly send probes full of instruments into space, to the Moon and elsewhere... And what about the Apollo missions... lol.
So in 2014 a team of scientists led by the University of Colorado Boulder discovered a "Star Trek"-style invisible shield that blocks so-called "killer electrons" 11500 kms above the Earth.
The shield, which forms a barrier to the movement of particles, was found in the Van Allen radiation belts. The radiation belts, which are held in place by the Earth's magnetic field, are two doughnut-shaped rings that are filled with high-energy electrons and protons.
"It's almost as if these electrons are running through a glass wall in space," said Baker, in a statement. "A bit like the shields created by force fields on Star Trek that were used to repel alien weapons, we're seeing an invisible shield blocking these electrons. It's an extremely puzzling phenomenon."
Scientists have discovered an "extremely sharp" boundary at the inner edge of the outer radiation belt, which appears to prevent electrons from piercing the shield and travelling towards the Earth's atmosphere.
As a reminder for a future issue, the level of radioactivity in the Van Allen belts is so high that the measuring instruments used by James Van Allen, who discovered them in 1958, have all "exploded" ....
But the Apollo astronauts passed them easily with their tinfoil gizmos... But LOL!
 
Voici l'ordinateur du vaisseau spatial Apollo.
Il disposait d'environ 65 kb de mémoire et d'une vitesse de traitement de 0,045 Mhz. 🤪🤪🤪
Mais Don Pettit, astronaute de la Nasa dit :
"Nous ne pouvons pas retourner sur la Lune, nous ne disposons plus de cette technologie."

It had around 65 kb of memory and a processing speed of 0.045 Mhz. 🤪🤪🤪
But Don Pettit, Nasa astronaut said:
"We can't go back to the Moon, we don't have that technology any more."


1705573484553.png
 
(Niall) Was the Russian rocket to the moon sabotaged?

A: Yes

Q: (Niall) Why?

A: Keep Russia down and embarrassed!

Q: (Joe) How was it done?

A: Remote activated EM pulse.
I watched an interview with Momčilo Milinović, a retired engineer and professor at the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering in Belgrade. He is an expert in the field of rocket technology.
At 01:08:00 he talks about the Russian rocket to the moon and he mentions something very interesting.

Unlike all previous missions to the moon, this Russian rocket trajectory was something that nobody had ever done before. According to him, it was almost an "artillery" attempt to shoot the rocket and land on the moon. They fired the rocket without any classic circling around the Earth. They circled just a quarter rotation around the Earth and fired directly at the moon. There they had another half or quarter rotation around the moon and they tried to land vertically on the surface of the moon, breaking vertically with powerful braking motors.

According to his words, the technic and the equipment were the masterpieces, the best our science can offer today.

It was an attempt to show the world what are they capable of. To fire a rocket directly to the moon and land vertically. As he says it was a "maniacal" attempt to show the world their capabilities in rocket technic.

They lost control of the rocket in the last phase of the vertical landing. Not in communication, but lost control the control, according to his words.

So if we take the C's answer that the goal was to keep Russia down and embarrassed then somehow the whole story makes sense.
The World government or whoever it was, did not want to allow Russia to publicly present its capabilities in rocket technic. Like, if we can shoot a rocket directly on the moon, then any place on earth is not a problem for us.

They had to publicly admit that they failed, while other countries like India or China succeeded in landing, although they are using classic, by-the-book techniques to do that.
 
Back
Top Bottom