.
What do you think of the Apollo 17 LEM lift-off from the moon?
.
You know, the one where astronauts have vociferously defended the camera technique as being the result of advance orders given to the TV camera robot left on the moon to start panning upwards two seconds before the liftoff so that the LEM would still be in the frame, since a robot was left on the moon to operate the camera while the astronauts all went home.
.
Oh, BTW, it's the shot that makes Dorothy's house falling on Munchkin land look like it was real. Yeah. That LEM lift-off.
And BTW, it's the lift-off that shows no plume of rocket engines firing from the module lifting off. And it wiggles like a toy.
.
That would be a robot and TV camera that are still there on the moon's surface, of course. Or......... not.
.

And how did they get that film physically out of the camera and back to earth since they just left?

Gee if only there were methods of wirelessly transmitting data from one point to another...

Back then?  Do you think they used a 2400 baud modem?  Oh, wait, hadn't been invented yet.  Maybe they broadcast TV signals and then recorded them on the other end with a VCR.  Oh, wait.

It is impossible for anyone to get to the moon, and even if they could, the moon is not solid.

This just greets stranger and stranger.

Yeah these "government officials" are probably his mailman and garbage collector. I doubt he has connections with important government people.

Sibrel gives off the whiff of a Jew huckster.

.
Did you watch the video, especially the last 5 minutes? Did you read the history under it, where it says British Channel 5 deleted 98% of the interview selecting only the parts that would give the OPPOSITE impression if handled carefully? Did you hear the questions the interviewer asked Sibrel during the 100 minutes? Did you hear how she kept trying to steer the material away from Sibrel's message? Are you accusing Sibrel of FAKING this whole thing and there never was any interview?

.
Perhaps you ought to be informed that TV cameras don't need film. That's common knowledge BTW.
.
How many other things are you ignorant of? Perhaps the earth's curvature?

You're so stupid,  it's painful.
You think they dragged one these beasts to the moon, when weight matters so much?

?

The first transatlantic television broadcast was done in 1928. The technology existed and antennas don't take up a lot of space. If you think it was impossible to leave behind a camera on the surface and have it send the video to the lander you are deluding yourself. Independent of the question of whether or not it actually happened, that piece was doable in the 30s.

Which technology in particular are you referring to here? If you mean the capacity to send a signal all the way from the moon back to a control station on earth, I don't doubt that at all. Obviously a trip to the moon would involve a large amount of tech with very narrow use cases that no one would have bothered to develop (because there's no other reason for an antenna system capable of broadcasting over the distances involved, for example). Developing things like that and working out all the issues is hard, so I'm not surprised they had to get someone to build something specifically for the purpose.