Phil Schnider Debunked! I'm tired of the lies!

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by sp00ner
you say they were built side by side?


There were 2 assembly lines at Lockheed Burbank Skunk Works. They were separated by a huge metal curtain. No one on the F-117A was supposed to know about the F-19 although everybody on the F-19 knew about the F-117A.

Of course we all know that there was a huge interplay and exchange of information but for security purposes that was how it worked. And if you had a clearance to work at the Skunk works you played the game or you were shown the door.

One strict rule was that no one working on the F-117A was allowed to go work on the F-19 and vice versa.

Its all a game. Everybody knows whats going on. But if you want to keep your job you have to keep your clearance and if you want to keep your clearance you have to keep your mouth shut.




posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
That's quite a feat, keeping the sailors, mechanics and technicians of a aircraft carrier quiet. Nevertheless, it's interesting to think about.



Originally posted by johnlear
Second, the F-19 is kept hidden. Whoops, oh yeah, can't hide an airplane on an aircraft carrier. Just keep on believing that.


Since when? I'm going with John on this one. Steve, have you ever heard of the Sea Shadow? If not, check this out:

Sea Shadow

If they hid an Entire SHIP for 10 Years, how hard can a fighter sized airplane be? All you have to do is keep it in the hanger bay below deck when it's not being launched or recovered.

Hideing the F-19 on a ship should be pritty easy!

All navy aircraft have land bases for overhual and support. The F-14's for example were ratated to mirimar for overhaul & land based training. Considering how secret the F-19 is, you would need a good place to hide the main fleet. Judging by the way the F-117 was handled, it would seem unlikly that an operational wing would be at Groom Lake (the F-117's were sent to Tonapah because of space and security issues of an operational unit). Using histery as a guide, I would expect the same to be true of the F-19!

John, just courious, where do you think the land support base for the F-19 is?

Tim



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost01
John, just courious, where do you think the land support base for the F-19 is?Tim



Don't know. But with all of the new high tech hidden military runways that 'unzip' for operation I would say within 25 or 30 miles of NAS Miramar.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost01

Hideing the F-19 on a ship should be pritty easy!



Except for all the people that work on the ship. How many on an aircraft carrier, hundreds, wouldnt someone talk, friends, family etc. Just asking.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by mojo4sale
Except for all the people that work on the ship. How many on an aircraft carrier, hundreds, wouldnt someone talk, friends, family etc. Just asking.


mojo4sale, let me respectfully suggest that you must be thinking of McHales Navy. I am talking about the United States Navy. There is not a more loyal military organization in this world. I'm not going to tell you how briefings work on a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier but I can assure you that whatever happens on a carrier stays on a carrier unless the release of that information has been specifically authorized.

Furthermore, if you think that anybody in the U.S. Navy feels free to talk about operations and incidents that occurred while at sea you are wrong. There is no blabing, or what you call 'talk' to friends, family, etc.

As far as the other 'people' that work on the ship they are subject to the same restrictions.

Further, U.S. Navy personnel are loyal, patriotic and serve their country with honor. Your suggestion that they would talk to 'friends and family' about classified operations is, in my opinion, disrespectful. If I thought your comments mattered one whit to them I would suggest an apology. But I don't.

Thank you for your post, as ill-considered as it was. Even if you were just asking.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
If I thought your comments mattered one whit to them I would suggest an apology.


You could insist all you like you wont get one.


Are you able to answer any questions, particularly ones that werent directed to you without being a ......

Thanks anyway John, i do enjoy your threads and posts btw, i have an open mind, i just prefer concise answers to questions instead of wannabe witty retorts.



posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by mojo4sale

Except for all the people that work on the ship. How many on an aircraft carrier, hundreds, wouldnt someone talk, friends, family etc. Just asking.


Not if they all have some level of security clearance. Anyone with even the most basic clearance know that discussing classified information with uncleared people will get you time in the Brigg!

Also, as John pointed out, People in the Navy (and the military in general) tend to be very loyal. In war time, they depend on each other to stay alive, which tends to inspire loyality and trust!

Tim



posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost01

Not if they all have some level of security clearance. Anyone with even the most basic clearance know that discussing classified information with uncleared people will get you time in the Brigg!


Out of all these people you are saying none of them would ever mention anything to their wives or loved ones, ever!!


Originally posted by Ghost01
Also, as John pointed out, People in the Navy (and the military in general) tend to be very loyal. In war time, they depend on each other to stay alive, which tends to inspire loyality and trust!

Tim

My comment certainly didnt suggest any lack of loyalty or honor or trust to anyone in the armed forces, just the fact that humans are notoriously bad at keeping secrets and out of all those people none would ever let anything slip, even accidently to their wife or mother, sorry i just cant accept that.
Its not an attack on their integrity, its just human nature.



posted on Feb, 2 2007 @ 04:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by mojo4sale
My comment certainly didnt suggest any lack of loyalty or honor or trust to anyone in the armed forces, just the fact that humans are notoriously bad at keeping secrets and out of all those people none would ever let anything slip, even accidently to their wife or mother, sorry i just cant accept that.
Its not an attack on their integrity, its just human nature.


Just wondering, how then do you account for the hundreds of people who work at Groom Lake not slipping and telling uncleard people about what goes on inside Area 51?

Surely, there are more people working inside Area 51 then on a carrier, seeing how large Goom Lake is.

Tim



posted on Feb, 3 2007 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Hello,

this is my first post on this forum, and it might well be the last one.

For the last two years or so, I've been following a few of the threads in the "Area 51" and "Aircraft Projects" sub-forums on ATS. I've quickly abandoned the idea that I could learn much actual facts from here, and regarded reading ATS threads increasingly as pure entertainment of the more bizarre sort
.

Most users here are apparently trying to do to the word "gullibility" what the Wright brothers did to "aviation": reach completely new levels of sophistication! I mean, someone makes completely outrageous claims about, say, "Dulce underground base" or "F-19 naval(!) stealth fighter", without even the slightest bit of solid evidence, only lots and lots of hearsay and tall tales, and everyone just soaks up every word at face value!

Doesn't anyone ever think about the various really big plotholes in any of these stories? Let's take a stab at the "F-19" in this thread: Mr. John Lear seems to know really much about this one - exactly how many were built, which security procedures were applied, where they were deployed, etc. He must have had many informants, who were very willing to talk. Yet, on the other hand, he claims that everyone is soo honorable that they would never, ever talk about this F-19. Doesn't anybody see the very obvious contradiction in that?! And I didn't even mention that the whole scenario of super-secret carrier(!) fighters doesn't make any sense at all from an operational point of view.

Anyway, I've had many good laughs at all the uncritical "ooh"s and "aah"s when yet another self-proclaimed conspiration theorist came out and fed the masses. Therefore, please go on believing every little piece of completely unproven bunk as if it was revealed to you by God himself. Why ask for evidence, let alone proof, when the story itself is soo cool ...


Regards
yf



posted on Feb, 3 2007 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by yfxxx
Hello,

this is my first post on this forum, and it might well be the last one.

And I didn't even mention that the whole scenario of super-secret carrier(!) fighters doesn't make any sense at all from an operational point of view.


Thanks for the post yf. We welcome one and all and please don't let this be you last post. You brought up some excellent points and I'd just like to mention that if I could give name, rank and serial number it wouldn't be much of a conspiracy would it?

I would really appreciate it, if you have to time, to elaborate on the point you made about super-secret carrier fighters not making any sense from an operational point of view. This would be particularly valuable if you have had any time in command of an aircraft carrier or in its operation. Thanks.



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by yfxxx
And I didn't even mention that the whole scenario of super-secret carrier(!) fighters doesn't make any sense at all from an operational point of view.


yfxxx,

Don't run off on us! Your contrabutions help everyone, even If you only asking questions. Chances are, if you though to ask it, someone else has the same question, but was afraid to ask!

On one hand, I can see why hiding an airplane on a ship seems odd. Carriers have thousands of poeple on them. But, remember these two facts:

1. There are hanger bays where a plane can be kept out of sight
2. Not everyone is on deck during flight op's

Also the Navy has shown us they can hide big things before. You might want to look into a stealth ship called the Sea Shadow

The fact that they hid a whole ship for many years sais that Size isn't the factor you might expect it to be.

Tim



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
No one on the F-117A was supposed to know about the F-19 although everybody on the F-19 knew about the F-117A.

One strict rule was that no one working on the F-117A was allowed to go work on the F-19 and vice versa.


Hey John,

These statments contradict each other!

The second statement suggests that the two programs were kept seprate and secret from each other. however, the first sais everyone involved with the F-19 knew about the F-117. How is this true?

If security rules forbid all crossover between the program, how did the F-19 people know about the F-117?

Tim



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Ok, I'll bite (for the moment) ...


Originally posted by Ghost01
Also the Navy has shown us they can hide big things before. You might want to look into a stealth ship called the Sea Shadow

The fact that they hid a whole ship for many years sais that Size isn't the factor you might expect it to be.


I know "Sea Shadow". And I didn't say anything about size.

"Sea Shadow" was hidden during test and evaluation within reach of a secure dock. With a relatively small crew.

Operations around the world is entirely different. Guess why the USAF revealed the existence of the F-117 in 1988? Because before this, operations were just too awkward, inflexible and downright dangerous (night-time ops only!). And that with an aircraft based at Groom Lake, which is a piece of cake security-wise when compared to an aircraft carrier!

Anyway, that's just a minor point. See other reply.

yf



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost01
Don't run off on us! Your contrabutions help everyone, even If you only asking questions. Chances are, if you though to ask it, someone else has the same question, but was afraid to ask!


Oh yeah? "Afraid" to question any of the fabulous "revealers" here?

I mean, for example, give me one reason why I should believe a single word of Mr. John Lear's "F-19" story! He seems to know rather a lot about a program which he says is kept in extreme secrecy. How does he know? Has he ever produced a copy of a leaked-out supporting document, a photograph, or an artefact whose origin and validity could be evaluated? Was there ever anything more than "someone told me ...", of course without a verifiable and relevant name behind the "someone"?

And all this from a man, who claims that ...


... the Moon [...] has a breathable atmosphere, and its gravity is not one sixth as NASA and mainstream science would have you believe. The gravity on the Moon is closer to 65% that of earth's. [John] will discuss the presence on the Moon of rivers, lakes, forests and, oh yes, people too.

(quote from www.thebayareaufoexpo.com... )

Gimme a (...) break
!! With such an agenda, I'd look out of the window for verification, if Mr. Lear claimed the sky was blue! Let alone believe any "F-19" (or other) claim without really solid evidence.

That's what I mean when I laugh about the gullibility on this forum. But again, go ahead with it. I don't want to stop anyone, and I certainly don't have any mission to accomplish. Of course, if only one of the many thousand conspiracy fans on this forums starts to think after reading this, I won't complain, either


Regards
yf

[edit for typo]

[edit on 7.2.2007 by yfxxx]

```````````````````
Edited to remove vulgar language
Please re-read the Terms and Conditions



[edit on 7/2/07 by masqua]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
No one on the F-117A was supposed to know about the F-19 although everybody on the F-19 knew about the F-117A.

One strict rule was that no one working on the F-117A was allowed to go work on the F-19 and vice versa.



Hey John,

These statments contradict each other!

The second statement suggests that the two programs were kept seprate and secret from each other. however, the first sais everyone involved with the F-19 knew about the F-117. How is this true?

If security rules forbid all crossover between the program, how did the F-19 people know about the F-117?



The key word here is 'supposed'. That was how it was 'supposed' to work. But as hard as they tried, both sets of workers knew about the other, but for the sake of their job and their security clearance they pretended not to know.

``````````````
tried to fix quotes
hope I didn't screw it up more



[edit on 7/2/07 by masqua]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by yfxxx
Oh yeah? "Afraid" to question any of the fabulous "revealers" here?

I mean, for example, give me one reason why I should believe a single word of Mr. John Lear's "F-19" story!


You don't have to believe it! The point is you raise questions that make people Think about what they are reading. Through your posting, you make other stop and question things. Even conspiracy researchers need a reality check sometimes to keep us grounded.

People tend to forget that you need someone who is skeptical of the fact to provide others with that "Reality Check" !

Look I started this thread because I don't believe ANY of the Phil Schnider claims. My goal was to make the rest of the conspiracy crowd STOP and say:
Wait, something here is not right!

I know Phil Schnider is dead, and that some things about his death are very odd! However, I still can't bring myself to Believe that the Dulce Base is (or ever was) Real! The story has too many holes for me.

Tim



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by yfxxx
Ok, I'll bite (for the moment) ...


Originally posted by Ghost01
Also the Navy has shown us they can hide big things before. You might want to look into a stealth ship called the Sea Shadow

The fact that they hid a whole ship for many years sais that Size isn't the factor you might expect it to be.


I know "Sea Shadow". And I didn't say anything about size.

"Sea Shadow" was hidden during test and evaluation within reach of a secure dock. With a relatively small crew.

Operations around the world is entirely different. Guess why the USAF revealed the existence of the F-117 in 1988? Because before this, operations were just too awkward, inflexible and downright dangerous (night-time ops only!). And that with an aircraft based at Groom Lake, which is a piece of cake security-wise when compared to an aircraft carrier!

Anyway, that's just a minor point. See other reply.

yf


Suppose it's a spy plane! Look at the U-2 and the A-12 Blackbird. Both Planes were flying operationally before anyone knew about them.

And about the F-117, which you highlighted. Did you know they became Operational in 1983? Of course they never flew a combat mission until 1989. However keep in mind that the F-117 is a Strike aircraft. How do you bomb someone without them knowing about it?

Now, if on the other hand you are taking picture, or conducting ELINT, you don't leave anything behind. It seems odd, but it is possible.

Tim



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Hi Tim,

your comments about skepticism are appreciated.

As for the possibility of operating a carrier-based aircraft in complete secrecy, maybe it's possible if you try really hard. (But I don't really think it can be done). But has anyone ever provided a reasonable realistic context for such an operation? I mean, it's said the F-19 has been "operated" from carriers. But when, where and, most importantly, in which role? I don't see any scenario here which would make a lot of sense.

Anyway, I'm just amused that nobody appears to seriously ask (and pursue!) such questions here. It's always lots of "oohs and aahs", but the overall picture (in this case, the existence of the F-19 in the first place) is apparently never seriously challenged. I wonder if John Lear will ever react to my questioning his credibility
.

Regards
yf



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by yfxxx
Operations around the world is entirely different. Guess why the USAF revealed the existence of the F-117 in 1988?


Thanks for the comments yf. No, the existence of the F-117A was revealed much before that. As a matter of fact I revealed the existence of the F-117A to both George Knapp and Ned Day at Channel 8 here in Las Vegas in 1983 or 1984, George recently mentioned that in an interview here on ATS. What the Air Force released in 1988 was a picture of the F-117A.


Because before this, operations were just too awkward, inflexible and downright dangerous (night-time ops only!). And that with an aircraft based at Groom Lake, which is a piece of cake security-wise when compared to an aircraft carrier!


No, the F-117A was not based at Groom Lake. It was test flown there but when it became operational it was based at the Tonopah Test Range. Thanks again for your posts.





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join