John Lear
Our last interview with veteran pilot John Lear covered so much ground that we had to have him back to go into detail. John discusses the role of direct energy weapons, weaponized satellites, voice morphing, and holographic technology in 9/11, the scientific flaws in the official story, the real reason the United States military invaded Afghanistan, and more. A retired airplane captain and former CIA contract pilot, John Lear is the son of Learjet inventor Bill Lear. Between 1972-3, he flew 560 missions for the CIA in Southeast Asia, over half of which were combat. John Lear’s extensive flight experience (which spans over 40 years), list of FAA certifications, and years of firsthand research qualify him uniquely to highlight controversial issues central to the War on Terror and the military-industrial complex. If you were intrigued by John Lear’s first interview, the trail picks up here.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
This is just so sad…these conspiracy theories have been rigorously debunked many times, and yet this pathetic old guy continues to spout this silly nonsense. Sad.
Especially sad considering his very active and distinguished career.
What’s really sad is your condescending, insulting tone. I’d wager this “pathetic old guy” has done more firsthand research than you’d ever dare to do.
Rigorously debunked by who, the 9/11 commission? Who are your sources? Who are those sources affiliated with?
Experience and qualifications in any given area, however noteworthy, do not transfer to other areas. Sorry about the tone, but I stand by what I said.
POPULAR MECHINICS did a great job answering some of these questions. A Pulitzer prize awaits any reporter who can show a conspiracy. The government is just too large and incompetent to pull something like this off in any event. There would be too many people [and potential leaks].
You appear to have an emotional investment in this theory, which isn’t a good sign of an entirely logical presentation.
In any event, there is a chance [however small] that you may be correct. And you still have the right [thank God] to bring forth your ideas and opinions.
“Experience and qualifications in any given area, however noteworthy, do not transfer to other areas.”
I don’t necessarily agree. Many climate scientists arrogantly claim that established information from other scientific disciplines is wrong, or ignore it altogether, even if totally relevant. But I understand what you’re getting at.
“Sorry about the tone, but I stand by what I said.”
Your tone was most of what you said. I was more offended by that than the content.
“POPULAR MECHINICS did a great job answering some of these questions. A Pulitzer prize awaits any reporter who can show a conspiracy.”
I disagree that Popular Mechanics did a great job. Have you read any responses to it, or did you read it and say “PM is unquestionably reputable, so that’s that”?
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm
I also asked “Who are those sources affiliated with?” – in the case of Popular Mechanics, that’s a doozy:
http://www.rense.com/general63/brutalpurgeofPMstaff.htm
Excerpt:
American Free Press revealed that Benjamin Chertoff, the 25-year-old senior researcher who authored the 9/11 article, is related to Michael Chertoff, the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The PM article illustrates how a propaganda method, used by dictatorships, is now being employed by the U.S. government: controlling mainstream media outlets to promote its version of 9/11.
The actions of Michael Chertoff concerning the events of 9/11, the non-investigation that followed, the USA PATRIOT Act, and the propaganda being disseminated in PM, are strikingly similar to actions attributed to the Nazi ministers Joseph Goebbels and Hermann Gvring.
While Chertoff is the czar of DHS, he is not sovereign at PM or Hearst Magazines, its corporate parent. The president of Hearst Magazines, one of the world’s largest publishers of monthly magazines with 18 U.S. titles and more than 100 international editions, is Cathleen P. Black, a 60-year old native of Chicago. Black oversees the publication of 175 titles around the world including Cosmopolitan, Harpers Bazaar, Town & Country, Esquire, Good Housekeeping, and Popular Mechanics.
Black is a former president and publisher of USA Today. In 1983, Black was made president of the new newspaper published by Gannett. The following year she was made publisher and soon became a member of Gannetts board of directors.
Despite her efforts, her biography reads, USA Today did not show an operating profit in the eight years that Black was there. The newspaper’s non-profitability notwithstanding, Gannett paid Black $600,000 a year for her efforts. USA Today reportedly had a circulation of 1.8 million when Black left in 1991. USA Today is often given away free of charge.
Black left USA Today to become president and chief executive of the nascent Newspaper Association of America (NAA), formed on June 1, 1992. She then became the leading spokesperson and lobbyist for the nation’s newspaper industry. Black’s position at the NAA carried “considerable political heft,” Paul Farhi of The Washington Post wrote, “given that the 1,400 members of her organization control the nations editorial pages.
In 1995, for an annual salary reported to be “in excess of $1 million,” Black was hired by Hearst Corp. to head its magazine division. Named by Fortune magazine as one of the Most Powerful Women in American Business, Black sits on the boards of Hearst Corp., the Advertising Council, IBM, and Coca-Cola. She is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Read the rest of the article to learn about the management coup at PM too. Then tell me they’re reputable.
“The government is just too large and incompetent to pull something like this off in any event. There would be too many people [and potential leaks].”
I feel you’re underestimating the government, and confusing them with the military. Covert ops often take place far beyond the security clearances of high-ranking politicians.
“You appear to have an emotional investment in this theory, which isn’t a good sign of an entirely logical presentation.”
The emotion was in response to your disrespectful and condescending tone…
“This is just so sad…these conspiracy theories have been rigorously debunked many times, and yet this pathetic old guy continues to spout this silly nonsense. Sad.”
…not to your disagreement. Though since you accept PM’s 9/11 whitewash, it also upsets me to read your disdain for those who dare to question what is considerably more compelling than corporate interest, institutional academia, and government stooges apparently want us to believe.
OK…I started off this exchange with an unfortunate ad hominim attack, which I regret. I don’t like this in others, and I did it myself. Unacceptable. I appologize.
One of the hallmarks of a lot of ‘conspiracy’ theories is the large number of people supposedly involved. In the various 9/11 scenarios we end up with thousands of folks who have dark secrets to keep — unlikely. This includes the magazine publishers, the entire investigative reporting cadre of the international press, high-ranking military and government types, and the science community. That’s a lot of people to be involved in a cover-up. Of course, these theories say many are ‘duped’, and it’s surely true that duping can, and does, often occur. Just look at the AGW scam, thankfully dying out under a huge load of facts and growing skepicism.
I’m not saying it’s impossible, just highly improbable. It aslo violates the theory of ‘Occam’s Razor’, that is: put your money on the simplist of several explanations.
If your scenario proves to be valid, then it will have very profound implications for everyone and everything. I do understand that there are very powerful forces that protect the status quo, as it greatly benefits themselves at the expense of truth and freedom. I’m just not convinced that 9/11 was much more than has been stated — a very well-planned and financed terrorist attack by Al Qaeda fanatics.
In any event, thanks for your efforts, regardless of my views on them at this time. We all need to keep challenging the various paradigms that are so arrogantly defended.
“I appologize.”
I absolutely respect you for that.
“One of the hallmarks of a lot of ‘conspiracy’ theories is the large number of people supposedly involved.”
I do understand this argument. However, it’s pretty common knowledge that the global financial elite control the vast majority of what goes on in the world. By funding paradigms (the Rockefeller Foundation’s promotion of Peking Man is a good example of this – for the story, I’d recommend Michael Cremo’s “The Forbidden Archeologist”), and banking on the power of belief and the likelihood that most people will not contradict institutional research, it’s pretty easy to direct groups to fulfill an agenda. The Rockefeller Foundation certainly does!
“In the various 9/11 scenarios we end up with thousands of folks who have dark secrets to keep — unlikely.”
In America, it’s rare to find folks who don’t have dark secrets to keep. Between the military-industrial complex, the corporate interests that spend so much in DC (the glutamate lobby, for example – they’re sitting on a mountain of lies about the health of MSG), the really dishonest politicians… (see my point?)
Ultimately a lot of people will tow the line to keep their jobs and to protect their families. If one’s bread and butter is tied up in deception – and we have to accept that this is the case on a global scale sometimes, as with AGW – it’s hard to be the whistleblower.
Frankly I think deception is at the heart of academic science too, as they face the same pressures as any institution funded by big money. Personally, I know people who’ve done medical research that shows an outcome predetermined by their client, a prosthetic designer – people who do research studies usually know how to skew data quite well in order to preserve funding.
“This includes the magazine publishers, the entire investigative reporting cadre of the international press, high-ranking military and government types, and the science community. That’s a lot of people to be involved in a cover-up.”
That’s one way of looking at it; I would call it a lot of people whose entire lives depend on a particular view of the world, which is either wrong (for those who accept the world at face value) or self-serving (for those who are privy to the “truth” about how society works and don’t care as long as they can benefit). To some extent, if we’re duped, we’re complicit; it takes dedication to accept the reality handed to us by institutions.
“I’m not saying it’s impossible, just highly improbable.”
I accept that it’s possible that I’m wrong. However, institutions are very powerful – corporations included amongst them – and their chains of command are such that everyone has to answer to someone; it makes it very easy for few to control many.
“It aslo violates the theory of ‘Occam’s Razor’, that is: put your money on the simplist of several explanations.”
On the very same basis, I have issues with relativity. 🙂 I do abide by Occam’s Razor – I think we just have drastically different ideas of the way things actually work here, so of course I’m applying it differently.
“I’m just not convinced that 9/11 was much more than has been stated — a very well-planned and financed terrorist attack by Al Qaeda fanatics.”
It’s hard for me to swallow that. You do know a bunch (9, I believe) of the supposed terrorists were discovered alive and well – they were never involved – right? Their photos were just used on the wanted lists.
I think it’s great that you’re still open to consideration – you might want to check out the interview with Judy Wood on this site. A lot of people are intent on drawing conclusions about 9/11, but Judy’s take is to forget about all that and really look at the data. Which is REALLY WEIRD, by the way.
“In any event, thanks for your efforts, regardless of my views on them at this time. We all need to keep challenging the various paradigms that are so arrogantly defended.”
I’m glad we could get past the initial hurdles and have a constructive discussion, Michael. Best wishes.
Best wishes to you also, Joe.
I visit this site because I am always challenging the status quo and try hard to keep my mental parameters pretty wide. I understand that there is an almost infinite amount of knowledge that I’ll never know, but I keep pushing for that knowledge [as opposed to ‘data’ or ‘information’].
In any event, this has been an enlightening exchange and a reminder for me not to commit sins myself which I so despise in others.
Thanks again.
I am glad this guy doesn’t fly planes anymore.
One thing I noticed over many months of observing people and their connection to the earth is that people who appear ungrounded or lack a solid connection with the earth tend to be the ones who embrace and focus on conspiracies and especially aliens. In contrast people I have met who are totally connected to mother earth either through gardening, agriculture, trees, walking barefoot, working to improve the ‘earthly’ quality of life of others, working with animals, etc do not spend time focusing on ufos, aliens and a host of other scary conspiracies. Or lets say if they do then it is really just on the scale of small print or annotated footnotes. Of course there are always exceptions to the rule and I am probably one of them or I lack sufficient connection with the earth. Anyhow I couldn’t help noticing the connection between John Lear’s passion for the element of air and his involvement and interest in aliens and similar phenomena. I say this with reverence and complete respect for John as he touched me deeply with his ideas on how we should conduct our lives with integrity and one can’t help but believe that he has integrated these virtues into the very fabric of his life. However this post is in no way a criticism of his person or how he spends his time it is simply a sweeping generalisation of a pattern I have noticed in various people I have encountered in recent years. My own point of view on these aliens and ufos is that they may well exist but not on the same physical frequency that we exist on even though at times they can appear denser and more 3D like. Many years ago a scientist told me that there were beings inhabiting Venus and the Sun and that they were both temperate zones but these beings according to this Royal Navy scientist were not physical as in blood and flesh physical. But the big paradox is that it begs the question what is physicality anyway as really at an sub atomic level we are all made up of space. Regarding understanding the dynamics of reincarnation I highly recommend the book by Joseph entitled: Your Life After Death and another book entitled The Fall which is a fantastic insight into the Bigger Picture.
Gotta Love Intelligent Hosts that Interview Intelligent People.
John Lear already Knew what Dr Judy Wood had to do. That’s a whole lot of Investigation to come to the conclusion of Molecular Dissociation. On the subject of the controlled wiki another recent site that lasted all of 2 days is the OPPT. Wonder why? Check out The One Peoples Public Trust.
Ann it would be Great if you could arrange an Interview with Heather Ann Tucci-Jarrif..
In Lak’ech…joachim