In this interview, the first man to walk on the moon gives a personal commentary on Apollo 11’s historic lunar landing along with his thoughts on leadership and taking risks to innovate for the future.
Neil Armstrong is a household name, yet, in contrast to his crew-mate Buzz Aldrin, he has studiously stayed out of the spotlight in the decades since he walked on the Moon. He frequently passed on interview and advertising requests, all the while beating back unwelcome advances on his legacy.
So it was a coup of sorts for Certified Practicing Accountants organization of Australia to score an extended interview with Armstrong, a connection that seems about as natural as a two-headed kangaroo. (CEO Alex Malley had developed the relationship, sharing his concerns about long-term strategic planning both in business and politics with Armstrong. The interview was a part of CPA Australia’s 125th anniversary celebration.)
Armstrong shows flashes of the rationality and equanimity that made him an ideal astronaut candidate in the first place. He confesses that he gave Apollo 11 a 90% chance of returning home safely, but just a 50% chance of landing on the Moon successfully. He expresses a sense of fate about his dangerous work as a test pilot and astronaut, refusing to worry about future tasks because he figured something would go wrong first and he’d be otherwise engaged firing the ejection seat or scrambling to repair a valve. Of his time on the Moon’s surface: “we weren’t there to meditate, we were there to get things done.” As a counter balance to this version of events - whether reliable or not - view the following presentation by Richard D Hall. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB43e95ZtdY&fbclid=IwAR1eHpFJb3zZy5iW_Zs7SDuvCzkE01mS1wb61hCd6blzc2_tTU-Ye_qOSmk
Yea, Sandy Hook is very much up there with the stars of False Flags, but for some reason it never grabbed me. Perhaps partly because it was so well covered by others. Nevertheless incredibly it seems to have entered the pantheon of 'urban myths' supported by government, which causes us to doubt everything that now comes from that quarter. Indeed we have got to the point that on balance, anything coming from state sources is more likely to be false in some regard, than true. That is the pretty pass that 'representative democracy' has got itself into. The 'representatives' are all too scared, either of life, property or career, to challenge the official narrative despite the overwhelming evidence that it is fraudulent. I see that Alex Jones and others are retreating in the face of legal actions which are probably backed by government agencies. This appears to be part of a wider concerted effort to stop any challenge of government lies of which the arrest of Assange is a notable part. What we are witnessing is the paradox of government arguing the right to infringe the privacy of others whilst becoming increasingly draconian to protect itself, even when it acts in the worst sort of illegality. This is the two tier system that legislators at the behest of publically funded secret agencies, have created, and continue to create, in the 21st Century. It needs to be opposed at every opportunity.
Yea, Sandy Hook is very much up there with the stars of False Flags, but for some reason it never grabbed me. Perhaps partly because it was so well covered by others. Nevertheless incredibly it seems to have entered the pantheon of 'urban myths' supported by government, which causes us to doubt everything that now comes from that quarter. Indeed we have got to the point that on balance, anything coming from state sources is more likely to be false in some regard, than true. That is the pretty pass that 'representative democracy' has got itself into. The 'representatives' are all too scared, either of life, property or career, to challenge the official narrative despite the overwhelming evidence that it is fraudulent. I see that Alex Jones and others are retreating in the face of legal actions which are probably backed by government agencies. This appears to be part of a wider concerted effort to stop any challenge of government lies of which the arrest of Assange is a notable part. What we are witnessing is the paradox of government arguing the right to infringe the privacy of others whilst becoming increasingly draconian to protect itself, even when it acts in the worst sort of illegality. This is the two tier system that legislators at the behest of publically funded secret agencies, have created, and continue to create, in the 21st Century. It needs to be opposed at every opportunity.
ReplyDelete