Top NASA Official Jailed Under Suspicious Circumstances

a reply to: Navarro

Sorry if I missed something, but did you try looking in mental institutions?

originally posted by: Misterlondon
Thanks for the info..

I hear what your saying but before we glorify him as being some sort of martyr. . We should not forget the facts at hand.
He is alleged to have been caught with child porn and although he worked at nasa for 30 years.. people can lose their mind at any time especially as they approach old age..

Having said that I'll be watching to see if anyone here digs up some info..

S and f

I never meant to martyr the guy. Regardless of the truth behind this news, Lawson made it his life's work to deprive the world of knowledge which is humanity's right to know. Not only that, but he has deprived me personally from the information which I seek. There are people who've spent their lives in pursuit of the information which he has, and he spent his life obstructing their pursuits. The Wright Brothers first flew their Kittyhawk in 1903, and NASA put a man on the moon in 1969, just 66 years later. Less than a single human lifetime later. Now, 47 years later, NASA's technical capabilities appear much the same as it did at the time of the Apollo missions. Yet, NASA doesn't even have the capacity to put a man in orbit anymore. Our astronauts are left hitching rides to the ISS in Russian rockets. I suppose the Russians won the space race after all, or at least it appears that way.

Lawson knew that appearances can be deceiving, because he spent thirty years overseeing that deception. Meanwhile the USAF recently ran an advertisement campaign listing "star ships" as a potential assignment, incredibly briefly displaying an airman floating in space ship for the length of time it took to say "star ship." Years ago the USAF released a document on their website discussing a satellite array which was purposed for detecting and tracking hostile objects in deep space. The USAF openly operates the USAF Space Command and USAF Space Wings. Of course, I'm sure many here have seen the NASA TV videos of what seemed to be UFOs dodging energy weapons fired from the surface.

There were even articles not long ago where a NASA scientist spoke on developing spacecraft comparable to Star Trek's Enterprise. There were yet more articles where other scientists were discussing whether or not the USS Enterprise could be constructed today, and the conclusion was that something similar could, and that it would cost the same amount which the federal government spends overall in one year, or about 3.6 trillion dollars. Just what was it that happened to that 2.3 trillion dollars which went missing from the DOD budget, as Rumsfeld discussed the day before 9/11? How convenient that the Pentagon's accounting offices were destroyed the next day, while they were in the midst of investigating the disappearance of those funds. How convenient that everyone instantly forgot about Rumsfeld's announcement. Am I really to believe that low earth orbit is the best we can do? In 66 years we went from the first flight to landing on the moon, but 47 years from that our capabilities are even less than before?

Lawson was a man who arrived at his position during the Reagan presidency, where Reagan is well know for his Star Wars Program. Lawson knew so much, and deprived us all of that knowledge. He was the guardian of our present dark age, and the enemy of every truth seeker. By no means do I mean to paint a pleasant portrait of the man. I view him as a cunning Baghdad Bob, the Iraqi Information Minister during Saddam Hussein's reign in Iraq. Maybe in his old age he came to reflect on the goal which he had spent his life in service of, and he didn't like what he realized himself to be. Maybe he wanted to make up for it. He was, however, anything but truth's hero.

a reply to: Navarro


I worked at KSC and I can tell you that it was common to do security scan on employee computers and they explicitly looked for p0rn. When I worked their and during one of the scan many top level individuals even within the IT departments lost their jobs cause of it.

In addition, it is not only NASA that did those scans. Those scans were performed by contractors as well as internal to NASA.

Also, he could have been reported by fellow colleague for another issues and one of the first things they would do is to perform those scans.

Sometimes things are as they appear.

originally posted by: Tulpa

My phone tells me exactly how many downloads I've done. Surely, even on multiple devices, it wouldnt be too difficult to identify their origins and find a precise figure?

Because it's better to go to a jury and say "the defendant admitted in interview to possessing, in his estimation, between 600-800 images. Our investigation determined that there were actually 687 images of interest." You're underlining his culpability by underlining how he offered up this information from his own knowledge.

It's always better to have that kind of evidence coming from the defendant's mouth. Interviews and examination really are half science/half voodoo. Lots of things don't make obvious sense until it comes to court and all the little pieces get slotted together. It's one of many reasons why ATS gets its collective panties all bunched up on a regular basis; pulling snippets out of news articles without knowing or understanding the context inevitably turns any event into a conspiracy-in-progress.

a reply to: Navarro

Top NASA Official Jailed Under Suspicious Circumstances

You may want to fix that headline as it is very wrong...

Lawson, a contractor for NASA working on their IT infrastructure, was fired May 29 "for multiple agency violations" after 30 years of working in administration at the Kennedy Space Center, the documents said

www.nydailynews.com...

But way to get hits calling him a top NASA official, when he is far from that.

originally posted by: berenike
a reply to: Navarro

Sorry if I missed something, but did you try looking in mental institutions?

Mental institutions don't provide lists of their patients like correctional facilities disclose their inmates. I vaguely recall years back claims of an American who knew something or another, but that he was being held in a Canadian mental institution. He was held incognito and without any allowance for contact from the outside world, even from his family. I recall no other details, but the idea doesn't seem like a bad one if for whatever reason you don't want to kill a guy, but you also don't want him spilling the beans.

You propose a very reasonable idea. I hadn't considered that, but it'd certainly fit the story given that he was in an institution either at the time of article's release or shortly before it. Maybe he's still there, or maybe he's been transferred to another facility, be it a local long-term facility or somewhere more distant and more difficult to find. If that's where he is, I don't expect that any amount of OSINT searching of the internet will yield his location. I wonder what "crazy things" he might be telling staff and other patients there if so.

The video news report makes it seem like the initial investigation was about child pornography viewing. However, Unless I am mistaken, this wasn't just about one guy, there were over a dozen employees involved, see here,

www.abovetopsecret.com...



There are plenty of links at the youtube video site, however the Florida Times story has been trashed.

originally posted by: Navarro
So he was there, but is no longer. If the county of jurisdiction doesn't have him, the state doesn't have him, and the feds don't have him, then we arrive at the same question as before: where is he? Who's custody is he in, if anyones? The answer isn't one that you'd like, but it is an obvious one: he's somewhere that he can't be reached. If you could find him within any of the systems I've searched, then you could contact him. If you could contact him, then you'd be in a position to learn a great deal of information, and the whole point of this seemed to be to prevent information from leaking out.

Oh good grief. I think ATS has had this identical discussion in relation to someone else recently.

If he is in a mental institution (which the article suggests happened at some point at least) then he will fall under HIPAA. Hospitals would be prohibited by law from confirming or denying that he was a patient. That's not a conspiracy, it's a protection of the patient's right to privacy.

If he's not in hospital and he's not in a prison somewhere, he might be at home/alternative personal location. Perhaps he just doesn't want random strangers from the internet contacting him. Hell, if I was out on bail for something like this, I'd be holed up in an anonymous little flat somewhere and only going out in disguise!

Edited to add: I see you addressed that in a later post. I leave this post standing for all future readers and the betterment of mankind. Per aspera ad posta, etc.

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Navarro

"He was fired May 29 from his job at Kennedy Space Center…as well as Science Applications International Corp., after they accused him of several security violations." …

I'm having a hard time reconciling the above with this from the OP:

Donald Lawson was NASA's Communication Security Administrator (COMSEC Admin) for the past thirty years. Since the Reagan Administration, Lawson has been the man in charge of controlling information coming out've NASA.

Is the top security guy at NASA for 30 years actually work for a contractor? Are we sure these are the same two guys? Just asking.

I don't think that seems unreasonable. Officials often work side-jobs as contractors for private firms. Most notoriously, police officers frequently work as security guards in their off hours. I would guess that Lawson was a consultant for SAIC, or sat a chair overseeing something there.

a reply to: Navarro

According to tsurfer2000h's link he was put into Westhueff Medical Center in Rockledge at some stage, so I suppose he could still be there.

Of course I take the point that it would probably very difficult if not impossible to ascertain if that's where he is now. Unless you found someone who knew him personally.

originally posted by: HawkeyeNation
What they do now is label and prosecute someone falsely with child porn. Pretty much once that happens you are no longer viable to the public.

Absolutely. I after all clicked on the headline when I first came across it out of the realization that "child porn" is an allegation commonly associated with attacking former assets. Once I saw the "he's crazy so don't believe him" and "don't be shocked if he kills himself," followed by finding out who the man actually is, I was sold. It's hard to deny such potent potential for this being a COINTEL smear campaign and cover up.

a reply to: Navarro

Lawson was seventy years old. It could be that like so many before him, as retirement and rapidly approaching mortality reared it's head, he was thinking about disclosure. He was thinking about telling the world what he knew, and the information on his electronic storage devices was the evidence he needed to back up his claims. So don't trust him he's crazy and don't be surprised if he's already killed himself, but don't worry if he did because he's just a child molester anyway.

I think you nailed it with this one.

With all the other "death bed confessions" it wouldnt be surprising in the least - particularly from someone in his position. I'd imagine he's been surveilled for most of his career without his knowledge (even possibly by people who dont know who they're watching with no risk of being involved).

It wouldnt surprise me in the least to hear of his "suicide" followed by deep condolences from NASA before being swept under that dirty, dirty rug.

Good find OP, S+F

originally posted by: Morrad
A news source from Orlando states that the FBI believed he had hidden video camera to photograph young boys. He appears to have looked after young boys for a youth outreach programme.

According to a federal criminal complaint, Lawson admitted to downloading "600 to 800 images and videos" and federal agents believe Lawson set up a hidden camera at his house and a hotel room to record young boys naked.

Investigators said the hidden cameras recorded "nude images of the young boys that were in his care, including at least one young boy that Lawson interacted with as a volunteer for a well-known youth outreach program."

A LinkedIn page under his name said Lawson has been a mentor with Big Brothers Big Sisters since 1992. It reads, "Long term volunteer. Not currently registered with the agency, however, I continue to mentor 'Little Brothers' I was matched with, now in their early 20s."

There is a web extra link to read the criminal complaint but it 404s.

clickorlando

Not sure if this reads as FBI believes he had several cameras or he in fact had several cameras and the FBI believes he used them to film young naked boys.

The above report suggests he was not only a watcher but also a predator.

This stinks. My bs-ometer is pinging away.

S&F.

Yes I saw that, and a similar NYT article. The FBI was certainly doing a whole lot of talking about an open investigation. It's a shame that no specific agents were identified as disseminating this information, nor was a press conference or press release mentioned that I recall. I'd be interested to know just who it was in the bureau that thought it important to present their case to the court of public opinion before Lawson was even tried in the legitimate courts. Evidence is generally withheld pending the trial. It seems strange too that these things should be stated as a matter of fact rather than as allegations, given the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing. Seems like this anonymous agent desired to dirty Lawson's name.

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: Navarro


I worked at KSC and I can tell you that it was common to do security scan on employee computers and they explicitly looked for p0rn. When I worked their and during one of the scan many top level individuals even within the IT departments lost their jobs cause of it.

In addition, it is not only NASA that did those scans. Those scans were performed by contractors as well as internal to NASA.

Also, he could have been reported by fellow colleague for another issues and one of the first things they would do is to perform those scans.

Sometimes things are as they appear.

Which department was doing these scans? Who did the scanners report to? You say that high level officials lost their jobs over it. Can you recall who? Were any of these people charged? Do you know if child pornography was ever detected before? Had you heard of Lawson before and if so what did you hear? Ever see him to your knowledge and if so what did you observe? Who's idea was it to begin these scans and why? What was your job at KSC?

I'd go on a big, loud campaign to sell all my computers, cell phones and any other electronic gadgets prior to blowing any whistles. I'd store any information I had CD's and have copies of them in several safe deposit boxes, stashed with friends, and possibly rigged up to a server to be released as a torrent file in case something happened to me.

I'd excise myself from any and all technology for a period of a few years, at the very least. I wouldn't use the internet at all. I'd use regular old paper snail-mail to correspond with media outlets. That way, having false charges of illegal downloaded images or whatever couldn't stick. Where's the computer I used? What ISP was I using? Oh, I wasn't? Hmmm...

When the people you are up against are high-tech, you change the paradigm and go low tech.

THIS is exactly the type and scope of writing that should be rewarded.....cudos for the logic, the expenditure of time and energy and the depth of thought put into this thread...I'm certainly along for the ride and will help with the "digging". I'm as impessed with the thoughtful and erudite responders as well....speaks highly of the caliber of people visiting this website. Good work all round.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Navarro

You may want to fix that headline as it is very wrong...

Lawson, a contractor for NASA working on their IT infrastructure, was fired May 29 "for multiple agency violations" after 30 years of working in administration at the Kennedy Space Center, the documents said

www.nydailynews.com...

But way to get hits calling him a top NASA official, when he is far from that.

THAT'S what I said above. This guy could not possibly be the "head on NASA's security since the Reagan administration." which is what OP is claiming. He's a contractor working for a Beltway Bandit. I used to be one of these guys (on Trident nukes.) We'd get government contracts to perform specific tasks, but we were NOT 'part of government.'

Surely the head security guy would be a NASA employee in the GS super grades. I'm thinking there are two different guys here or at least some of this information is wrong. Someone working on "IT infrastructure" is not a top level official. This is grunt work. It's intelligent grunt work. I get that. It's not mopping floors, but it's still grunt work.

I mean, look at this guy's house (in the link above.) Does that look like the house of a "top NASA official" to you? No way in hell.

originally posted by: EvillerBob

originally posted by: Tulpa

My phone tells me exactly how many downloads I've done. Surely, even on multiple devices, it wouldnt be too difficult to identify their origins and find a precise figure?

Because it's better to go to a jury and say "the defendant admitted in interview to possessing, in his estimation, between 600-800 images. Our investigation determined that there were actually 687 images of interest." You're underlining his culpability by underlining how he offered up this information from his own knowledge.

It's always better to have that kind of evidence coming from the defendant's mouth. Interviews and examination really are half science/half voodoo. Lots of things don't make obvious sense until it comes to court and all the little pieces get slotted together. It's one of many reasons why ATS gets its collective panties all bunched up on a regular basis; pulling snippets out of news articles without knowing or understanding the context inevitably turns any event into a conspiracy-in-progress.

What you suggest is certainly a possibility. Everyone likes a good story, and nobody wants the conspiracy bubble to be popped after being intrigued by it. Let alone after investing time and emotion into it. The fact that many of us here know the name John Titor speaks to that. I never said this was a smoking gun though; I said it was suspicious. Even now I find it so. If not for the simple fact that someone so prominent doesn't very often fall from the tip of the pyramid directly into the dungeons below. Let alone does a man who's memory and mouth are a weapon of considerable fortitude. Maybe the official story is also the true story, but I see room to suspect otherwise.

What would you say is the best reason to suspect a conspiracy in this situation, and what would you say is the best means for investigating that point? Similarly, what do you suppose is the weakest element of the argument?

a reply to: Navarro

Sounds like he was about to go public, probably with info that makes Gary McKinnons NASA hack look like childs play. After all, holding such a position for such a long period of time suggests he may have been privy to some pretty strange and potentially game-changing intelligence which may put NASA in a bad light and even expose them for fraudulent activity when it comes to the dissemination of information to the public over the course of their tenure.

NASA - Need Another Security Administrator

a reply to: Navarro

Who is John Titor?