|THE APOLLO 20 CASE: DEBUNKING OR A TROJAN HORSE FOR THE TRUTH?
"Retiredafb", are you an "impostor"? Here is his answer
by Luca Scantamburlo
Posted: 12:20 August 22, 2007
INTRODUCTION TO THE CONTROVERSIAL APOLLO 20 CASE
Beginning in May 2007, I had many private contacts with a presumed William Rutledge (YouTube username, "retiredafb") who claims to have been a volunteer for MOLGemini project (he was not chosen, according to what he wrote me) and a former civilian test pilot on various aircrafts. Up to now my last contact with him, having always taken place by the YouTube General/Messages, was on July 20, 2007, at 01:39 pm: a message of just three lines.
Is he honest? Is he an agent of discredit? Is he a debunker? Who is behind him? Was he really a former test pilot who now is telling us the truth? Or just kernels of truth?
Rutledge could have been a former civilian test pilot on various aircrafts, born in Belgium in 1930 and employed in the last century with Avro, Chance Vought and USAF. According to his testimony granted to me in an interview, his last job before retiring was working on the KH11 project.
Since April 2007 W. Rutledge posted on YouTube several video footages and images which could have come from the documentation material of a classified mission that took place in August 1976: Apollo 20. He added 13 different videos; later he removed 4 of them. The main point of his presumed testimony was the probable space investigation of a mysterious cigarshaped object, visible on official NASA photos taken by Apollo 15 and Apollo 17. The presence of the huge and mysterious object is a reality, based on fact, pointed out by Rutledge himself.
Under Natural Law and Natural Reason, mankind had the duty, as a categorical imperative, to go there and investigate the mysterious object. You can be sure that it did happen. If it was not Apollo 20, it was some other secret space mission. And if somebody is skeptical about it, I invite him/her to read the Brookings' report, prepared in November 1960 by the Brookings Institution Washington, D.C.: <>, The report, prepared for NASA, was introduced to the Committe on Science and Astronautics by the House of Representatives of U.S.A. In the documents we can read:
<< […] Historical and empirical studies of the behavior of peoples and their leaders when confronted with dramatic and unfamiliar events or social pressures. Such studies might help to provide programs for meeting and adjusting to the implications of such a discovery. Questions one might wish to answer by such studies would include: How might such information, under what cirucumstances, be presented or withheld from the public for what ends? What might be the role of the discovering scientists and other decisionmakers regarding release of the fact of discovery?>>
from pag. 216, ibidem
So it is likely that in the past somebody recommended and encouraged the adoption of several policies and procedures to follow should the discovery of extraterrestrial artifacts in our Solar System become a reality; chief among them: withholding or delaying disclosure of the discovery of such extraterrestrial "artifacts" from the public.
The Eagle (LM5) Lunar Module on the Moon (Apollo 11, 1969). Here is the link with the list of all Lunar Modules produced:
You will find that the LM15, the Phoenix spacecraft according to William Rutledge, has never
flown and was scrapped. W. Rutledge knows this detail of official space history, and has
pointed it out in the interview (see answer nr.13).
AS1713420437 image taken with a 70mm Hasselblad; mission: Apollo 17; Mission Activity:
EVA 1; Lens Focal Length: 60 mm;
AS1714522163 image taken with a 70mm Hasselblad; mission: Apollo 17; Mission Activity:
EVA 2; Lens Focal Length: 60 mm Courtesy NASA/LPI
CONTRADICTIONS AND FAKES. DID SOMEONE FABRICATE THEM ON PURPOSE TO GIVE US A RIDDLE?
On July 01, 2007, at 01:33 PM, my YouTube account received a message from Rutledge. In his message the presumed William Rutledge answered my previous request for clarification. I was very upset because as time passed, many controversial aspects were coming out. I have already discussed them. Most of them are audio contaminations with radio dialogues from former Apollo missions (Apollo 11 and Apollo 15). Finally somebody (a very clever YouTube user), discovered that the video of the presumed "City" (named "Station 1" in the interview) is a fake: if you examine images AS1713420437 and AS1714522163, found in the Apollo Image Atlas located at the Lunar and Planetary Institute website, you can see for yourself that the matrix of the lunar landscape (visible in the lower part of the screen) is a composition of images taken during the Apollo 17 mission.