The thread was deleted at 2:26am.

Nefermore said that: "This issue has been covered in detail in this thread: 

"Why is Lear no longer a consp. Master"?
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread331804/pg1

The thread contains information from Springer and SO, as well as discussion about the subject from numerous members."

Actually, Nefermore is not stating the facts accurately.

Yes the issue has been covered but not in detail. We have received no response from Springer or Skeptic Overlord as to why I am banned.

Skeptic Overlord has said, "Unfortunately Johns interpretation of the events are somewhat skewed…"

All I know is that Skeptic Overlord post banned me, then hammered me for lying on the morning of January 28 without asking my side of the story first. And when he found out it was someone else who lied, I got banned, the other guy is currently posting, and there was no apology from SO or anyone else at ATS.

Skeptic Overlord has said, "His account posting privileges we restored as soon as everyone promised to play nice with each other."

First, I never made that promise because I never was untruthful in the first place. And second, under no circumstances was I going to go along with a cover-up about events hidden from the general membership of ATS. And third my posting privileges were not restored until the following Sunday and then only until I made my first post.

As far as I am concerned both Springer and Skeptic Overlord are still my friends. I just can't understand why they won't respond to any questions by ATS members or discuss the issue.

The issue being: "Why is John Lear banned?"

The following is the thread that was posted last night (Saturday night, February 9, 2008) at 11pm. The title was "What happened to John Lear? Conspiracy?? The thread had 4 posts and then was closed by Neformore at 1:59am and the thread was then deleted at 2:26am.

THIS THREAD: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread333304/pg1
 

This thread deleted at 2:26 am.

Now ask yourself: why would this thread be deleted? This is just a discussion. Nobody is threatening anybody or anything except trying to find out the truth of John Lear's ban?

Now it has been suggested by a few that the three Amigos had to "agree" to editorial and thread content "suggestions" as part of the substantial "loan" they got a few months ago.

Would the government be above forming a group of investors who would then "invest" in ATS in order to 'suggest" editorial content. After all, ATS is now big enough to be noticed by a considerable portion of the public.

Its not like they haven't done that for the past 60 years beginning with their infiltration of NICAP by Admiral Hilloenkotter who, unbeknownst to the UFO group was actually a member of MJ-12 and who directed their inquiries down dead end roads.

I have actually said very little about flying saucers.

My subjects are usually:

A Navy submarine base in the Nevada desert.
A breathable atmosphere on the moon.
A civilization on the moon.
The secret base at Sandia.
A high speed train from Sandia to a Las Vegas hotel.
Ten U.S. secret space stations orbiting earth with directed energy weapons one of which was used to destroy the World Trade Center.
People living on Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn.
A 4th astronaut killed in Apollo 1.
No planes on 911.
A shadow government composed of Nazi/Masonic/Dod/militaryindustrialists.

Now ask yourself: why would the government care about any of that?

Most of that is just speculative nonsense right?

So why would Springer and Skeptic Overlord care about any of that? Its just a discussion.

So why am I banned?

Many of you would ask, so John, have you emailed Springer or Skeptic Overlord like they have suggested?

My answer is no. And here's why:

This issue is now so big and affects so many here at ATS and is really the core issue of what ATS is all about that it should be discussed in plain view of all. There should be no 'behind the scenes maneuvering" as Skeptic Overlord and Springer suggest. No "back room deals".

And I will certainly not become part and parcel of a back room deal. Once I engage in an email exchange with either Skeptic Overlord or Springer, I am prohibited from discussing or divulging the contents of that email.

This is Skeptic Overlord's email notice:
 

Bill Irvine, Chief Executive Officer The Above Network, LLC "User-Generated Content Ecosystems" This email, its contents, and its distribution list is private communications intended solely for the consumption of the specified recipients. The sharing of the content of this message, any attachments, or the parties indicated in the distribution list is strictly forbidden without the prior permission of the author.

So since I want this all to be 'out front' and 'in the open' I will not engage in private exchanges of emails with any of the 3 amigos as I would be prohibited from telling you what they told me.

If ATS is going to really "deny ignorance" then they are going to do it in front of God and the members of ATS.

They will have the honesty and integrity to start a thread:

"John Lear, this is why we banned you!"

And then post the reason why they banned me.

There should be no reason why the 3 Amigos have to hide behind their Mods.

There should be no reason why the 3 Amigos cannot just come out and simply say:

Look, this is why we banned John Lear.

We'll eventually find out the truth anyway.

All the best to Springer, Skeptic Overlord and all my friends at ATS.