So I guess Buzz Aldrin is still brainwashed

Why is China working on a manned mission to the Moon?  Are they going to just fake it, too? 

Given that going to the moon earns a country a lot of prestige from all the people who believe it's possible, and given that Apollo doubters think it's easy to fake a moon landing, why don't more countries claim to have done it?  To date, the United States is the only country that claims to have done it.  Why doesn't China or Italy or Egypt or Peru post some doctored videos showing their astronauts walking on the moon?

China has a history of being busted with their fake space missions.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">China's Space Walk Was FAKE (part 1)

edited for typo

If it's the same one I saw, it does look fake. Even so it doesn't mean it was all fake.

TV actors do it all the time. They follow a script for a decent pay day and celebrity life. People will literally spit in their own families faces for the chance to get fame and fortune.

So the Apollo people who play the astronauts get told to act out a scene or scenes for a life time of fame and fortune. What harm are they doing? It's only what TV actors do, except this is passed off as real but it will never come to light that it's all faked, so they live out the lie with the trimmings that go with it.
All they have to do, is study the storylines so they can answer questions as they arise.

What would it take for any of you to follow a script for a potential lifetime of fortune and fame?
People can think what they want about whether those people are lying or not. the issue is, nobody gets to physically prove it unless someone breaks down and tells the truth.
The problem with that is, how far would the guilty persons truth go? It would go as far as a bit of tongue wagging before they were deemed insane and suffering from space dementia or whatever is bestowed upon them.

Argue all you want about this not being possible. You know it is and you also know that Armstrong displayed very weird mannerisms all the way throughout his life after his so called space jaunt. Most other actornauts revel in the fame and the money that comes their way.

Once you accept the invitation to the lie, you have to live that lie. there's no backing out freely or without consequence.
Aldrin isn't brainwashed. Aldrin struggles to keep up the ruse. Their post Apollo conference should be enough to tell any rational person that something is not right. The only thing missing from the conference, is the forehead stickers that should read LIAR.

There is also a lot of ties to freemasonry which is an organization built upon lying and threats of death to those who dare betray the organization. They'll kill your kids, your spouse, or anyone to ensure you comply. On the other hand, if you play like a good dog, you get money and fame. The press conference was indeed a dead give away. Collins couldn't see any stars...WOW

There is also a lot of ties to freemasonry which is an organization built upon lying and threats of death to those who dare betray the organization. They'll kill your kids, your spouse, or anyone to ensure you comply. On the other hand, if you play like a good dog, you get money and fame. The press conference was indeed a dead give away. Collins couldn't see any stars...WOW

Citation needed.

Quote from: sceptimatic on July 16, 2014, 04:02:18 AM

TV actors do it all the time. They follow a script for a decent pay day and celebrity life. People will literally spit in their own families faces for the chance to get fame and fortune.

So the Apollo people who play the astronauts get told to act out a scene or scenes for a life time of fame and fortune. What harm are they doing? It's only what TV actors do, except this is passed off as real but it will never come to light that it's all faked, so they live out the lie with the trimmings that go with it.
All they have to do, is study the storylines so they can answer questions as they arise.

What would it take for any of you to follow a script for a potential lifetime of fortune and fame?
People can think what they want about whether those people are lying or not. the issue is, nobody gets to physically prove it unless someone breaks down and tells the truth.
The problem with that is, how far would the guilty persons truth go? It would go as far as a bit of tongue wagging before they were deemed insane and suffering from space dementia or whatever is bestowed upon them.

Argue all you want about this not being possible. You know it is and you also know that Armstrong displayed very weird mannerisms all the way throughout his life after his so called space jaunt. Most other actornauts revel in the fame and the money that comes their way.

Once you accept the invitation to the lie, you have to live that lie. there's no backing out freely or without consequence.
Aldrin isn't brainwashed. Aldrin struggles to keep up the ruse. Their post Apollo conference should be enough to tell any rational person that something is not right. The only thing missing from the conference, is the forehead stickers that should read LIAR.

There is also a lot of ties to freemasonry which is an organization built upon lying and threats of death to those who dare betray the organization. They'll kill your kids, your spouse, or anyone to ensure you comply. On the other hand, if you play like a good dog, you get money and fame. The press conference was indeed a dead give away. Collins couldn't see any stars...WOW

Well astronauts do see stars from space. In Collins case, even though there is no air and the sky is black, much of our ability to see stars depends on how well our eyes are adjusted to the low light conditions. The whole time they were on the moon, the ground was well lit, like daytime on earth. Everything below their horizon is bright, so their eyes never get adjusted enough to see stars. If any of them had thought to look up for a few seconds, they would have seen stars as their eyes got adjusted. But looking up, in those suits and helmets, may not have been as easy as we'd think. They were probably dumbfounded in the interview because they were probably thinking, "Geez, how could I have been there for two days and never even think about looking at the stars??"

I suppose the answer is discipline and the ability to focus on duties. While they were there, it was almost with the same degree of rigor as if they were actors on stage in a play. Essentially every minute of their time was carefully planned. They were chosen for the program because of the very abilities and personalities which would have kept them from being distracted by such thoughts.

It might also be fair to say that the stars and sun were the ONLY things up there that they had seen many times before and were used to. The fascination of the terrain would be compelling, by comparison, I would think. We only see the pictures, but imagine standing in the middle of all that. If they looked up at anything, it would almost certainly have been the earth. I think if I saw that, I would be completely oblivious to stars.

Besides, what is your implication when you say, "Collins couldn't see stars, WOW"? If there is something wrong with that picture, what is the problem? Are you saying the space program is fake because Collins actually went to space and couldn't see stars?

Have you ever seen the post Apollo 11 press conference?
Have you ever seen astronauts gone wild?
Have you ever seen the few times that Armstrong has made a public speech?
What about Aldrin, apart form that punch job?

I've now watched both of Sibrel's nauseating documentaries. What's amazing to me is that he only got punched once. He's about the slimiest character I've come across when it comes to this kind of fake journalism. I think Aldrin had it exactly right in that Sibrel is doing nothing but trying to stir up controversy to make a name for himself. His alleged evidence has been debunked over and over again. His "exclusive footage" and "never before seen pictures" have been available for decades. Even when his "evidence" has been refuted he still makes the same arguments.

How he treated those men who did nothing but do their jobs, jobs which were not only dangerous but took a high level of skill and sheer guts, was totally shameful. Think of what your reaction would be if someone came up to you and pointed a camera in your face and demanded you swear on the bible that one of your greatest achievements in your career was true, all the while telling you it was faked and that you're a liar. Those guys acted exactly how you'd expect someone in that position to act - a moment of "what the hell is this guy on about" followed by the realization that it's a setup, whereupon they get pissed.

For someone who claims to think independently and critically, I can't understand how you can fall for Sibrel's filthy scam. I mean, not only is he underhanded, he's a shit film maker. The whole time he's interviewing Aldrin he has his idiotic first video blaring away and you can't hear either one clearly. No wonder he's resorted to muckraking - he's desperate because his film career is in the toilet - which it should be. He should be flipping burgers somewhere and mopping up but apparently he thinks he's been sent by God or something to expose the evil of the world. I do get the sense at some points that he really believes what he's saying is correct, and in those moments I only feel sorry for the dumb shmuck.

http://heiwaco.tripod.com/moontravel.htm

Thanks for the major LULZ Charles!  You've excelled yourself.

Anders Björkman is so demonstrably mentally deranged that he was even thrown out of one of the major conspiracy sites for his lunatic views;   Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

I can certainly understand why someone like poor old Charles would suck up Björkman's ravings—considering some of his own lunatic theories he's posted here.

—And Charles still hasn't posted his diagram of a "leaning" plumb bob yet, or any footage of his own Foucault pendulum he promised to post.

C'mon Charles... you can do it... you know you can mate!

Quote from: sceptimatic on July 17, 2014, 12:26:00 PM

Have you ever seen the post Apollo 11 press conference?
Have you ever seen astronauts gone wild?
Have you ever seen the few times that Armstrong has made a public speech?
What about Aldrin, apart form that punch job?

I've now watched both of Sibrel's nauseating documentaries. What's amazing to me is that he only got punched once. He's about the slimiest character I've come across when it comes to this kind of fake journalism. I think Aldrin had it exactly right in that Sibrel is doing nothing but trying to stir up controversy to make a name for himself. His alleged evidence has been debunked over and over again. His "exclusive footage" and "never before seen pictures" have been available for decades. Even when his "evidence" has been refuted he still makes the same arguments.

How he treated those men who did nothing but do their jobs, jobs which were not only dangerous but took a high level of skill and sheer guts, was totally shameful. Think of what your reaction would be if someone came up to you and pointed a camera in your face and demanded you swear on the bible that one of your greatest achievements in your career was true, all the while telling you it was faked and that you're a liar. Those guys acted exactly how you'd expect someone in that position to act - a moment of "what the hell is this guy on about" followed by the realization that it's a setup, whereupon they get pissed.

For someone who claims to think independently and critically, I can't understand how you can fall for Sibrel's filthy scam. I mean, not only is he underhanded, he's a shit film maker. The whole time he's interviewing Aldrin he has his idiotic first video blaring away and you can't hear either one clearly. No wonder he's resorted to muckraking - he's desperate because his film career is in the toilet - which it should be. He should be flipping burgers somewhere and mopping up but apparently he thinks he's been sent by God or something to expose the evil of the world. I do get the sense at some points that he really believes what he's saying is correct, and in those moments I only feel sorry for the dumb shmuck.

It's absolutely fine what you think of Sibrel I'm not interested in Sibrel. Just observe the body language of the people he's interviewing.
I know it's strange how people simply say, " oh, they look fine to me, all truthful and everything...no weird guilty stances or nothing."
Just take a look at the guilt. The only thing missing on those people is the tattoo on their fore-heads that spells BULLSHITTER.

Bart Sibrel is nothing more than pond scum.  If sceptimatic truly believes Sibrel has legitimately exposed Buzz Aldrin as a fraud, then he's even more stupid than I thought.  If that's possible LOL.

Could we please stop with the personal attacks and have a real debate?  Thanks. 

It's absolutely fine what you think of Sibrel I'm not interested in Sibrel. Just observe the body language of the people he's interviewing.
I know it's strange how people simply say, " oh, they look fine to me, all truthful and everything...no weird guilty stances or nothing."
Just take a look at the guilt. The only thing missing on those people is the tattoo on their fore-heads that spells BULLSHITTER.

Maybe you're not interested in Sibrel, but you use many of the same arguments he does, and you've totally fallen for his line of manipulative bullshit. He staged every interview the way he did exactly to give the impression that they were trying to hide something. Of course these guys are going to be uncomfortable, because they probably could smell the bullshit coming. Of course they are going to get angry at being cornered, harassed, misled and lied to. You could see that Aldrin spotted the ruse right from the start when Sibrel asked to show him the video. And he was totally correct when he said Sibrel was doing it wrong by springing the video on him instead of discussing it beforehand, that was completely unprofessional. You know how professionals act when faced with unprofessional behaviour? They courteously but firmly point out the error being made, which Aldrin did at first. When pressed, naturally they get irritated and angry when their time is being wasted. All of which happened in the video. Aldrin was too nice to him in my opinion, he should have just trusted his instincts and refused to waste any more of his time. But I expect his curiosity got the better of him and Sibrel hadn't yet crossed the line into being rude and disrespectful.

I don't know what "guilty stances" you are talking about, if you can even explain what that's supposed to look like. To me this looks like just another case of you having made up your mind ahead of time and seeing what you want to see, which in this case is what Sibrel wants you to see.

Quote from: sceptimatic on July 18, 2014, 05:10:00 PM

It's absolutely fine what you think of Sibrel I'm not interested in Sibrel. Just observe the body language of the people he's interviewing.
I know it's strange how people simply say, " oh, they look fine to me, all truthful and everything...no weird guilty stances or nothing."
Just take a look at the guilt. The only thing missing on those people is the tattoo on their fore-heads that spells BULLSHITTER.

Maybe you're not interested in Sibrel, but you use many of the same arguments he does, and you've totally fallen for his line of manipulative bullshit. He staged every interview the way he did exactly to give the impression that they were trying to hide something. Of course these guys are going to be uncomfortable, because they probably could smell the bullshit coming. Of course they are going to get angry at being cornered, harassed, misled and lied to. You could see that Aldrin spotted the ruse right from the start when Sibrel asked to show him the video. And he was totally correct when he said Sibrel was doing it wrong by springing the video on him instead of discussing it beforehand, that was completely unprofessional. You know how professionals act when faced with unprofessional behaviour? They courteously but firmly point out the error being made, which Aldrin did at first. When pressed, naturally they get irritated and angry when their time is being wasted. All of which happened in the video. Aldrin was too nice to him in my opinion, he should have just trusted his instincts and refused to waste any more of his time. But I expect his curiosity got the better of him and Sibrel hadn't yet crossed the line into being rude and disrespectful.

I don't know what "guilty stances" you are talking about, if you can even explain what that's supposed to look like. To me this looks like just another case of you having made up your mind ahead of time and seeing what you want to see, which in this case is what Sibrel wants you to see.

Like I said, I'm not interested in what and how Sibrel went about his work. I'm not interested whether he's a sleaze ball or whatever. What I'm interested in are the reactions of the so called astronauts in answering questions that he put.

Let me make this clear.
If I was a real astronaut and I went to the moon and all the rest of it, I would be begging people to come and ask me all about it just to boast, etc.
Whataver questions were put to me, I would have been more than happy to answer them. If I couldn't, I would say I don't know.
In a post mission conference with reporters asking me questions, I would be confident in taking those questions and happy to point out everything I could recall. I would not display a childs guilty face plus explanation as if I was trying my best to tell them it wasn't me that smashed their greenhouse window. Many of those so called astronauts displayed this and not just in front of Sibrel.

Rational people that don't have to be body language experts can see they are blatantly telling lies and are showing extreme guilt doing so, plus fear.
Pilots and such like are confident people. Infact, maybe full of it. These people displayed none of this, not even close. They displayed what can only be construed as two things. Fear or guilt or both.

Take some time and study their guilt...or fear...or both.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Psychotic apollo11 press conference RKO

Quote from: Shmeggley on July 18, 2014, 06:05:15 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on July 18, 2014, 05:10:00 PM

It's absolutely fine what you think of Sibrel I'm not interested in Sibrel. Just observe the body language of the people he's interviewing.
I know it's strange how people simply say, " oh, they look fine to me, all truthful and everything...no weird guilty stances or nothing."
Just take a look at the guilt. The only thing missing on those people is the tattoo on their fore-heads that spells BULLSHITTER.

Maybe you're not interested in Sibrel, but you use many of the same arguments he does, and you've totally fallen for his line of manipulative bullshit. He staged every interview the way he did exactly to give the impression that they were trying to hide something. Of course these guys are going to be uncomfortable, because they probably could smell the bullshit coming. Of course they are going to get angry at being cornered, harassed, misled and lied to. You could see that Aldrin spotted the ruse right from the start when Sibrel asked to show him the video. And he was totally correct when he said Sibrel was doing it wrong by springing the video on him instead of discussing it beforehand, that was completely unprofessional. You know how professionals act when faced with unprofessional behaviour? They courteously but firmly point out the error being made, which Aldrin did at first. When pressed, naturally they get irritated and angry when their time is being wasted. All of which happened in the video. Aldrin was too nice to him in my opinion, he should have just trusted his instincts and refused to waste any more of his time. But I expect his curiosity got the better of him and Sibrel hadn't yet crossed the line into being rude and disrespectful.

I don't know what "guilty stances" you are talking about, if you can even explain what that's supposed to look like. To me this looks like just another case of you having made up your mind ahead of time and seeing what you want to see, which in this case is what Sibrel wants you to see.

Like I said, I'm not interested in what and how Sibrel went about his work. I'm not interested whether he's a sleaze ball or whatever. What I'm interested in are the reactions of the so called astronauts in answering questions that he put.

Again, you say that while parroting Sibrel's own arguments, but whatever. It's interesting that you fall right into line with his agenda though.

Let me make this clear.
If I was a real astronaut and I went to the moon and all the rest of it, I would be begging people to come and ask me all about it just to boast, etc.
Whataver questions were put to me, I would have been more than happy to answer them. If I couldn't, I would say I don't know.
In a post mission conference with reporters asking me questions, I would be confident in taking those questions and happy to point out everything I could recall. I would not display a childs guilty face plus explanation as if I was trying my best to tell them it wasn't me that smashed their greenhouse window. Many of those so called astronauts displayed this and not just in front of Sibrel.

It's just amazing to me that you think that what you think you would do matters one tiny bit. These are human beings and as such they all have different personalities. If you think Armstrong is acting guilty, where is your evidence that he normally acts differently at a press conference? You also have no idea of his state of mind at the time. Was he maybe exhausted, after an utterly exhilarating experience and then being brought back to Earth, debriefed, probably having every conceivable medical and physical test done on him, then subjected to endless repetitive questions from the press? How many press conferences had he done before this? It's far more likely that he's just bored! He signed up so he could fly. Obviously what he loves is flying, and mastering demanding and challenging situations, not talking endlessly to reporters. Aldrin just looks pensive, like he'd rather be somewhere else doing real work. That's my take on it anyway. I just think it's incredibly limited, and unfair, to judge these guys only on what you think they should be doing and how you think they should react. They would not give a shit how you think they should act. That you, with your extremely limited knowledge of the situation, and absolutely no knowledge of their thoughts and feelings in that moment, should be able to judge that they are guilty of something, is laughable. Are you actually saying that their "guilty look" is evidence that they didn't do what they say they did? Or are you just judging them based on your preconceived idea that they are already guilty of fraud? Again, I see absolutely nothing here but you seeing what you want to see because it conforms to your weird theory that gives you so much joy.

Rational people that don't have to be body language experts can see they are blatantly telling lies and are showing extreme guilt doing so, plus fear.
Pilots and such like are confident people. Infact, maybe full of it. These people displayed none of this, not even close. They displayed what can only be construed as two things. Fear or guilt or both.

Take some time and study their guilt...or fear...or both.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Psychotic apollo11 press conference RKO

[/quote]

Just incredible. You are really just lapping these conspiracy theories up. Instead of just throwing around accusations of fraud, why don't you look through a telescope once in a while and actually make a real observation. Maybe look at the ISS a few times as it flies by right on schedule and see if it really looks like a balloon. Maybe look at the moons of Jupiter, and try to convince yourself it's some kind of reflection. See if you can spot any cracks in the sky next time a comet comes around that's been predicted months in advance. Seriously man, just look at the real world for once without your blinders on.

Like I said, I'm not interested in what and how Sibrel went about his work. I'm not interested whether he's a sleaze ball or whatever. What I'm interested in are the reactions of the so called astronauts in answering questions that he put.

Fair enough, but they are related, since Sibrel asks his questions in a derogatory and agressive way which can't help but influence the responses of the people he interrogates.

Let me make this clear.
If I was a real astronaut and I went to the moon and all the rest of it, I would be begging people to come and ask me all about it just to boast, etc.
Whataver questions were put to me, I would have been more than happy to answer them. If I couldn't, I would say I don't know.

So what?  Other people might not be as attention seeking as you are.  There is more than one valid response to this circumstance.

In a post mission conference with reporters asking me questions, I would be confident in taking those questions and happy to point out everything I could recall. I would not display a childs guilty face plus explanation as if I was trying my best to tell them it wasn't me that smashed their greenhouse window. Many of those so called astronauts displayed this and not just in front of Sibrel.

You are accusing astronauts of guilt because they are not behaving as you expect them to.  This is a ridiculous position.  Sibrel puts them in to confrontational and uncomfortable situations and it should not be surprising when they respond uncomfortably and confrontationally should it?

Rational people that don't have to be body language experts can see they are blatantly telling lies and are showing extreme guilt doing so, plus fear.
Pilots and such like are confident people. Infact, maybe full of it. These people displayed none of this, not even close. They displayed what can only be construed as two things. Fear or guilt or both.

Take some time and study their guilt...or fear...or both.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Psychotic apollo11 press conference RKO

Sure Neal Armstrong is displaying nervousness.  You are immediately assuming that this must be because they lied about going to the moon when there are hundreds of simpler and more likely reasons, like he is uncomfortable and scared of addressing what looks like a full auditorium of people scribbling down his every word.  My wife used to squirm like fire was being held to her feet when talking to 10 people much less hundreds, it is pretty common really.

In short, although I cannot discount what you are saying, it is definitely not a likely and self-evident truth.  You have provided nothing to support your beliefs other than hunches and in the face of many simpler and more likely explanations I have to say I am wholly unconvinced by your ideas.

Let me make this clear.

If I was a real astronaut and I went to the moon and all the rest of it, I would be begging people to come and ask me all about it just to boast, etc.

And this is one of the prime reasons you would not be accepted into any space program.  If your sole reasons were to boast about it and make lots of money on your return, then you'd be flagged as psychologically unsuitable for such a demanding mission, and rejected permanently.

Your "assessment" of these astronauts—considering that you've never met them personally—is totally valueless.  You're also very poorly equipped, if at all, in order to make any meaningful psychological appraisal.  These guys were put through a massive battery of physical and mental tests prior to even being trained as astronauts.  You seem to think that any old Joe Blow can wander into NASA, have a quick cup of coffee and be off to the moon the next day.

And your comment:  "The only thing missing on those people is the tattoo on their fore-heads that spells BULLSHITTER" is really an ignorant—and offensive—claim.  You obviously don't know that Neil Armstrong was a university professor with both a Bachelor's degree and a Master's degree in science.  Buzz Aldrin has a Bachelor's degree in engineering and a science Ph.D in astronautics.

BTW, I don't recall you telling us what your double doctorates were in?

Watch this and see if you want to ask the man to his face if he is bullshitting.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Watch this and see if you want to ask the man to his face if he is bullshitting.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

lol, would an honest man get so defensive? 

Quote from: guv on August 06, 2014, 06:25:24 PM

Watch this and see if you want to ask the man to his face if he is bullshitting.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

lol, would an honest man get so defensive?

Of course you would never get upset if someone was basically calling your career a sham and you a liar right?

Quote from: guv on August 06, 2014, 06:25:24 PM

Watch this and see if you want to ask the man to his face if he is bullshitting.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

lol, would an honest man get so defensive?

Yes. Being followed and insulted by a crazy man would make anyone defensive.

An honest man would just say, "Sorry, but I am not giving an interview at this time."  An honest man does not physically attack people when questioned.  That is called being overly defensive.   

An honest man would just say, "Sorry, but I am not giving an interview at this time."  An honest man does not physically attack people when questioned.  That is called being overly defensive.

Did you watch the video? He did.

And the scumfuck just keeps hounding and insulting him, even after Buzz threatens to call the cops. And then he punches him after the man insults him.

More than justified.

I've worked as a freelance reporter before. That is no way to go about getting your questions answers. Ambushing someone and hounding them is a great way to make someone defensive about anything. Because you are presenting yourself as an aggressive, potentially violent physical threat.

I'd have laid that fucker out too.

I get asked questions all the time, and I either answer or tell the other person that I cannot or do not wish to answer at this time.  I have never hit anyone for simply asking a question.  Oh, but I have nothing to hide. 

I get asked questions all the time, and I either answer or tell the other person that I cannot or do not wish to answer at this time.  I have never hit anyone for simply asking a question.  Oh, but I have nothing to hide.

Don't reply to my post if you are going to ignore its content.

I am sorry.  I thought this was a debate forum.  Oh, wait... 

An honest man would just say, "Sorry, but I am not giving an interview at this time."  An honest man does not physically attack people when questioned.  That is called being overly defensive.

Thats preposterous.  You, who defended shooting someone who throws popcorn in a movie theatre thinks it is out of line to punch some twat (pardon my french) who gets in your face and impugns your character and the thing you sacrificed years and years to accomplish?  You should try and use balanced criteria my friend and consider that there is more happening than what is seen in the footage.  What kind of day was Aldrin having?  Did he have anything to drink?  Did he get any bad news like perhaps an old friend from the program was ill?  All these things could fuel the desire to punch some reprobate in the face. 

An honest man can behave in all sorts of ways that you would not expect and to use this as proof of guilt is actually ridiculous. 

An honest man would just say, "Sorry, but I am not giving an interview at this time."  An honest man does not physically attack people when questioned.  That is called being overly defensive.

Aldrin was actually very cooperative when he first met Sibrel, and granted him an interview. Then Sibrel tried to blindside - he didn't discuss any topics beforehand, and sprang some clips from his first documentary on him in an attempt to stage a "gotcha" for his next documentary. Sibrel then jumped Aldrin in public again, and blocked his way. Aldrin showed a considerable amount of restraint. Sibrel is an unethical hack.

Sibrel simply asked a few questions and Aldrin flipped out.  What kind of monster would act like that? 

If I was lying for a living, I would probably get very mad when people questioned me about my lies too. 

Sibrel simply asked a few questions and Aldrin flipped out.  What kind of monster would act like that? 

Troll harder.

If I was lying for a living, I would probably get very mad when people questioned me about my lies too.

If you were lying for a living, you would be prepared for someone to question your lies I imagine.  Anger seems like an unlikely response if your entire purpose within the program is to propagate those lies.

I am sorry.  I thought this was a debate forum.  Oh, wait... 

It is. So debate what I said. Don't ignore it.

Well, you'd also get mad if you were cornered and called a liar, thief and coward in public by someone who'd already tried to burn you in an interview before, I would think.