Consider the purpose of NASA's creation during the Cold War and you will see the consequence of it being all fake.
Funny you should mention that, because §1.7(a)(2) specifically forbids classifying documents in order to "prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency".
And remember, §1.1(b) puts the burden of proof on the person who wants it classified.
Wrong. NASA's creation during the Cold War was to allow for nukes with an international range, space weapons, and weapon delivery systems.
Wait, what? I thought you said that intercontinental ballistic missiles don't work! So why would we form a space agency to allow for things that don't work? That's like me creating a space agency and perpetuating lies to hide my flying rubber ducky! Seems like the U.S. and USSR are a bunch of bumbling idiots!
Oh wait! Now you're saying that they DO work? That the U.S. is a superpower because of the intercontinental range of its missiles? HOW CAN THEY BE MISTAKEN THEN, ABOUT THE FLAT EARTH? You know, if you had a semblance of an understanding of how ... force diagrams and Newton's 2nd Law ... work, perhaps you'd see that ballistic missiles with intercontinental range have to go really high?
Long range ICBMs require earth orbit to exist. If NASA is a fraud that can't get anything into earth orbit then it weakens the US ICBM Iron Curtain for itself and its allies.
You really need to do some 30-second searches before spouting this nonsense. Seriously. This is not even a debate when one side comes back with such poor argument. Why in the world do you think you're so much better than all of the scientists in the U.S. government and in private institutions everywhere when you can't even do elementary physics and don't even understand elementary concepts in space travel? Do you really think you're that good?
1. "Iron Curtain" does NOT refer to the U.S. ICBM stockpile. I don't even know where you got this misconception in history from.
2. ICBMs do not require orbit to exist. Do you not understand how a ballistic trajectory (i.e. introductory mechanics taught at any respectable educational institution) works? That's like saying pitchers need to send baseballs into orbit for them to make it to home plate. Where do you get these misconceptions from? Why do you think you're even in a position to criticize established science?
Why haven't you taken a class in physics at your local community college? I'll ask again, do you really think you know that much about physics when you can't even get basic details correct?
While the technical details of ICBMs are closely-guarded secrets, the basic physics about how they work are well-known. It's even in the name: ballistic missiles... We know they burn solid fuel for a while, and then just fall toward their destinations.