Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,773 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,267,379
Pageviews Today: 1,752,410Threads Today: 407Posts Today: 8,221
02:03 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 35980658
United Kingdom
03/11/2013 06:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
AC2700

I'm not necessarily a "no-planer" but if there really were no planes and it was missiles masked with CGI for television, then there would be no evidence. I'm of the mind that at least one plane hit (south tower). Still not sure about north tower.



No plane hit either tower. Perhaps you should read my proof in my affidavit to the New York District Court proving this.

As far as the south tower no airliner could possible have flown at 561 MPH at sea leverl Maximum speed would have been 360 knots or 380 mph.

Further, it would have been impossible for a first time pilot to have hit a building, dead center.

No experienced pilot has been able to duplicate this maneuver in the simulator.

 Quoting: johnlear


John, I know you are very knowledgeable in aeronautics but why is it that you say the max speed would be 380 knots yet there are lots of highly qualified pilots that agree with the speeds stated by the official story.

Can you explain this please?
johnlear

User ID: 33628280
United States
03/12/2013 02:36 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Because Vmo (Velocity Max Operating) is 360kts (380 mph). This airspeed is determined by wind tunnel tests including the speed at which the airplane will start coming apart.

Please read my affidavit:

Jerry V. Leaphart #jl4468
Jerry V. Leaphart & Assoc., P.C.
8 West Street, Suite 203
Danbury, CT 06810
(203) 825-6265 – phone
(203) 825-6256 – fax
jsleaphart@cs.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

DR. MORGAN REYNOLDS, on behalf of :
The United States of America :
:
Plaintiff, : ECF CASE
vs. :
: 07 CIV 4612 (GBD)
SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP.;
et al :
: January 28, 2008
Defendants. :
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF NEVADA :
COUNTY OF CLARK :
JOHN LEAR, of full age, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
I.
1. I am 65 years of age, a retired airline captain and former CIA pilot with over 19,000 hours of flight time, over 11,000 of which are in command of 3 or 4 engine jet transports, have flown over 100 different types of aircraft in 60 different countries around the world. I retired in 2001 after 40 years of flying.

2. I am the son of Learjet inventor, Bill Lear, and hold more FAA airman certificates than any other FAA certificated airman. These include the Airline Transport Pilot certificate with 23 type ratings, Flight Instructor, Flight Engineer, Flight Navigator, Ground Instructor, Aircraft Dispatcher, Control Tower Operator and Parachute Rigger.

3. I flew secret missions for the CIA in Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa between 1967 and 1983
.
4. During the last 17 years of my career I worked for several passenger and cargo airlines as Captain, Check Airman and Instructor. I was certificated by the FAA as a North Atlantic (MNPS) Check Airman. I have extensive experience as command pilot and instructor in the Boeing 707, Douglas DC-8 and Lockheed L-1011.

5. I checked out as Captain on a Boeing 707 in 1973 and Captain on the Lockheed L-1011 in 1985.

6. I hold 17 world records including Speed Around the World in a Lear Jet Model 24 set in 1966 and was presented the PATCO (Professional Air Traffic Controller's Association) award for Outstanding Airmanship in 1968. I am a Senior Vice-Commander of the China Post 1, the American Legions Post for “Soldiers of Fortune”, a 24 year member of the Special Operations Association and member of Pilotfor911truth.org.

7. I have 4 daughters, 3 grandchildren and live with my wife of 37 years, Las Vegas business woman Marilee Lear in Las Vegas, Nevada.

II.
8. No Boeing 767 airliners hit the Twin Towers as fraudulently alleged by the government, media, NIST and its contractors. Such crashes did not occur because they are physically impossible as depicted for the following reasons:

A. In the case of UAL 175 going into the south tower, a real Boeing 767 would have begun 'telescoping' when the nose hit the 14 inch steel columns which are 39 inches on center. The vertical and horizontal tail would have instantaneously separated from the aircraft, hit the steel box columns and fallen to the ground.

B. The engines when impacting the steel columns would have maintained their general shape and either fallen to the ground or been recovered in the debris of the collapsed building. One alleged engine part was found on Murray Street but there should be three other engine cores weighing over 9000 pounds each. Normal operating temperatures for these engines are 650°C so they could not possibly have burned up. This is a photo of a similar sized engine from a McDonnell-Douglas MD-11 which impacted the ocean at a high rate of speed. You can see that the engine remains generally intact.(photo, [link to www.cbsnews.com] shtml)



C. When and if the nose of an airplane came in contact with the buildings 14 inch by 14 inch steel box columns and then, 37 feet beyond, the steel box columns of the building core the momentum of the wings would have slowed drastically depriving them of the energy to penetrate the exterior steel box columns. The spars of the wing, which extend outward, could not possibly have penetrated the 14 inch by 14 inch steel box columns placed 39 inches on center and would have crashed to the ground.

D. The argument that the energy of the mass of the Boeing 767 at a speed of 540 mph fails because:

a. No Boeing 767 could attain that speed at 1000 feet
above sea level because of parasite drag which doubles with velocity and parasite power which cubes with velocity.
b. The fan portion of the engine is not designed to accept
the volume of dense air at that altitude and speed.

E. The piece of alleged external fuselage containing 3 or 4 window cutouts is inconsistent with an airplane that hit 14 inch steel box columns, placed 39 inches in center, at over 500 mph. This fuselage section would be telescopically crumpled had it actually penetrated the building as depicted in the CNN video. It is impossible for it to have then re-emerged from the building and then fallen intact and unburned as depicted.

F. The Purdue video fails because no significant part of the Boeing 767 or engine thereon could have penetrated the 14 inch steel columns and 37 feet beyond the massive core of the tower without part of it falling to the ground. The Purdue video misrepresents the construction of the core of the building and depicts unidentified parts of the airplane snapping the core columns which were 12"x36". The Purdue video also misrepresents what would happen to the tail when the alleged fuselage contacted the core. The tail would instantaneously separate from the empennage (aft fuselage). Further, the Purdue video misrepresents, indeed it fails to show, the wing box or center section of the wing in the collision with the core. The wing box is a very strong unit designed to hold the wings together and is an integral portion of the fuselage. The wing box is designed to help distribute the loads of the wings up-and-down flexing in flight.

G. My analysis of the alleged cutout made by the Boeing 767 shows that many of the 14-inch exterior steel box columns which are shown as severed horizontally, do not match up with the position of the wings. Further, several of the columns through which the horizontal tail allegedly disappeared are not severed or broken. In addition, the wing tips of the Boeing 767 being of less robust construction than the inner portions of the wings could not possibly have made the cookie-cutter pattern as shown in the aftermath photos. The wing tips would have been stopped by the 14 inch steel box columns and fallen to the ground.

H. The debris of the Boeing 767, as found after the
collapse, was not consistent with actual debris had there really been a
crash. Massive forgings, spars from both the wing and horizontal and vertical stabilizers, landing gear retract cylinders, landing gear struts, hydraulic reservoirs and bogeys oxygen bottles, a massive keel beam, bulkheads and the wing box itself cold not possibly have 'evaporated' even in a high intensity fire. The debris of the collapse should have contained massive sections of the Boeing 767, including 3 engine cores weighing approximately 9000 pounds apiece which could not have been hidden. Yet there is no evidence of any of these massive structural components from either 767 at the WTC. Such complete disappearance of 767s is impossible.

III.
9. My opinion, based on extensive flight experience both as captain and instructor in large 3 and 4 engine aircraft is that it would have been impossible for an alleged hijacker with little or no time in the Boeing 767 to have taken over, then flown a Boeing 767 at high speed, descending to below 1000 feet above mean sea level and flown a course to impact the twin towers at high speed for these reasons:
A. As soon as the alleged hijackers sat in the pilots seat of the Boeing 767 they would be looking at an EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrumentation System) display panel comprised of six large multi-mode LCDs interspersed with clusters of 'hard' instruments. These displays process the raw aircraft system and flight data into an integrated picture of the aircraft situation, position and progress, not only in the horizontal and vertical dimensions, but also with regard to time and speed as well.

Had they murdered the pilot with a box knife as alleged there would be blood all over the seat, the controls, the center pedestal, the instrument panel and floor of the cockpit. The hijacker would have had to remove the dead pilot from his seat which means he would have had electrically or manually place the seat in its rearmost position and then lifted the murdered pilot from his seat, further distributing blood, making the controls including the throttles wet, sticky and difficult to hold onto.

Even on a clear day a novice pilot would be wholly incapable of taking control and turning a Boeing 767 towards New York because of his total lack of experience and situational awareness under these conditions. The alleged hijackers were not 'instrument rated' and controlled high altitude flight requires experience in constantly referring to and cross-checking attitude, altitude and speed instruments. Using the distant horizon to fly 'visually' under controlled conditions is virtually impossible particularly at the cruising speed of the Boeing 767 of .80 Mach.

The alleged 'controlled' descent into New York on a relatively straight course by a novice pilot in unlikely in the extreme because of the difficulty of controlling heading, descent rate and descent speed within the parameters of 'controlled' flight.

Its takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret the "EFIS" (Electronic Flight Instrument Display) display, with which none of the hijacker pilots would have been familiar or received training on, and use his controls, including the ailerons, rudder, elevators, spoilers and throttles to effect, control and maintain a descent. The Boeing 767 does not fly itself nor does it automatically correct any misuse of the controls.

B. As soon as the speed of the aircraft went above 360 knots (=414 mph) indicated airspeed a "clacker" would have sounded in the cockpit. The 'clacker' is a loud clacking sound, designed to be irritating, to instantly get the attention of the pilot that he is exceeding the FAA-authorized speed of the aircraft. The clacker had no circuit breaker on September 11, 2001 although it does now simply because one or more accidents were caused, in part, by the inability to silence the clacker which made decision, tempered with reasoning, impossible because of the noise and distraction.

C. Assuming, however, that the alleged hijacker was able to navigate into a position to approach the WTC tower at a speed of approximately 790 feet per second the alleged hijacker would have about 67 seconds to navigate the last 10 miles. During that 67 seconds the pilot would have to line up perfectly with a 208 ft. wide target (the tower) and stay lined up with the clacker clacking plus the tremendous air noise against the windshield and the bucking bronco-like airplane, exceeding the Boeing 767 maximum stability limits and encountering early morning turbulence caused by rising irregular currents of air.

He would also have to control his altitude with a high degree of
precision and at the alleged speeds would be extremely difficult.
In addition to this the control, although hydraulically boosted, would be very stiff. Just the slightest control movements would have sent the airplane up or down at thousands of feet a minute. To propose that an alleged hijacker with limited experience could get a Boeing 767 lined up with a 208 foot wide target and keep it lined up and hold his altitude at exactly 800 feet while being aurally bombarded with the clacker is beyond the realm of possibility. [NIST claims a descent from horizontal angle of 10.6 degrees for AA11 at impact and 6 degrees for UA175; see page 276 of 462 in NCSTAR 1-2].

That an alleged hijacker could overcome all of these difficulties and hit a 208 foot wide building dead center at the north tower and 23 feet east of dead center at the south tower is simply not possible. At the peak of my proficiency as a pilot I know that I could not have done it on the first pass. And for two alleged hijackers, with limited experience to have hit the twin towers dead center on September 11, 2001 is total fiction. It could not happen.

IV.
10. No Boeing 767 airliner(s) exceeded 500 mph in level flight at approximately 1000 feet on 9/11 as fraudulently alleged by the government, media, NIST and its contractors because they are incapable of such speeds at low altitude.

11. One of the critical issues of the 'impossible' speeds of the aircraft hitting the World Trade Center Towers alleged by NIST as 443 mph (385 kts. M.6, American Airlines Flight 11) and 542 mph (470 kts. M.75, United Airlines 175) is that the VD or dive velocity of the Boeing 767 as certificated by the Federal Aviation under 14 CFR Part 25 Airworthiness Standards; Transport Category Transports of 420 kts CAS (Calibrated Air Speed) makes these speeds achievable. This is unlikely.

12. The 'Dive Velocity' VD is 420 knots CAS (calibrated airspeed)(483 mph). Some allege that this speed, 420 knots (483 mph) is near enough to the NIST alleged speeds that the NIST speeds 443 (385 kts.) mph and 542 mph (471 kts.), could have been flown by the alleged hijackers and are probably correct.

13. In fact VD of 420 knots (483 mph) is a speed that is a maximum for certification under 14 CFR Part 25.253 High Speed Characteristics and has not only not necessarily been achieved but is far above VFC (390 kts. 450 mph) which is the maximum speed at which stability characteristics must be demonstrated.(14 CFR 25.253 (b).

14. What this means is not only was VD not necessarily achieved but even if it was, it was achieved in a DIVE demonstrating controllability considerably above VFC which is the maximum speed under which stability characteristics must be demonstrated. Further, that as the alleged speed is considerably above VFC for which stability characteristics must be met, a hijacker who is not an experienced test pilot would have considerable difficulty in controlling the airplane, similar to flying a bucking bronco, much less hitting a 208 foot target dead center, at 800 feet altitude (above mean sea level) at the alleged speed.

15. Now to determine whether or not a Boeing 757 or Boeing 767 could even attain 540 miles per hour at 800 feet we have to first consider what the drag versus the power ratio is.

Drag is the effect of the air pushing against the frontal areas of the fuselage and wing and horizontal and vertical stabilizers. Drag also includes the friction that is a result of the air flowing over these surfaces. If there was no drag you could go very fast. But we do have drag and there are 2 types: induced and parasite. Assume we are going really fast as NIST and the defendants claim, then we don't have to consider induced drag because induced drag is caused by lift and varies inversely as the square of the airspeed. What this means is the faster you go the lower the induced drag.

What we do have to consider is parasite drag. Parasite drag is any drag produced that is not induced drag. Parasite drag is technically called 'form and friction' drag. It includes the air pushing against the entire airplane including the engines, as the engines try to push the entire airplane through the air.

16. We have two other things to consider: induced power and
parasite power.

Induced power varies inversely with velocity so we don't have to consider that because we are already going fast by assumption and it varies inversely.
Parasite power however varies as the cube of the velocity which
means to double the speed you have to cube or have three times the power.

17. So taking these four factors into consideration we are only concerned with two: parasite power and parasite drag, and if all other factors are constant, and you are level at 800 feet and making no turns, the parasite drag varies with the square of the velocity but parasite power varies as the cube of the velocity.

What this means is at double the speed, drag doubles and the power required to maintain such speed is cubed.

The airspeed limitation for the Boeing 767 below approximately 23,000 feet is 360 kts [414 mph] or what they call VMO (velocity maximum operating).
That means that the maximum permissible speed of the Boeing 767 below 23,000 feet is 360 knots and it is safe to operate the airplane at that speed but not faster.


18. While the Boeing 767 can fly faster and has been flown faster during flight test it is only done so within carefully planned flight test programs. We can safely infer that most commercial 767 pilots have never exceeded 360 knots indicated air speed below 23,000 feet.

19. The alleged NIST speed of 443 mph (385 kts,) for American Airlines Flight 11 would be technically achievable. However the NIST speed of 542 mph (470 kts) for United Airlines Flight 175 which is 50 kts. above VD is not commensurate with and/or possible considering:

(1) the power available,* **
(2) parasite drag (NAVAIR 00-80T-80 Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators
(3) parasite power (NAVAIR 00-80T-80 Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators
(4) the controllability by a pilot with limited experience. 14 CFR Part 25.253 (a)(b)
* [link to www.ntsb.gov]
** [link to www.content.airbusworld.com]
20. Therefore the speed of the aircraft, that hit the World Trade Center, as represented by NIST, particularly that of United Airlines Flight 175 is fraudulent and could not have occurred.

21. One more consideration is the impossibility of the PW4062 turbofan engines to operate in dense air at sea level altitude at high speed.
The Boeing 767 was designed to fly at high altitudes at a maximum Mach of .86 or 86/100ths the speed of sound. This maximum speed is called MMO, (Maximum Mach Operating). Its normal cruise speed, however, is Mach .80 (about 530 mph) or less, for better fuel economy. (The speed of sound at 35,000 feet is 663 mph so 530 mph is Mach .7998 see [link to www.grc.nasa.gov]
The fan tip diameter of the PW4062 which powered UAL 175 was 94 inches, over 7 feet in diameter making it, essentially a huge propeller.
This huge fan compresses enormous amount of air during takeoff to produce the thrust necessary to get the airplane off of the ground and into the air.
At high altitudes, in cruise, where the air is much thinner and where the engines are designed to fly at most of the time, the fan and turbine sections are designed to efficiently accept enormous amounts of this thin air and produce an enormous amount of thrust.

But at low altitudes, in much denser air, such as one thousand feet, where the air is over 3x as dense as at 35,000 feet, going much faster than Vmo or 360 knots, the air is going to start jamming up in the engine simply because a turbofan engine is not designed to take the enormous quantities of dense air at high speed, low altitude flight. Because of the much denser air the fan blades will be jammed with so much air they will start cavitating or choking causing the engines to start spitting air back out the front. The turbofan tip diameter is over 7 feet; it simply cannot accept that much dense air, at that rate, because they aren't designed to.

So achieving an airspeed much over its Vmo which is 360 knots isn't going to be possible coupled with the fact that because the parasite drag increases as the square of the speed and the power required increases as the cube of the speed you are not going to be able to get the speed with the thrust (power) available.

It can be argued that modern aerodynamic principles hold that if an aircraft can fly at 35,000 ft altitude at 540 mph (~Mach 0.8), and for a given speed, both engine thrust and airframe drag vary approximately in proportion to air density (altitude), that the engine can produce enough thrust to fly 540 mph at 800 ft. altitude.

That argument fails because although the engine might be theoretically capable of producing that amount of thrust, the real question is can that amount of thrust be extracted from it at 540 mph at 800 ft.

22, To propose that a Boeing 767 airliner exceeded its designed limit speed of 360 knots by 127 mph to fly through the air at 540 mph is simply not possible. It is not possible because of the thrust required and it's not possible because of the engine fan design which precludes accepting the amount of dense air being forced into it.

23. I am informed that the lawsuit for which this affidavit is intended is in its preliminary, pre-discovery phase. I am further informed that actual eyewitness statements cast considerable doubt on the jetliner crash claims, irrespective of the media-driven impression that there were lots of witnesses. In fact, the witnesses tend, on balance, to confirm there were no jetliner crashes. I am also informed that information that will enable further refinement of the issues addressed in this affidavit will be forthcoming in discovery including, without limitation, the opportunity to take depositions and to request relevant documentation (additional information). When that additional information is obtained, I will then be in a position to offer such other and further opinions as, upon analysis, that additional information will mandate.

24. At this stage, it cannot properly be assumed, much less asserted
as factual, that wide-body jetliners crashed into the then Twin Towers of the WTC. Any declaration that such events occurred must be deemed false and fraudulently asserted, video images notwithstanding.

Notes:
1. On any chart plotting velocity versus either drag or thrust required or power required the parasite value rises sharply after 300 kts,

2. On any chart plotting velocity versus thrust or power required the curves rises sharply after 250 kts
.
3. On any chart plotting velocity versus thrust required at sea level, the curve rises dramatically above 200 kts as does the curve for power required.
I swear the above statements to be true to the best of my knowledge.

_/s/ John Olsen Lear___________
John Olsen Lear
1414 N. Hollywood Blvd.
Las Vegas, NV 89110-2006
Subscribed and Sworn to before
me this 24 day of January 2008.
/s/ Connie Jones______________
Notary Public/Appt Exp. 11/22/09
Certificate #94-2650-1

This is the page for the Boeing 767-200 Type Data Certificate information from which was used in this affidavit:
<rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_library/rgMakeModel.nsf/​0/15302e51a401f11a8625718b00658962/$FILE/A1NM.pdf >.
This is the page that shows how dive tests are conducted:
[link to www.flightsimaviation.com]
This is the page for the type data certificate for the engines used on UAL175
[link to www.content.airbusworld.com]
This is the page that shows the type of engine used on the MD-11 that crashed into the ocean. (photo attached)
[link to www.bst.gc.ca]
Live your life with integrity; and without envy hate or greed. Express your love to your family every day.

Thats all you have to do in this life other than doing things you like to do.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 35980658
United Kingdom
03/12/2013 03:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Thanks John, but isn't vmo just 'safe' operating max?

Surely the plane could acheive 500mph after a dive and for a short period of time?


I'm just trying to understand why other qualified pilots have no problem with the official speeds.
Free Store
User ID: 36030057
Canada
03/12/2013 04:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
I like John Lear. Lots of truths and half truths due to no fault of his own.I have a nack of turning on TV and seeing first hand the program. I saw the short TV broadcast of the brand new discovery of Planet X that was so new that Planet X was the name used till a file name can be used. Two scientists with the shmocks, poiner in one hand and an easle board with the planet orbits drawn up... and other things. I happen to turn TV on just as a tv crew was doing a sidewaLK interview with a couple a few blocks away and a jet flying over the buildings and smashing directly into the tower with the smoke fire and plane (the TV monitor shook to the jet's roar)No time for edits. That was truley amazing Anyway John keep that curtain ever going up..
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 35980658
United Kingdom
03/12/2013 04:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
I like John Lear. Lots of truths and half truths due to no fault of his own.I have a nack of turning on TV and seeing first hand the program. I saw the short TV broadcast of the brand new discovery of Planet X that was so new that Planet X was the name used till a file name can be used. Two scientists with the shmocks, poiner in one hand and an easle board with the planet orbits drawn up... and other things. I happen to turn TV on just as a tv crew was doing a sidewaLK interview with a couple a few blocks away and a jet flying over the buildings and smashing directly into the tower with the smoke fire and plane (the TV monitor shook to the jet's roar)No time for edits. That was truley amazing Anyway John keep that curtain ever going up..
 Quoting: Free Store 36030057


link?
eos

User ID: 35717998
United States
03/12/2013 04:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Because Vmo (Velocity Max Operating) is 360kts (380 mph). This airspeed is determined by wind tunnel tests including the speed at which the airplane will start coming apart.

Please read my affidavit:

Jerry V. Leaphart #jl4468
Jerry V. Leaphart & Assoc., P.C.
8 West Street, Suite 203
Danbury, CT 06810
(203) 825-6265 – phone
(203) 825-6256 – fax
jsleaphart@cs.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

DR. MORGAN REYNOLDS, on behalf of :
The United States of America :
:
Plaintiff, : ECF CASE
vs. :
: 07 CIV 4612 (GBD)
SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP.;
et al :
: January 28, 2008
Defendants. :
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF NEVADA :
COUNTY OF CLARK :
JOHN LEAR, of full age, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
I.
1. I am 65 years of age, a retired airline captain and former CIA pilot with over 19,000 hours of flight time, over 11,000 of which are in command of 3 or 4 engine jet transports, have flown over 100 different types of aircraft in 60 different countries around the world. I retired in 2001 after 40 years of flying.

2. I am the son of Learjet inventor, Bill Lear, and hold more FAA airman certificates than any other FAA certificated airman. These include the Airline Transport Pilot certificate with 23 type ratings, Flight Instructor, Flight Engineer, Flight Navigator, Ground Instructor, Aircraft Dispatcher, Control Tower Operator and Parachute Rigger.

3. I flew secret missions for the CIA in Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa between 1967 and 1983
.
4. During the last 17 years of my career I worked for several passenger and cargo airlines as Captain, Check Airman and Instructor. I was certificated by the FAA as a North Atlantic (MNPS) Check Airman. I have extensive experience as command pilot and instructor in the Boeing 707, Douglas DC-8 and Lockheed L-1011.

5. I checked out as Captain on a Boeing 707 in 1973 and Captain on the Lockheed L-1011 in 1985.

6. I hold 17 world records including Speed Around the World in a Lear Jet Model 24 set in 1966 and was presented the PATCO (Professional Air Traffic Controller's Association) award for Outstanding Airmanship in 1968. I am a Senior Vice-Commander of the China Post 1, the American Legions Post for “Soldiers of Fortune”, a 24 year member of the Special Operations Association and member of Pilotfor911truth.org.

7. I have 4 daughters, 3 grandchildren and live with my wife of 37 years, Las Vegas business woman Marilee Lear in Las Vegas, Nevada.

II.
8. No Boeing 767 airliners hit the Twin Towers as fraudulently alleged by the government, media, NIST and its contractors. Such crashes did not occur because they are physically impossible as depicted for the following reasons:

A. In the case of UAL 175 going into the south tower, a real Boeing 767 would have begun 'telescoping' when the nose hit the 14 inch steel columns which are 39 inches on center. The vertical and horizontal tail would have instantaneously separated from the aircraft, hit the steel box columns and fallen to the ground.

B. The engines when impacting the steel columns would have maintained their general shape and either fallen to the ground or been recovered in the debris of the collapsed building. One alleged engine part was found on Murray Street but there should be three other engine cores weighing over 9000 pounds each. Normal operating temperatures for these engines are 650°C so they could not possibly have burned up. This is a photo of a similar sized engine from a McDonnell-Douglas MD-11 which impacted the ocean at a high rate of speed. You can see that the engine remains generally intact.(photo, [link to www.cbsnews.com] shtml)



C. When and if the nose of an airplane came in contact with the buildings 14 inch by 14 inch steel box columns and then, 37 feet beyond, the steel box columns of the building core the momentum of the wings would have slowed drastically depriving them of the energy to penetrate the exterior steel box columns. The spars of the wing, which extend outward, could not possibly have penetrated the 14 inch by 14 inch steel box columns placed 39 inches on center and would have crashed to the ground.

D. The argument that the energy of the mass of the Boeing 767 at a speed of 540 mph fails because:

a. No Boeing 767 could attain that speed at 1000 feet
above sea level because of parasite drag which doubles with velocity and parasite power which cubes with velocity.
b. The fan portion of the engine is not designed to accept
the volume of dense air at that altitude and speed.

E. The piece of alleged external fuselage containing 3 or 4 window cutouts is inconsistent with an airplane that hit 14 inch steel box columns, placed 39 inches in center, at over 500 mph. This fuselage section would be telescopically crumpled had it actually penetrated the building as depicted in the CNN video. It is impossible for it to have then re-emerged from the building and then fallen intact and unburned as depicted.

F. The Purdue video fails because no significant part of the Boeing 767 or engine thereon could have penetrated the 14 inch steel columns and 37 feet beyond the massive core of the tower without part of it falling to the ground. The Purdue video misrepresents the construction of the core of the building and depicts unidentified parts of the airplane snapping the core columns which were 12"x36". The Purdue video also misrepresents what would happen to the tail when the alleged fuselage contacted the core. The tail would instantaneously separate from the empennage (aft fuselage). Further, the Purdue video misrepresents, indeed it fails to show, the wing box or center section of the wing in the collision with the core. The wing box is a very strong unit designed to hold the wings together and is an integral portion of the fuselage. The wing box is designed to help distribute the loads of the wings up-and-down flexing in flight.

G. My analysis of the alleged cutout made by the Boeing 767 shows that many of the 14-inch exterior steel box columns which are shown as severed horizontally, do not match up with the position of the wings. Further, several of the columns through which the horizontal tail allegedly disappeared are not severed or broken. In addition, the wing tips of the Boeing 767 being of less robust construction than the inner portions of the wings could not possibly have made the cookie-cutter pattern as shown in the aftermath photos. The wing tips would have been stopped by the 14 inch steel box columns and fallen to the ground.

H. The debris of the Boeing 767, as found after the
collapse, was not consistent with actual debris had there really been a
crash. Massive forgings, spars from both the wing and horizontal and vertical stabilizers, landing gear retract cylinders, landing gear struts, hydraulic reservoirs and bogeys oxygen bottles, a massive keel beam, bulkheads and the wing box itself cold not possibly have 'evaporated' even in a high intensity fire. The debris of the collapse should have contained massive sections of the Boeing 767, including 3 engine cores weighing approximately 9000 pounds apiece which could not have been hidden. Yet there is no evidence of any of these massive structural components from either 767 at the WTC. Such complete disappearance of 767s is impossible.

III.
9. My opinion, based on extensive flight experience both as captain and instructor in large 3 and 4 engine aircraft is that it would have been impossible for an alleged hijacker with little or no time in the Boeing 767 to have taken over, then flown a Boeing 767 at high speed, descending to below 1000 feet above mean sea level and flown a course to impact the twin towers at high speed for these reasons:
A. As soon as the alleged hijackers sat in the pilots seat of the Boeing 767 they would be looking at an EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrumentation System) display panel comprised of six large multi-mode LCDs interspersed with clusters of 'hard' instruments. These displays process the raw aircraft system and flight data into an integrated picture of the aircraft situation, position and progress, not only in the horizontal and vertical dimensions, but also with regard to time and speed as well.

Had they murdered the pilot with a box knife as alleged there would be blood all over the seat, the controls, the center pedestal, the instrument panel and floor of the cockpit. The hijacker would have had to remove the dead pilot from his seat which means he would have had electrically or manually place the seat in its rearmost position and then lifted the murdered pilot from his seat, further distributing blood, making the controls including the throttles wet, sticky and difficult to hold onto.

Even on a clear day a novice pilot would be wholly incapable of taking control and turning a Boeing 767 towards New York because of his total lack of experience and situational awareness under these conditions. The alleged hijackers were not 'instrument rated' and controlled high altitude flight requires experience in constantly referring to and cross-checking attitude, altitude and speed instruments. Using the distant horizon to fly 'visually' under controlled conditions is virtually impossible particularly at the cruising speed of the Boeing 767 of .80 Mach.

The alleged 'controlled' descent into New York on a relatively straight course by a novice pilot in unlikely in the extreme because of the difficulty of controlling heading, descent rate and descent speed within the parameters of 'controlled' flight.

Its takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret the "EFIS" (Electronic Flight Instrument Display) display, with which none of the hijacker pilots would have been familiar or received training on, and use his controls, including the ailerons, rudder, elevators, spoilers and throttles to effect, control and maintain a descent. The Boeing 767 does not fly itself nor does it automatically correct any misuse of the controls.

B. As soon as the speed of the aircraft went above 360 knots (=414 mph) indicated airspeed a "clacker" would have sounded in the cockpit. The 'clacker' is a loud clacking sound, designed to be irritating, to instantly get the attention of the pilot that he is exceeding the FAA-authorized speed of the aircraft. The clacker had no circuit breaker on September 11, 2001 although it does now simply because one or more accidents were caused, in part, by the inability to silence the clacker which made decision, tempered with reasoning, impossible because of the noise and distraction.

C. Assuming, however, that the alleged hijacker was able to navigate into a position to approach the WTC tower at a speed of approximately 790 feet per second the alleged hijacker would have about 67 seconds to navigate the last 10 miles. During that 67 seconds the pilot would have to line up perfectly with a 208 ft. wide target (the tower) and stay lined up with the clacker clacking plus the tremendous air noise against the windshield and the bucking bronco-like airplane, exceeding the Boeing 767 maximum stability limits and encountering early morning turbulence caused by rising irregular currents of air.

He would also have to control his altitude with a high degree of
precision and at the alleged speeds would be extremely difficult.
In addition to this the control, although hydraulically boosted, would be very stiff. Just the slightest control movements would have sent the airplane up or down at thousands of feet a minute. To propose that an alleged hijacker with limited experience could get a Boeing 767 lined up with a 208 foot wide target and keep it lined up and hold his altitude at exactly 800 feet while being aurally bombarded with the clacker is beyond the realm of possibility. [NIST claims a descent from horizontal angle of 10.6 degrees for AA11 at impact and 6 degrees for UA175; see page 276 of 462 in NCSTAR 1-2].

That an alleged hijacker could overcome all of these difficulties and hit a 208 foot wide building dead center at the north tower and 23 feet east of dead center at the south tower is simply not possible. At the peak of my proficiency as a pilot I know that I could not have done it on the first pass. And for two alleged hijackers, with limited experience to have hit the twin towers dead center on September 11, 2001 is total fiction. It could not happen.

IV.
10. No Boeing 767 airliner(s) exceeded 500 mph in level flight at approximately 1000 feet on 9/11 as fraudulently alleged by the government, media, NIST and its contractors because they are incapable of such speeds at low altitude.

11. One of the critical issues of the 'impossible' speeds of the aircraft hitting the World Trade Center Towers alleged by NIST as 443 mph (385 kts. M.6, American Airlines Flight 11) and 542 mph (470 kts. M.75, United Airlines 175) is that the VD or dive velocity of the Boeing 767 as certificated by the Federal Aviation under 14 CFR Part 25 Airworthiness Standards; Transport Category Transports of 420 kts CAS (Calibrated Air Speed) makes these speeds achievable. This is unlikely.

12. The 'Dive Velocity' VD is 420 knots CAS (calibrated airspeed)(483 mph). Some allege that this speed, 420 knots (483 mph) is near enough to the NIST alleged speeds that the NIST speeds 443 (385 kts.) mph and 542 mph (471 kts.), could have been flown by the alleged hijackers and are probably correct.

13. In fact VD of 420 knots (483 mph) is a speed that is a maximum for certification under 14 CFR Part 25.253 High Speed Characteristics and has not only not necessarily been achieved but is far above VFC (390 kts. 450 mph) which is the maximum speed at which stability characteristics must be demonstrated.(14 CFR 25.253 (b).

14. What this means is not only was VD not necessarily achieved but even if it was, it was achieved in a DIVE demonstrating controllability considerably above VFC which is the maximum speed under which stability characteristics must be demonstrated. Further, that as the alleged speed is considerably above VFC for which stability characteristics must be met, a hijacker who is not an experienced test pilot would have considerable difficulty in controlling the airplane, similar to flying a bucking bronco, much less hitting a 208 foot target dead center, at 800 feet altitude (above mean sea level) at the alleged speed.

15. Now to determine whether or not a Boeing 757 or Boeing 767 could even attain 540 miles per hour at 800 feet we have to first consider what the drag versus the power ratio is.

Drag is the effect of the air pushing against the frontal areas of the fuselage and wing and horizontal and vertical stabilizers. Drag also includes the friction that is a result of the air flowing over these surfaces. If there was no drag you could go very fast. But we do have drag and there are 2 types: induced and parasite. Assume we are going really fast as NIST and the defendants claim, then we don't have to consider induced drag because induced drag is caused by lift and varies inversely as the square of the airspeed. What this means is the faster you go the lower the induced drag.

What we do have to consider is parasite drag. Parasite drag is any drag produced that is not induced drag. Parasite drag is technically called 'form and friction' drag. It includes the air pushing against the entire airplane including the engines, as the engines try to push the entire airplane through the air.

16. We have two other things to consider: induced power and
parasite power.

Induced power varies inversely with velocity so we don't have to consider that because we are already going fast by assumption and it varies inversely.
Parasite power however varies as the cube of the velocity which
means to double the speed you have to cube or have three times the power.

17. So taking these four factors into consideration we are only concerned with two: parasite power and parasite drag, and if all other factors are constant, and you are level at 800 feet and making no turns, the parasite drag varies with the square of the velocity but parasite power varies as the cube of the velocity.

What this means is at double the speed, drag doubles and the power required to maintain such speed is cubed.

The airspeed limitation for the Boeing 767 below approximately 23,000 feet is 360 kts [414 mph] or what they call VMO (velocity maximum operating).
That means that the maximum permissible speed of the Boeing 767 below 23,000 feet is 360 knots and it is safe to operate the airplane at that speed but not faster.


18. While the Boeing 767 can fly faster and has been flown faster during flight test it is only done so within carefully planned flight test programs. We can safely infer that most commercial 767 pilots have never exceeded 360 knots indicated air speed below 23,000 feet.

19. The alleged NIST speed of 443 mph (385 kts,) for American Airlines Flight 11 would be technically achievable. However the NIST speed of 542 mph (470 kts) for United Airlines Flight 175 which is 50 kts. above VD is not commensurate with and/or possible considering:

(1) the power available,* **
(2) parasite drag (NAVAIR 00-80T-80 Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators
(3) parasite power (NAVAIR 00-80T-80 Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators
(4) the controllability by a pilot with limited experience. 14 CFR Part 25.253 (a)(b)
* [link to www.ntsb.gov]
** [link to www.content.airbusworld.com]
20. Therefore the speed of the aircraft, that hit the World Trade Center, as represented by NIST, particularly that of United Airlines Flight 175 is fraudulent and could not have occurred.

21. One more consideration is the impossibility of the PW4062 turbofan engines to operate in dense air at sea level altitude at high speed.
The Boeing 767 was designed to fly at high altitudes at a maximum Mach of .86 or 86/100ths the speed of sound. This maximum speed is called MMO, (Maximum Mach Operating). Its normal cruise speed, however, is Mach .80 (about 530 mph) or less, for better fuel economy. (The speed of sound at 35,000 feet is 663 mph so 530 mph is Mach .7998 see [link to www.grc.nasa.gov]
The fan tip diameter of the PW4062 which powered UAL 175 was 94 inches, over 7 feet in diameter making it, essentially a huge propeller.
This huge fan compresses enormous amount of air during takeoff to produce the thrust necessary to get the airplane off of the ground and into the air.
At high altitudes, in cruise, where the air is much thinner and where the engines are designed to fly at most of the time, the fan and turbine sections are designed to efficiently accept enormous amounts of this thin air and produce an enormous amount of thrust.

But at low altitudes, in much denser air, such as one thousand feet, where the air is over 3x as dense as at 35,000 feet, going much faster than Vmo or 360 knots, the air is going to start jamming up in the engine simply because a turbofan engine is not designed to take the enormous quantities of dense air at high speed, low altitude flight. Because of the much denser air the fan blades will be jammed with so much air they will start cavitating or choking causing the engines to start spitting air back out the front. The turbofan tip diameter is over 7 feet; it simply cannot accept that much dense air, at that rate, because they aren't designed to.

So achieving an airspeed much over its Vmo which is 360 knots isn't going to be possible coupled with the fact that because the parasite drag increases as the square of the speed and the power required increases as the cube of the speed you are not going to be able to get the speed with the thrust (power) available.

It can be argued that modern aerodynamic principles hold that if an aircraft can fly at 35,000 ft altitude at 540 mph (~Mach 0.8), and for a given speed, both engine thrust and airframe drag vary approximately in proportion to air density (altitude), that the engine can produce enough thrust to fly 540 mph at 800 ft. altitude.

That argument fails because although the engine might be theoretically capable of producing that amount of thrust, the real question is can that amount of thrust be extracted from it at 540 mph at 800 ft.

22, To propose that a Boeing 767 airliner exceeded its designed limit speed of 360 knots by 127 mph to fly through the air at 540 mph is simply not possible. It is not possible because of the thrust required and it's not possible because of the engine fan design which precludes accepting the amount of dense air being forced into it.

23. I am informed that the lawsuit for which this affidavit is intended is in its preliminary, pre-discovery phase. I am further informed that actual eyewitness statements cast considerable doubt on the jetliner crash claims, irrespective of the media-driven impression that there were lots of witnesses. In fact, the witnesses tend, on balance, to confirm there were no jetliner crashes. I am also informed that information that will enable further refinement of the issues addressed in this affidavit will be forthcoming in discovery including, without limitation, the opportunity to take depositions and to request relevant documentation (additional information). When that additional information is obtained, I will then be in a position to offer such other and further opinions as, upon analysis, that additional information will mandate.

24. At this stage, it cannot properly be assumed, much less asserted
as factual, that wide-body jetliners crashed into the then Twin Towers of the WTC. Any declaration that such events occurred must be deemed false and fraudulently asserted, video images notwithstanding.

Notes:
1. On any chart plotting velocity versus either drag or thrust required or power required the parasite value rises sharply after 300 kts,

2. On any chart plotting velocity versus thrust or power required the curves rises sharply after 250 kts
.
3. On any chart plotting velocity versus thrust required at sea level, the curve rises dramatically above 200 kts as does the curve for power required.
I swear the above statements to be true to the best of my knowledge.

_/s/ John Olsen Lear___________
John Olsen Lear
1414 N. Hollywood Blvd.
Las Vegas, NV 89110-2006
Subscribed and Sworn to before
me this 24 day of January 2008.
/s/ Connie Jones______________
Notary Public/Appt Exp. 11/22/09
Certificate #94-2650-1

This is the page for the Boeing 767-200 Type Data Certificate information from which was used in this affidavit:
<rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_library/rgMakeModel.nsf/​0/15302e51a401f11a8625718b00658962/$FILE/A1NM.pdf >.
This is the page that shows how dive tests are conducted:
[link to www.flightsimaviation.com]
This is the page for the type data certificate for the engines used on UAL175
[link to www.content.airbusworld.com]
This is the page that shows the type of engine used on the MD-11 that crashed into the ocean. (photo attached)
[link to www.bst.gc.ca]
 Quoting: johnlear


bumpfor later reading.

sometimes i think it's not so important what anyone believes. as the gears move the wheels go round and round, so let the word be an engine for truth.

mr. lear, you have made a nice presentation here. it is certainly worth a careful reading, but i think i personally looked away and inward as soon as building 7 fell.

was in a panic for a very long time. didn't know who the boogey man was, but i knew he was loose. don't forget anthrax started only a month later, and the discovery of the hidden only begins all over again.

now an even bigger question--how to prevent such a deep rift in ourselves ever again. how to prevent a strike from within, a coups. a failed coups d'etat. whatever.

how to prevent this, and how to heal a cynical heart of a nation and a world. however, a grand speech will not fix it. we will rely on the re-writing of history to cast it into something we can forget.
--------------------------------eos--------------------------​-------------
the first will be last, the last first, captivity captive.
johnlear

User ID: 33628280
United States
03/13/2013 02:05 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Eos 798

sometimes i think it's not so important what anyone believes. as the gears move the wheels go round and round, so let the word be an engine for truth.

mr. lear, you have made a nice presentation here. it is certainly worth a careful reading, but i think i personally looked away and inward as soon as building 7 fell.

was in a panic for a very long time. didn't know who the boogey man was, but i knew he was loose. don't forget anthrax started only a month later, and the discovery of the hidden only begins all over again.

now an even bigger question--how to prevent such a deep rift in ourselves ever again. how to prevent a strike from within, a coups. a failed coups d'etat. whatever.

how to prevent this, and how to heal a cynical heart of a nation and a world. however, a grand speech will not fix it. we will rely on the re-writing of history to cast it into something we can forget.



We are not here to change the world. We are here for the world to change us. And we do that by living with integrity and without envy, hate or greed. And to express our love t our family each and every day. Many times a day.

How to heal a cynical heart? We can only heal our own.

How to prevent a strike from within, a coujp, or failed coups d’etat?

We cant.. And we are not supposed to. We are on a aj is a shill to help ourselves.

And helping ourselves means to live life with integrity, and without envy, hate or greed.
And to express our love to our family each and every day. Many times a day.
Everyday we have a multitude of challenges hurled our way. Late on the rent, lost our job, divorce, being harassed, get screwed all kinds of stuff. And these challenges are being hurled at us by our makers to see what we are made of. To see if we have what it takes to live in the next dimension, the fourth dimension. (Thats heaven for those of you with a religious bent. But the 4th dimension is a thousand times a thousand better than heaven unless you enjoy sitting around on a cloud playing the harp.) Its not that hard, millions of people make it every day.

So quit worrying about ‘those guys’, ‘the perps’, ‘the prez, the secret government, Cheney. Arabs, Muslims, coujps, coup d’etats, asteroids, ET attacks from outer space etc.

You were sent here for one reason and one reason only: live you life with integrity, and without envy hate or greed. And to express you love to your family each and every day. Many times.


Last Edited by johnlear on 03/13/2013 02:07 AM
Live your life with integrity; and without envy hate or greed. Express your love to your family every day.

Thats all you have to do in this life other than doing things you like to do.
johnlear

User ID: 33628280
United States
03/13/2013 02:29 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
AC0658

John, I know you are very knowledgeable in aeronautics but why is it that you say the max speed would be 380 knots yet there are lots of highly qualified pilots that agree with the speeds stated by the official story.

Can you explain this please?

Its 360 kts., not 380 kts.

As far as ‘other pilots having no problem with the official speeds’, I have 4 questions, airline he flies for, airplane he flies, his name and phone number, alternatively a written statement that he believes a Boeing 767 can achieve 500 kts at sea level. If he truly believes that, a written statement should be no problem.

Live your life with integrity; and without envy hate or greed. Express your love to your family every day.

Thats all you have to do in this life other than doing things you like to do.
johnlear

User ID: 33628280
United States
03/13/2013 03:00 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
AC0658

Hi John, in the link following your post, a witness said he saw the plane coming in towards the tower with the landing gear down.

How much would having the gear down effect the top speed? quite a bit I assume?





The maximum speed for landing gear extension is 270 kts. You can put the handle in the down position at a faster speed but it would rip the doors off and there were no landing gear doors found.

How did this first time pilot find the landing gear handle? First I have to know how long his arms are because the handle is on the copilots side of the panel.

Live your life with integrity; and without envy hate or greed. Express your love to your family every day.

Thats all you have to do in this life other than doing things you like to do.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 35980658
United Kingdom
03/13/2013 10:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Thanks John, but isn't vmo just 'safe' operating max?

Surely the plane could acheive 500mph after a dive and for a short period of time?


I'm just trying to understand why other qualified pilots have no problem with the official speeds.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35980658


bump

Thanks for your replies John.
eos

User ID: 35717998
United States
03/13/2013 11:25 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Eos 798

sometimes i think it's not so important what anyone believes. as the gears move the wheels go round and round, so let the word be an engine for truth.

mr. lear, you have made a nice presentation here. it is certainly worth a careful reading, but i think i personally looked away and inward as soon as building 7 fell.

was in a panic for a very long time. didn't know who the boogey man was, but i knew he was loose. don't forget anthrax started only a month later, and the discovery of the hidden only begins all over again.

now an even bigger question--how to prevent such a deep rift in ourselves ever again. how to prevent a strike from within, a coups. a failed coups d'etat. whatever.

how to prevent this, and how to heal a cynical heart of a nation and a world. however, a grand speech will not fix it. we will rely on the re-writing of history to cast it into something we can forget.



We are not here to change the world. We are here for the world to change us. And we do that by living with integrity and without envy, hate or greed. And to express our love t our family each and every day. Many times a day.

How to heal a cynical heart? We can only heal our own.

How to prevent a strike from within, a coujp, or failed coups d’etat?

We cant.. And we are not supposed to. We are on a aj is a shill to help ourselves.

And helping ourselves means to live life with integrity, and without envy, hate or greed.
And to express our love to our family each and every day. Many times a day.
Everyday we have a multitude of challenges hurled our way. Late on the rent, lost our job, divorce, being harassed, get screwed all kinds of stuff. And these challenges are being hurled at us by our makers to see what we are made of. To see if we have what it takes to live in the next dimension, the fourth dimension. (Thats heaven for those of you with a religious bent. But the 4th dimension is a thousand times a thousand better than heaven unless you enjoy sitting around on a cloud playing the harp.) Its not that hard, millions of people make it every day.

So quit worrying about ‘those guys’, ‘the perps’, ‘the prez, the secret government, Cheney. Arabs, Muslims, coujps, coup d’etats, asteroids, ET attacks from outer space etc.

You were sent here for one reason and one reason only: live you life with integrity, and without envy hate or greed. And to express you love to your family each and every day. Many times.

 Quoting: johnlear


thank you, i completely agree. this world is absolutely cluttered with shiny, expensive distractions. a great soul may go into the wild and eat locusts and honey, but for the lesser of us, there is hope to find that place in the heart--to be honest and uncomplicated.

yes, we must stay close to what matters--creating and cultivating family. when you meet a good person, make them family too. open the door to angels...open the eyes to the temple in each living soul.

thank you for encouraging us by your example--speaking truth to power from a place of being secure in self.
--------------------------------eos--------------------------​-------------
the first will be last, the last first, captivity captive.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8768008
United Kingdom
03/15/2013 09:55 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 40945479
United States
06/08/2013 04:15 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
...


That's right... that's right out of the "truther" playbook. Don't address the facts, just scream "SHILL".
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 636186


Gee Whiz! These Anderson Cooper Groupies are everywhere!!!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35737278


WTF is that supposed to mean?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 636186


Im guessing they mean you've got your nose so far up Anderson Cooper's ass you cant see the light of day. Just speculating though.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35796721


HaHaHaclappa
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 44698695
United States
08/23/2013 04:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
There was only one plane that crashed that day. Tower 1 was hit by a missile. No one paying attention except the suspicious Naudet brothers' footage. Once the north tower was ablaze and all eyes were skyward, they sent in an actual plane to hit the south tower. I think this was probably a remote plane loaded with explosives that struck a weakened wall of the tower. I also believe the videos of the plane hitting were doctored by MSM. Once towers were on fire the pre-planted explosives took over to bring the buildings down. Pentagon was hit by a missile. Shankstown was done by firing a missile into the ground. And here we are 11 years later still at war.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35576667


this^
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 44698695
United States
08/23/2013 04:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
...


That's right... that's right out of the "truther" playbook. Don't address the facts, just scream "SHILL".
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 636186


Gee Whiz! These Anderson Cooper Groupies are everywhere!!!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35737278


WTF is that supposed to mean?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 636186


Im guessing they mean you've got your nose so far up Anderson Cooper's ass you cant see the light of day. Just speculating though.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35796721


haha, and th8s^
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45647466
United States
08/23/2013 07:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
bump
Anka

User ID: 593875
United States
08/23/2013 08:38 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
It's amazing how attached people become to what they saw on TV and refuse to look at the evidence. Any dispassionate review of the evidence shows that what was seen on TV was impossible.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35485888


That's the way the human mind works. People are in a state of hypnotism when they watch TV, so they're easily programmed.
"We shall no longer hang on to the tails of public opinion, or to a non-existent authority, on matters utterly unknown and strange. We shall gradually become experts ourselves in the mastery of the knowledge of the future." ~ Wilhelm Reich
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 47608151
United Kingdom
10/01/2013 12:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Interesting topic.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 9831451
United States
10/01/2013 12:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
John Lear will be going live at 9:00 pm EST on Nsearch Radio with Stew Webb to go over his evidence that no planes hit the towers on 9/11

Instead holograms and conventional explosives were used to fool the masses. He also states that the "Death Ray" was used to bring down the towers which ties in perfectly with Stew Webb's Intel sources and the research of Judy Wood!

[link to www.project.nsearch.com]

[link to www.stewwebb.com]

Here's John's affidavit that no planes hit the towers.

[link to www.stewwebb.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19004725


years ago, John Lear was credible.

Now...he is as credible as Barack Hussein Obama.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 9831451
United States
10/01/2013 12:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
It's amazing how attached people become to what they saw on TV and refuse to look at the evidence. Any dispassionate review of the evidence shows that what was seen on TV was impossible.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35485888


That's the way the human mind works. People are in a state of hypnotism when they watch TV, so they're easily programmed.
 Quoting: Anka


do you want evidence? look at the first bldg. that was hit. get the good digital photos that you can blow up.

YOU WILL SEE THAT THE WINGS CUT INTO THE SIDE OF THE BLDG...THE METAL GOES IN. DO YOU KNOW WHAT 'IN' MEANS?

it means that something pushed the metal siding IN...as in from the OUTSIDE. IN THE SHAPE OF A WING.

explosives did that?

are you THAT stupid?

and the towers came down from demolition...old fashioned and new fangled thermite mix. SEE VIDEOS OF LOWER FLOORS BEING DEMOLISHED FROM INSIDE EXPLOSIVES SECONDS BEFORE IT COLLAPSED.

or did you want a reality?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 51466292
United States
12/21/2013 10:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
There was only one plane that crashed that day. Tower 1 was hit by a missile. No one paying attention except the suspicious Naudet brothers' footage. Once the north tower was ablaze and all eyes were skyward, they sent in an actual plane to hit the south tower. I think this was probably a remote plane loaded with explosives that struck a weakened wall of the tower. I also believe the videos of the plane hitting were doctored by MSM. Once towers were on fire the pre-planted explosives took over to bring the buildings down. Pentagon was hit by a missile. Shankstown was done by firing a missile into the ground. And here we are 11 years later still at war.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35576667


this^
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44698695
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 52044801
United States
12/28/2013 07:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
There was only one plane that crashed that day. Tower 1 was hit by a missile. No one paying attention except the suspicious Naudet brothers' footage. Once the north tower was ablaze and all eyes were skyward, they sent in an actual plane to hit the south tower. I think this was probably a remote plane loaded with explosives that struck a weakened wall of the tower. I also believe the videos of the plane hitting were doctored by MSM. Once towers were on fire the pre-planted explosives took over to bring the buildings down. Pentagon was hit by a missile. Shankstown was done by firing a missile into the ground. And here we are 11 years later still at war.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35576667


this^
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44698695

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 51466292
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45375258
United States
12/28/2013 08:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
bump
sunburst

User ID: 41850894
United States
12/29/2013 04:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Conquer Heart of Darkness - A fascinating short film about the power of the dark world and the innate evil of elites' massive takeover. [link to www.youtube.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 52355121
United States
01/23/2014 10:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
There was only one plane that crashed that day. Tower 1 was hit by a missile. No one paying attention except the suspicious Naudet brothers' footage. Once the north tower was ablaze and all eyes were skyward, they sent in an actual plane to hit the south tower. I think this was probably a remote plane loaded with explosives that struck a weakened wall of the tower. I also believe the videos of the plane hitting were doctored by MSM. Once towers were on fire the pre-planted explosives took over to bring the buildings down. Pentagon was hit by a missile. Shankstown was done by firing a missile into the ground. And here we are 11 years later still at war.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35576667


this^
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44698695

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 51466292


bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 53353053
United States
01/24/2014 08:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 53400451
United States
01/25/2014 08:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
bump
Jango Mfwic

User ID: 41888174
United States
01/25/2014 09:03 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
So if the planes that hit the towers were remote controlled or holograms, that would mean the originating flights were diverted somewhere else and the passengers and crews were murdered?
 Quoting: Ralph--a house dog




Nothing hit the tower except a low frequency pulse from a satellite which destroyed the cohesivness of atomic
structure of matter reducing concrete and steel and everything else to powder whichh itself eventually disappeared.

The BTS (Bureau of Transportation Statistics) recorded no
departure for American Airlines Flight 11 and 77.

Nothing crashed at Shanksville. The passengers of Flight 93 were deplaned earlier at Cleveland-Hopkins airport into the NASA hangar there. The plane departed with no flight plan.

Flight 77 overflew the Pentagon and probably landed at Andrews just across the Potomic.

No information on United 175.

Fllight 11 was just pure video fakery.

No pax wer murdered as most were government employees and were deplaned somehwere else and
probably given new identities. The selection process for these government employees included people who for one reason or another didn't mind a new identitiy and probably a hefty cash payment.

They could not have been remote controlled as the chance for something to go wrong was too high plus the 'nose out' video shows video fakery.

There were 51 video tapes and each one shows evidence of fakery especially the one labelled "How To Make Your Own 911 Fake Video".
 Quoting: johnlear



I back every single thing you have exposed. You sir, are the real deal. Every time i mention "hologram" technology people dismiss me as a wacko. Operation BLUE BEAM! Its all so obvious now.
Mr. Mfwic

"Hatred is gained as much by good works as by evil" ~ Machiavelli
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 5245480
United States
01/31/2014 02:56 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
I've often thought this was the case. This just solidifies my stance.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 53694033
United States
01/31/2014 06:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
I've often thought this was the case. This just solidifies my stance.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 5245480

News