9/11: John Lear - Disinformation? Cia Operative? Options

[rob balsamo]

Another chat between Rob Balsamo and John Lear, Son of the Learjet and Core Member of Pilots For 9/11 Truth, answering the questions of those who refuse to ask him directly. Topics include CIA work, Iran-Contra, "Truth Movement" division, "Impossible Speeds", NTSB Data, and "No Plane Theories"... among other topics.
Please visit pilotsfor911truth.org for more information.

[Trapster]

Ok, I have stayed away from this because I thought things needed to cool down a bit.

I am sorry if I have caused confusion or made unwarrented accusations. I see that I have even cause Mr. Lear to address these issues here on this forum. Greetings Mr Lear, you are a man of many accomplishments.

Ok, I understand that I am going after a Sacred Cow here. And that I don't know a thing about all the good work that Mr Lear may be doing behind the scenes.

However, (here I go)

Trap, you have provided no evidence of Lear being a CIA asset except innuendo, your personal belief, and paranoia. It has been spelled out clearly Lears' "ties" to the CIA. He doesnt have any except being hired for an airline which was contracted by the CIA. This has been made clear to you time and time again, yet you still fail to grasp such a concept.

Yes, I talked about the 'interviewer' in the third person because I did not want to get into something directly where personalities and feelings could be hurt. I knew who was giving the interview.

Yep, all I have is evidence of acknowleged CIA 'ties' and paranoia. But, is it really that unfounded??

Let me walk that cat backward: If a government operative wanted to discredit a potent element of the Truth Movement, what might he do?

Send into that group a well respected and well credentialed individual with name recognition? A person who might have some of his own 'unfounded theories' outside the movement that might be used to discredit the entire group? And of course, when a member is interviewed in the press, the first thing the member is called on to defend is this tangential 'theory'?

Point of evidence:
Honestly, do ya really think that there is an underground 'Sub Canal' dug from the Pacific to a lake in Nevada where an Undersea Warfare base for subs is located? Just ponder it, I don't want a full blown argument.
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/0...ets.html#Nevada

The 'evidence' presented here is pretty thin: A sign about Undersea Warfare and a very secretive guard.

Well, I think think of a very logical reason why the US Navy would want to locate a test and research center in a lake in Nevada---Security from prying eyes. Torpedoes, Sonar, SEAL tactics, propulsion systems (propellers), and more could be observed from Soviet Subs if tested in any Ocean. Nevada is the site of other 'secret' military bases, so the location of a Navy testing center is not that far fetched. But, I'd call saying that there is a deep underground canal linking the lake with the ocean a real trip in creative thinking. (With all due respect Mr. Lear)

And, you know how the press loves to go at people who talk about UFO's and Alien Civilizations. Just ask Presidential candidate Kucinich about how they tore into him.

(Personally, I hope that some of what Lear says about that subject is true, it'd be fun to talk to an alien one day, ask him how his civilization coped with the challenges we face here on Earth)

My last words on the subject (truly)
The Pilot's for 9/11 Truth is a powerful organization. It is guaranteed to attract both positive and negative attention once some of its big research projects are completed. Projects involving solid mathematical analysis, data computation and principals of science. But, you can be sure that the first 'press' questions will be directed toward the subject of 'crazy UFO conspiracy theories'.

To Mr Lear, I did not mean to insult you or your contributions. I see from your response that you have a great sense of humor and took it lightly. You have presented a truly astonishing body of 'theory' on other sites. Perhaps there is much more to mankind that I know. Perhaps I am paranoid in a negative way. Given the gravity (slight pun) of the magnitude of the events of 9/11, I simply caution any professional group to be weary of any 'appearance' of 'crazy theories'. As we know, perception is reality.

Cheers John Lear, thanks for taking time here. Cheers Pilots for 9/11 Truth, keep up the good work.

[johnlear]

Ok, I have stayed away from this because I thought things needed to cool down a bit.


Point of evidence:
Honestly, do ya really think that there is an underground 'Sub Canal' dug from the Pacific to a lake in Nevada where an Undersea Warfare base for subs is located? Just ponder it, I don't want a full blown argument.
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/0...ets.html#Nevada

The 'evidence' presented here is pretty thin: A sign about Undersea Warfare and a very secretive guard.

Well, I think think of a very logical reason why the US Navy would want to locate a test and research center in a lake in Nevada---Security from prying eyes. Torpedoes, Sonar, SEAL tactics, propulsion systems (propellers), and more could be observed from Soviet Subs if tested in any Ocean. Nevada is the site of other 'secret' military bases, so the location of a Navy testing center is not that far fetched. But, I'd call saying that there is a deep underground canal linking the lake with the ocean a real trip in creative thinking. (With all due respect Mr. Lear)

Thanks Trapster,

Nobody dug a trench from Monterey Bay to Hawthorne. Most of the western and part of the eastern U.S. sit on a plate covering the Pacific Ocean. Subs are able to go to Nevada, California, Idaho, Oregon and Washington. The reason they go to Hawthorne is because right across the street from the Naval Undersea Warfare Center at Hawthorne is the U.S. Army arsenal where specific armament including missiles are made. Rather than ship them to the west coast they just push them onto an elevator that goes down 4300 ft to the Pacific Ocean and load them there. I have 4 sources for this information. A recent source said he saw a nuclear sub at China Lake. Another source says his father worked on nuclear subs in St. Louis.

On discussing that with someome who knows the shipping lanes very well in and around St. Louis says that explains why dredging operations in the area go on 24/7. He was baffled by this because most of the river traffic draws 3 or 4 feet at the max, so why would they be dredging? The nuclear sub is the explanation. They enter from the gulf and cruise up the Mississippi.

One of the most interesting Naval bases is the one at Lake Tahoe. This one is serviced by an elevator also but I can't figure out why at Lake Tahoe. Winter skiing perhaps?

Both the Thresher and Scorpion were lost exploring the Pacific Ocean beneath the western U.S. Their cover stories were well concocted and nobody has any reason to think otherwise. And they have held up for almost 50 years now.

And, you know how the press loves to go at people who talk about UFO's and Alien Civilizations. Just ask Presidential candidate Kucinich about how they tore into him.

.

Yes, Some of us are real ""UFO nuts."

(Personally, I hope that some of what Lear says about that subject is true, it'd be fun to talk to an alien one day, ask him how his civilization coped with the challenges we face here on Earth)

My last words on the subject (truly)
The Pilot's for 9/11 Truth is a powerful organization. It is guaranteed to attract both positive and negative attention once some of its big research projects are completed. Projects involving solid mathematical analysis, data computation and principals of science. But, you can be sure that the first 'press' questions will be directed toward the subject of 'crazy UFO conspiracy theories'.

I should have realized 911 was a scam the first day. But I bought it hook, line and sinker for 4 years until I started reading some different theories. Of course then I changed my opinion and I was even invited by Morgan Reynolds to write a 15 page affidavit to the New York District Court in opposition to the motion to dismiss by one of the 21 parties charged with their connection with 911. Of course the judge took one day to dismiss the suit. Talk about sheer, outright dishonesty. My affidavit contained the details of why no Boeing 767 could have crashed into the WTC. I had excellent references but he shot those down too.

To Mr Lear, I did not mean to insult you or your contributions. I see from your response that you have a great sense of humor and took it lightly. You have presented a truly astonishing body of 'theory' on other sites. Perhaps there is much more to mankind that I know. Perhaps I am paranoid in a negative way. Given the gravity (slight pun) of the magnitude of the events of 9/11, I simply caution any professional group to be weary of any 'appearance' of 'crazy theories'. As we know, perception is reality.

Not to worry. I even invited John Alexander over to my house for dinner and while I didn't convince him the Lazar story is true, I did give him enough facts, "to give it a little more thought."

Cheers John Lear, thanks for taking time here. Cheers Pilots for 9/11 Truth, keep up the good work.

Thanks, and I have told Rob that anytime I become a liability to just toss my ass out.