Lear thread "scrubbed"?

OK guys, there was a hot thread last nite that concerned a very negative article about John Lear. It had something like seven flags and eleven posts but I get up this morning and it's like it never even existed.

If it was deleted, who deleted it and why?

I was looking for it as well.

Are we just missing it, or was it removed? If removed, can we ask why?

Here you go.. the poster re made the thread.. it was deleted..

Lear

yes, I did post it. and today it seems to have´dissapeared´just overnight.
very´strange´ posting policy.

perhaps some people dont want this documents to be too public ??

www.ufomind.com/area51/people/lear/hansson2.htm (2 pages)

where are information about deleted threads here anyway ?

my thread was very interesting and even flagged, yes..


[edit on 14-8-2007 by anti72]

Well, I brought those articles up in another internet session just in case the new thread is also scrubbed.

Looks like it will take me a while to read through.

Peace

I'm sure it was "scrubbed" for a good reason. I will find out.

In the mean time, do not post duplicate threads on the subject.

A couple of guesses on my part:

1. Maybe there is something in the TOS about posting negative comments about other users.

2. Maybe ATS was worried about a possible libel lawsuit from JL.

I think those possibilities need to be explored before we start throwing the coverup accusation around.

Originally posted by uberarcanist
A couple of guesses on my part:

1. Maybe there is something in the TOS about posting negative comments about other users.

2. Maybe ATS was worried about a possible libel lawsuit from JL.

I think those possibilities need to be explored before we start throwing the coverup accusation around.

1 and 2 good sir I was up this morning and checked into it, and then the artical was reposted went to check it out, and was the same song and game that was played here a few months back.
And turned into a Slander fest, with the person with the issue was completly slandering John Lear, and their agurment lost its steam with me atleast.. I dont need to hear about his personal life, and all that none sense.
It sounds more like to me with someon with a vengance to slander him.
And IMO should be removed from the boards..
Not a cover up, simply slanderous statements, with some stuff in there, but its hard to read when someone is throwing in personal attacks every other sentance.

Then sir, dont read it, but dont stop others from reading it and of making their own decisions?.
The watchword of this board is Deny Ignorance, how can you deny it when you cant read it?

Originally posted by Chorlton
Then sir, dont read it, but dont stop others from reading it and of making their own decisions?.
The watchword of this board is Deny Ignorance, how can you deny it when you cant read it?

They can read it all they want I dont care.. But when it comes to the rules of this board, its not okay to slander people peroid.. Thats all Im sayin..
And that post has its fair share of slanderous remarks and snide comments that make it senseless to me..

Originally posted by zysin5

Originally posted by Chorlton
Then sir, dont read it, but dont stop others from reading it and of making their own decisions?.
The watchword of this board is Deny Ignorance, how can you deny it when you cant read it?

They can read it all they want I dont care.. But when it comes to the rules of this board, its not okay to slander people peroid.. Thats all Im sayin..
And that post has its fair share of slanderous remarks and snide comments that make it senseless to me..

Im sure you mean Libel.
No one is libeling anyone. Neither was anyone contravening the rules of the board IMHO. What was done was simply to post a link. No
comments were made about what was posted.

And as stated, posting a link to something is not libelous.

Thats your thoughts man. But it was a slanderous link then.. However you want to chop it up its wrong, and has been removed agin. Stuff like that is not welcome here. Ask Spinger, and dont shoot the messager..=me.

The sensationalized, emotional hit piece written by a disgruntled ex friend with ZERO back up or evidence of anything substantial has been discussed here more than once.

It is libel at best and outright vicious B.S. at worst. It's not what we do here at ATS.

The new thread went the way of the other one. You can call it censorship, I have no problem with that, it violates the TAC in many ways, and offers nothing but one angry, probably jealous person's opinion on a guy who has done nothing but express his beliefs and share his experiences. We DO censor TAC violations and baseless hit pieces against our Members.

Springer...

Now as I step onto this breaking glass... even though this isn't the exact thread, something earily similar occured about 3 nights ago with...
"IF YOU WERE A TERRORIST, HOW WOULD YOU ATTACK?"
I woke up the next day and the entire thread was "RESTRICTED." It was growing by leaps and bounds, becoming very interesting & then, instantly firewalled!! Wow...Gently now while I exit please.

hm, Hansson seems to have been one of Mr Lears best friends..
perhaps he could be asked to take part of a really interesting discussion about these days ?




[edit on 14-8-2007 by anti72]

Originally posted by DREAMING MAN
"IF YOU WERE A TERRORIST, HOW WOULD YOU ATTACK?"

That would be grossly irresponsible of ATS not to shut it down. Why not start a thread asking how to kill someone without getting caught? Actually, I remember that happened once and the thread was deleted. Besides, the shadow government already knows all the ways.

Springer

With all due respect, it's not entirely a hit piece. Hansson compliments Lear on many occasions, but I can understand ATS's stance.

Peace

[edit on 14-8-2007 by Dr Love]

Originally posted by Dr Love

With all due respect, it's not entirely a hit piece. Hansson compliments Lear on many occasions, but I can understand ATS's stance.

Peace

[edit on 14-8-2007 by Dr Love]

Its also worth pointing out that its only Libel if its not true.
I would also suspect that if it wasnt true then legal action would have been taken at the time.
It wasnt, hence one can only make up their own mind who was at fault.

No offense to ATS, you gotta do what you gotta do fellas. However, I seem to see a ton of censorship throughout this site. The internet in America is currently supposed to be "uncensored", however I feel like I live in communist china when a conspiracy forum that "denies ignorance" doesn't allow opinionated posts. I'm out!

As I read the article, I have come to the conclusion that the irrelevant promiscuity attacks were done on purpose, maybe as a sort of protective barrier for Mr. Hansson. By that I mean that if in fact the relevant information in the article is true, the irrelevant attacks were intentionally self-discrediting. He intentionally would come off as vindictive with an axe to grind and the whole article would be in question, all the while getting really damning info out to the public and subsequently helping those that weren't put off by the irrelevant attacks to connect the dots.

At least that's how I would have done it.

Peace

[edit on 14-8-2007 by Dr Love]

Originally posted by Springer
The sensationalized, emotional hit piece written by a disgruntled ex friend with ZERO back up or evidence of anything substantial has been discussed here more than once.

It is libel at best and outright vicious B.S. at worst. It's not what we do here at ATS.
...[snip]...
We DO censor TAC violations and baseless hit pieces against our Members.

John Lear is not the typical ATS member though. All but a handful of ATS members are everyday people that generally don't merit any form of celebrity status.

Lear is a public figure, not only through his professional experiences, but through active "real life" participation in the Aerospace/UFO/Conspiracy communities. Because of that semi-celebrity status, he has, is, and always will be the target of active speculation about his background and experiences. His status of "ATS member" should protect him from abuse from fellow members, but should not exempt John Lear, UFO expert/Conspiracy theorist from those who seek to validate / invalidate his claims or expertise. John, for all intents and purposes, falls into the same category as Alex Jones or Stan Friedman.

So, if someone posts 3rd party information, op-ed or otherwise, from a former colleague of Lear's, it should be allowed for discussion. If the thread degenerates to direct abuse of John Lear the ATS Member, than you (meaning ATS Staff in general) can edit or delete the posts and ban the offending ATS member. It is not as though your hands are tied.

Bottom line- John has put himself out there for critique. Regardless of the source, let the ATS members make their own determinations with all possible information.