IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

16 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
9/11: John Lear - Disinformation? Cia Operative?

rob balsamo
post Aug 19 2009, 10:07 PM
Post #1



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,661
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



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.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post Aug 20 2009, 01:07 AM
Post #2


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



Thanks for doing this and putting it up, Rob. Lear is clearly one of the most remarkable and interesting people alive on this planet. I have the utmost respect for him -- but that doesn't mean I necessarily "believe" some of the things he says just because he says them. I don't think he would want anyone to do that, anyway.

Some of our detractors like to couch the "John Lear issue" as a matter of credibility. The idea being that since Lear has some very unconventional views, his support is a potential weakness that could be exploited, especially by unfriendly media, as further evidence that the 9/11 truth movement are a bunch of nutters not to be taken seriously. Aside from the fact that the corporate owned media is not likely to EVER take this movement "seriously," the problem here is that these same people aren't addressing the evidence that Pilots for Truth and Citizen Investigation Team has uncovered and made public. Instead they prefer to adopt a logical fallacy that insists if John Lear (or someone like him) supports this evidence, then this evidence must be false. Thus, in a twist of logic that goes beyond ironic, they do the very thing they say they're afraid the "John Lear issue" will do: Discredit by association.

MEANWHILE, analysis of the NTSB supplied FDR data allegedly from Flight 77 shows that it could not have hit the Pentagon. Aerodynamically impossible. This is clear, take it to the judge, evidence of a cover-up and falsification of evidence supplied to the public via FOIA by government agencies (NTSB and FBI). MEANWHILE we have numerous verified on the record and on the scene eye witnesses who corroborate one another in having seen a plane on a flight path, bank angle and air speed that is irreconcilable with the physical damage. MEANWHILE we have one on the scene taxi driver with a busted windshield and punctured back seat whose initial story stretches credulity to the breaking point followed by a complete denial of his having ever been in the precise location necessary for his initial story to even be remotely possible. MEANWHILE we have a Pentagon police officer reporting that immediately after the explosion at the Pentagon he saw a low flying "commercial airliner" flying over the South parking lot. MEANWHILE we have a bunch of people who claim to be advocates for 9/11 truth who can't wrap their heads around all this, preferring instead to continue to insist that, despite all this evidence, the official account of Flight 77 must be true and, instead, prefer to demonize the people and organizations that have worked diligently for years to gather this information and make it public. And these same people want to hang their arguments on issues of credibility??

whistle.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
albertchampion
post Aug 20 2009, 01:15 AM
Post #3





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 1,843
Joined: 1-March 07
Member No.: 710



thank you, rob. for that interview. and for putting faces up.

i don't question many of john lear's bona fides. i still have what i think was his dad's original invention, the portable radio for lightplane pilots.

but since john says that he was flying for an outfit prop during what has become known as iran-contra, do you think he could tell us what american corporation furnished the gulfstream to rich secord, albert hakim, manuchar ghorbanifar[aka the enterprise].....the aircraft that flew ollie and bud mcfarland to tehran with the cake and the bible?

i know the answer. does he?

does anyone on this board?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trapster
post Aug 20 2009, 10:40 PM
Post #4





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 223
Joined: 25-February 09
Member No.: 4,177



Be very weary of Lear.

He is a dis-info specialist. He does work for the CIA. He has off the wall theories about UFO's (dis-info put out by the CIA to hide the real truth about UFO's, that they are man-made). Anything you say to him, anything that you give him goes straight to the CIA. Not that they don't already know who we are.

Watch it with Lear. It's called 'Poisoning the well'; that is, inserting bad info into a body of good info as to 'poison' the entire body of info. Aka, a little poison kills the entire well.

Once CIA, always CIA
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 20 2009, 11:03 PM
Post #5



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,661
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Trap,

Did you listen to the interview? We discuss his "work" for the CIA. He never worked for the CIA. He worked for an airline which was contracted by the CIA. Many airlines today are contracted by the CIA for various reasons which are very overt. Does that mean all their pilots are CIA operatives?

Do you have any evidence that John Lear is a CIA Op? If so, please provide it. So far you havent provided anything but your belief he is CIA due to his UFO Research.

Also, Lear has no intention of "poisoning the well". You'd know this if you listen to the interview.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aerohead
post Aug 21 2009, 09:05 PM
Post #6





Group: Core Member
Posts: 327
Joined: 13-July 09
From: State of Heightened Awareness
Member No.: 4,476



Excellent interview.

And i feel much better about John Lear now.
If he backs the work done here, then he's ok
in my book. Where we get into trouble is when
we create our own theories without alot of proof
but some possibility. I know this first hand with
my F-4 theory whistle.gif laughing1.gif

But it was good to here John support Pilots and
the movement. Excellent


-Aero
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trapster
post Aug 21 2009, 10:55 PM
Post #7





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 223
Joined: 25-February 09
Member No.: 4,177



Ok, here we go.

1) Yes, I did listen to the interview. Twice.

2) I think Lear makes it clear as to how involved with the CIA he is. He took part in some real clandestine ops. Flying recon planes into secret bases in Laos, taking part in some Iran-Contra missions in the early 80's and taking part in some other very secret missions across the Middle East in the 70's and avoiding Soviet 'contact'.

Do you think a guy who flies these missions does NOT have some very high CIA clearances?

He says they have no 'folder' on him. Well, how would he know? He may not have been a top level trained Operative, but he sure did mesh with some of the Highest Level CIA operations with his skill set as a pilot. I will leave you to do the math and critical thinking on this.

3) John Lear has some strange theories on the whole UFO/NASA/Moon/et al. Check out this link: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/menu.html#Photo

He believes that the moon has a very thin atmosphere. No it does not. There is strange crystal structure on the moon. There are some interesting theories about what this may be. Instead, on a radio show, Lear says this may be a 'well of souls' of sorts. A totally off the wall theory that distracts from the more plausible theories. I'd call that Poisoning the Well, dis-info. Which gets us to:

4) Correct me if I'm wrong, but, does Lear theorize that it was holograms that hit the WTC? Seriously.

This is the kind of off the wall theories that bring discredit to the 'Truth' movement, and yes, it does poison the well of truth. Just like what one would expect from a CIA dis-info expert.

Rob,
I am one of the 'Black T-shirt wearing' people who shout "9/11 Was an Inside Job". I have worn my Lose Change 'Investigate 9/11' black T-shirt at Ground Zero on the 11th of September since 2006. I will be there in less than a month this year. I save the shouting for the street action we do in NYC around the anniversary; at Times Square and such.

I strongly believe that 9/11 was an Inside Job. In fact, this was confirmed to me by Pilot's member Dr. Bob Bowman. He told me the whole USAF story of their inability to intercept the hijacked jets story was bunk.

My suggestion is to really stay away from the 'no planes' theory, or theories. They are the weakest evidence in taking down the Official Theory.

Instead, as a pilot and with other pilots, explain how there is no way that those cockpits could have been over taken by hijackers armed with box cutters, after the FAA issued a warning to all aircraft just after 8:20am, before at least two of the other jets were hijacked. Focus on how hard it would be for a novice to simply keep control of a jetliner, much less navigate to NYC from Ohio or hit the Pentagon flying level into the side wall. That's your unique perspective and skill set to the 'Truth Movement'.

Keep fighting the Good Fight,
Trap
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 21 2009, 11:20 PM
Post #8



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,661
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 21 2009, 10:55 PM) *
Ok, here we go.

1) Yes, I did listen to the interview. Twice.


Clearly you havent. You may have 'heard' the interview "twice", but clearly you didnt listen.

Ok... here we go.

QUOTE
2) I think Lear makes it clear as to how involved with the CIA he is. He took part in some real clandestine ops.


If you listened to the interview, you would know he flew Cessna's from Wichita to SE Asia because the CIA couldnt get a boat to do it. So, the CIA started an airline as cover at the time, Lear was hired by that airline to fly Cessna's across the "pond". Yes, it was probably "covert" in the 60's so he didnt get shot down, but im sure you can google it now. Lear gives the name of the airline.

QUOTE
Flying recon planes into secret bases in Laos, taking part in some Iran-Contra missions in the early 80's


Again, if you listened to the interview, you would know that Lear never had a chance to fly any mission for "Iran-Contra" as the Russians shot down one of the planes over Russian territory. Im sure you can google this as well. Full sources are given including the name of the airline.

QUOTE
and taking part in some other very secret missions across the Middle East in the 70's and avoiding Soviet 'contact'.


The only time he "avoided USSR contact" is when he was told he will not fly. See reply above.

QUOTE
Do you think a guy who flies these missions does NOT have some very high CIA clearances?


Do you have evidence that Lear or any pilot flying today for an airline contracted by the CIA has "CIA Clearances"? And even if they do, are they all big bad boogie men?

QUOTE
He says they have no 'folder' on him. Well, how would he know? He may not have been a top level trained Operative, but he sure did mesh with some of the Highest Level CIA operations with his skill set as a pilot. I will leave you to do the math and critical thinking on this.


When Lear claims the CIA has "no folder on him", he is saying that he has no EMPLOYEE folder with the CIA. In other words, he wasnt employed directly by the CIA. The airline he worked for was contracted by the CIA. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

QUOTE
3) John Lear has some strange theories on the whole UFO/NASA/Moon/et al. Check out this link: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/menu.html#Photo


No one disputes John Lear has some "far out" theories. I even said it in the interview, if you listened. Clearly you havent.

QUOTE
This is the kind of off the wall theories that bring discredit to the 'Truth' movement,


Again, if you listen to the interview, Lear specifically says that if he is ever called upon to speak for P4T or the "Truth Movement" by mainstream media, he will defer it to me. Try actually listening to the interview.

By the way, who dictates who can speak out about 9/11? You? Do we live in America? You familiar with the 1st Amendment?

QUOTE
Rob,
I am one of the 'Black T-shirt wearing' people who shout "9/11 Was an Inside Job". I have worn my Lose Change 'Investigate 9/11' black T-shirt at Ground Zero on the 11th of September since 2006. I will be there in less than a month this year. I save the shouting for the street action we do in NYC around the anniversary; at Times Square and such.


I wont be standing beside you, nor will any of our professional aviators.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core

Our activism is filling out affidavits and putting our faces to our names with experience (see link above)... instead of coming across as some extreme fringe angry group.

But thats just my opinion and that of most professionals. You want to go out there and scream with others in a black T Shirt? More power to you. This is America after all.







QUOTE
My suggestion is to really stay away from the 'no planes' theory, or theories.


Clearly you havent listened to the interview or even read the top of our home page.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org

Please tell me and the rest of us what the underlined sentence says... millions of others have read it. You should take a look.

I think i made my point clear...

As for the rest of your post, its clear you havent even viewed our work. Start with "Flight Of American 77".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trapster
post Aug 22 2009, 12:44 AM
Post #9





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 223
Joined: 25-February 09
Member No.: 4,177



QUOTE
We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time.


And:
QUOTE
is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout


And:
QUOTE
We do not accept the 9/11 Commission Report and/or "hypothesis" as a satisfactory explanation for the sacrifice every American has made and continues to make -- some more than others.


So, first off, I am not a member of Pilots because I am neither a pilot or aviation professional. I do not, and will never say that I speak for this outstanding group. I am a forum member and nothing else. I'm sorry you won't be with us at Ground Zero, but I understand your position.

However, there is a time to look at the big picture and the big issues and get out there and take part in a visible agitation. It is important to deny the LIE of 9/11 from those that would use it for evil.

Ok, I can still engage in asking questions and adding my worthless 2 cents worth, yes?

Lear worked under contract for the CIA. He had to have clearance, high level clearance. There is a connection between the CIA and Lear. You and he are both up front with that.

So, what is disinformation?

By one account:
QUOTE
misinformation that is deliberately disseminated in order to influence or confuse rivals


The game is an old one, to plant bogus and easily disproved claims in any inquiry into what the government is doing, in order to ridicule those asking questions. In the old days it worked, because the media was under government control and could be counted on to withhold exposure of the fraud until it could most damage those who asked questions. These days, in the age of the Internet, such planted hoaxes do not survive because the questions the media should ask but refuse to do so ARE asked and answered.



In the interview, Lear was kept in a tight box, the interviewer did most of the talking and only alluded to some 'far out' theories. The question format was simple, a direct question about aircraft speed and as to if this proves or disproves the 'no plane' theory. Simple and tight. Prefect for a straight yes/no answer.

Here, in this forum, I am urging caution when dealing with someone who has CIA ties and some far out theories (I guess Lear does support the hologram theory).

It's a classic case of getting people within an orgnization looking for the Truth to start in-fighting.

Lear presents as a good guy. If you trust him, cool.

There is a guy in NYC, Nico Haupt, that loves the hologram theory. Nico is a full wingnut and presents as a Govt. plant. Perhaps Lear and Haupt should get together and discuss the hologram theory?? (sorry, I could not resist that one)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Aug 22 2009, 01:46 AM
Post #10



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 21 2009, 10:44 PM) *
Lear worked under contract for the CIA. He had to have clearance, high level clearance. There is a connection between the CIA and Lear. You and he are both up front with that.

Trapster, in all honesty this is probably the WRONG month to bring up "disinfo" charges. There is already a full-on sh*t-storm that appears to have been started by several other prominent "truth movement leaders" some time ago- I have even posted a one-page timeline over in the Debate forum for everyone's reference (and those dates were just the quick-n-dirty ones that I found in a quick INTERNET SEARCH and may need to be revised and other dates added). [HINT: Call it a "working copy." wink.gif ]

That said, have you ever actually worked for a government contractor? I have worked for more than one, and I actually had security clearances but sadly?? blink.gif they weren't all that "high..." rolleyes.gif In fact, our admin. assistants/secretaries often/usually had a higher clearance than I did as a scientist/engineer (although they rarely understood a small fraction of the written material or diagrams, which kept them (the secretaries) so efficient <<< *** : HINT).

With still more said, some could claim that I have worked for "USAF, USN, NASA, Russian, and Japanese Government" (and possibly the E.U. as well). In actuality, I actually worked for a contractor that had contracted with various "government" agencies (a couple of whom were far "spookier" than CIA, FWIW). rolleyes.gif

EDIT: Hallibortion, Blackwater/Xe, CACI, etc.- pretty much the same pattern (but likely far more sinister than the research/development end) I would expect.

EDIT2: Actually Trapster, a more RELEVANT question (IMHO) would involve Mr. John Lear and his involvement (or not) with the A-12/Y(F)-12/"SR-71" program. I'm ALL EARS for some of that...

I'll leave y'alls to do y'alls own research on "the numbers" (if you haven't already)...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lasthorseman
post Aug 22 2009, 06:16 AM
Post #11





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 848
Joined: 23-December 06
Member No.: 360



"The lie is different at every level"
Richard Hoagland

Thus the "disinformation" label may in truth apply. The collective evidence of an entire century of manipulation and control however is becoming more evident.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 22 2009, 07:39 AM
Post #12



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,661
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 22 2009, 12:44 AM) *
It's a classic case of getting people within an orgnization looking for the Truth to start in-fighting.


The only people fighting over Lear are people from outside our organization, attempting to incite "infighting" within our organization.

There is not one aviation professional on our roster who has a problem with Lear being in our organization. Lear is a highly respected member of the Aviation Community. After all, he does hold several world records in aviation and his name does appear on thousands of pilot certificates throughout the world. I would even go so far to say others felt more comfortable offering their name and credentials to be listed on our roster because Lear is a member, but I cant be sure.

Also, the "interviewer", was me. You'd know that if you listened to the interview and not just "heard" it, or even just looked at the screen while the interview was playing. The interview was designed to be a short interview, to the point, with questions most frequently asked, and addressing accusations against Lear. As you can see, we dont spend much time on frivolous accusations, speculation, theory... etc.. and instead focus mainly on our work.

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.

If you reply to this thread again, please bring documents and sources for your claims. Your frivolous accusations have gone on long enough with regard to a respected member of our organization.

As for "urging caution" when dealing with Lear on this forum. Lear has all of 2 posts here to date. http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showuser=744

Your caution is frivolous and unwarranted.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
johnlear
post Aug 22 2009, 12:53 PM
Post #13





Group: Core Member
Posts: 58
Joined: 9-March 07
From: Las Vegas, NV
Member No.: 744



QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 19 2009, 12:40 AM) *
Be very weary of Lear.


My wife has been weary of me for 38 years. But I am sure you mean wary. smile.gif

QUOTE
He is a dis-info specialist.


Not true. However if you could be more specific I will answer.

QUOTE
He does work for the CIA.


Not true. Between 1967 and 1982 I flew for companies that were contracted by the CIA.

QUOTE
He has off the wall theories about UFO's (dis-info put out by the CIA to hide the real truth about UFO's, that they are man-made).


Some are man made some are not. My father's company was a major DOD contractor in 1952 to work on anti-gravity,

QUOTE
Anything you say to him, anything that you give him goes straight to the CIA. Not that they don't already know who we are.


Not true. Over the past few years I have only talked to one current employee who was west coast interviewer for hiring. He has written several books about the war in SEA. He was working on the ground in Laos at the same time I was working air ops. He has written several books: Codename Mule and Last Man Out.

QUOTE
Watch it with Lear. It's called 'Poisoning the well'; that is, inserting bad info into a body of good info as to 'poison' the entire body of info. Aka, a little poison kills the entire well.


I would like to respond to this allegation but you will have to be more specific.

QUOTE
Once CIA, always CIA


True but I was not actually CIA. I was just a contract pilot.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post Aug 22 2009, 01:08 PM
Post #14


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



I want to underscore what Rob is saying here, Trapster. As I understand it, and Rob will correct me if I'm wrong or clarify as needed, to be a core member of Pilots for 9/11 Truth a person has to be a verified aviation professional and has to be willing to publicly endorse the research and findings of P4T.

That said, to my knowledge there is NO stipulation that a qualified aviation professional who endorses and stands behind P4T's work has to either have or not have any particular belief. I'm sure that Rob doesn't ask these people whether or not they believe in UFO's, Big Foot -- or Jesus Christ for that matter. From the point of view of their professional qualifications and endorsement of our work, it is irrelevant and, in fact, would be prejudicial to even ask.

As is pointed out in this video, John Lear is qualified to be a core member of this organization. Whether or not he has some "far out there" ideas or beliefs is irrelevant. Lear's endorsement of Pilots for Truth does not translate into the opposite, Pilots for Truth's endorsement of his personal views -- or the personal views of any other core member.

As I stated earlier, I understand there are some detractors among the Truth movement who want to single out John Lear and use his endorsement of Pilots for Truth to discredit this organization because of his personal beliefs. But I ask you, do you really think this organization should be in the business of screening applicants for core membership based on their beliefs, their politics, their religion, their nationality, their personal philosophy -- whatever it might be? We don't know how many of our core members "believe" in UFO's (or what have you) and I'm willing to bet that Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice and Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, etc., don't either. Should we exclude David Ray Griffin because he is a Christian theologian? Should we exclude Steven Jones because he is a Mormon? (Note: I don't know what Steven Jones' personal religious beliefs are, only that he was a professor at BYU.) This whole line of thinking -- that we ought to exclude certain people from professional endorsement of Truth research because of their personal beliefs -- is so fundamentally wrong, repugnant and prejudicial, it should be an embarrassment to those who hold and espouse it.

Moving on to the question of CIA involvement. In the interview above John Lear has made clear that he was not an employee of the CIA but was, rather, an employee of airlines that were either contracted by the CIA or front organizations for the CIA. Now one could make something of this, I suppose, but as with the above, where do we draw the line? Should we say anyone who has ever worked for the CIA should not be allowed to participate in Truth movement? I'm thinking of people like CIA analyst Ray McGovern, for example. What about FBI employee Sibel Edmonds? Should we exclude people who have ever worked for a government agency or worked under contract for an organization doing work or research for a government agency? If so, there goes Steven Jones again.

I understand that you may personally feel very strongly about the subject of John Lear, that you may fear this "well poisoning" scenario -- but I ask you, who is bringing this up? Where is all this "concern" coming from? Who is trying to "divide" the Truth movement? Clearly it is not coming from corporate owned media. It is coming from a small group of individuals who want to discredit Pilots for Truth by association. They've singled out Lear and are making his personal beliefs and past associations with government agencies an issue under the GUISE of protecting the Truth movement.

The point I'm really making here, Trapster, is however well meaning your intentions may be, you are being used. We don't know the personal beliefs, political affiliation, government connections (if any) of people like Michael Wolsey, Jim Hoffman, Victoria Ashley and especially people like Arabesque and reprehensor who choose to remain anonymous. I don't really know the motivations behind their intentions in denigrating the work of Pilots for Truth and Citizen Investigation Team. I know what they say, that we are agents of disinformation and I also know they back this up with criticisms that are often speculative, factually inaccurate at best, and out and out lies at worst. Over and over again, for example, I hear them making the "100+" south-side eye-witness claim, even though this claim has been royally disproved. I have YET to see them acknowledge that this claim has been disproved. No retractions. No corrections of previously published work. I hear them lobby all kinds of accusations and slanders absent verifiable evidence. I hear them criticize the work of P4T and CIT from a "superior" attitude, rather than a "supportive" attitude of "we're here to offer our help with time, qualifications, money, whatever is needed to get at the truth." What I see them doing is creating a divide within the movement and then having the GAUL to say that it is WE who are creating this divide. I see people like you taking up this cause and espousing indefensible and repugnant positions that we ought to "filter" organizations, excluding certain individuals because of their personal beliefs and opinions and because of their past associations. AND I see them doing this in a manor that is prejudicial and inconsistent. If Pilots for Truth is going to have to disavow John Lear then I insist that the Truth movement disavow Ray McGovern. You know what they say, once a spook, always a spook. And I'm going to have to insist that EVERY MEMBER OF THE MOVEMENT state publicly once and for all what they do and do not believe in regarding "god" "UFO's" "Big Foot" and every other thing human beings believe in or have opinions about. And then I'm gong to INSIST that anyone who does NOT believe exactly as I do be EXCLUDED from membership in any professional 9/11 Truth organization. After all, what is fair is fair, right?

Of course I'm not being serious -- I'm just pointing up the absurdity of this argument. You should really be ashamed to be here attempting to make a case for it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
johnlear
post Aug 22 2009, 01:11 PM
Post #15





Group: Core Member
Posts: 58
Joined: 9-March 07
From: Las Vegas, NV
Member No.: 744



QUOTE (dMole @ Aug 20 2009, 03:46 AM) *
EDIT2: Actually Trapster, a more RELEVANT question (IMHO) would involve Mr. John Lear and his involvement (or not) with the A-12/Y(F)-12/"SR-71" program. I'm ALL EARS for some of that...


I was not involved in any way with the black bird except and all consuming interest. I knew several of the Lockheed test pilots. One was Darryl Greenamyer who checked me out in the F-104. Another was Bill Weaver who I flew copilot for delivering an L-1011 from Marana to Cambridge, England for Orbital Sciences. I would have been permanent copilot for the Pegasus Program but the Pentagon refused to issue a security clearance. If I remember correctly the exact statement to Lockheed was, "Under no circumstances will John Lear ever be issued any more clearances." I think the Pentagon was over reacting. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
painter
post Aug 22 2009, 01:19 PM
Post #16


∞* M E R C U R I A L *∞


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 5,870
Joined: 25-August 06
From: SFO
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (johnlear @ Aug 22 2009, 09:53 AM) *
My wife has been weary of me for 38 years. But I am sure you mean wary. smile.gif
<snip>

Thanks for taking the time to address this issue, Mr. Lear.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 24 2009, 01:26 PM
Post #17



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,661
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



NPT posts split and moved here..
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=17864
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tezzajw
post Aug 28 2009, 06:38 PM
Post #18





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 23-March 09
Member No.: 4,213



No matter how hard you try to set the record straight, there's always going to be some jerks who will say anything to drag your names through the mud.

At least you both know that you're on to something when the jerks keep on making noise to discredit you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 28 2009, 06:50 PM
Post #19



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,661
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Welcome back tezz!

I was starting to wonder where you been... smile.gif

Good to see ya...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trapster
post Aug 28 2009, 10:55 PM
Post #20





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 223
Joined: 25-February 09
Member No.: 4,177



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)

QUOTE
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

16 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 30th July 2014 - 07:16 PM