John Bear--CPU, Yes he Did!!

[JohnBear]

Poor little man, sitting in his corner, obsessing over everything I have ever written and triumphantly sharing a few errors or changes of opinion with his two or three pals on this little forum. What a life.

--John Klempner (1938-1968) John Bear (1969-2015)

[Martin Eisenstadt]

Poor little man, sitting in his corner, obsessing over everything I have ever written and triumphantly sharing a few errors or changes of opinion with his two or three pals on this little forum. What a life.

--John Klempner (1938-1968) John Bear (1969-2015)

Wow, talk about sad little men.  Klempner has zero credibility…with Klempner!  He writes books that even Klempner obviously doesn’t take seriously, then ridicules those who do.  Something to remember whenever you read anything Klempner writes; he doesn’t believe it and neither should you.

[jhc7]

Little Man? I wish-- at least a little smaller.
But John, it's you who did the damage. Me-- I'm just someone holding your feet to the fire for what "YOU" did and said. It's not just a few errors and changes of opinions.
Example: You claim to have sold your stock in CPU in 1982-1983-1984. You claim to have been a minority owner of Greenwich-a 25% owner-a 50% owner. You sold your stock-received a small amount of cash for office supplies you bought-gave the stock to your partners. Greenwich was 10, 000 sq. ft.--5,000 sq. ft. Summit was good, no, it was very bad. Kennedy Western was good, no, I don't like it. Everything keeps changing. That's not my fault, John, it's yours. You made me possible by your lack of accuracy in dates, times, facts and opinions. If you don't like the results, then make amends for your actions and get things right.

I suggest you apologize to the people you have wronged and make it right, or, toe the line and keep THE "GANG" happy.
Since you can't be humble and contrite, well, the dance goes on.

[jhc7]

More of the TRUTH.
"Columbia Pacific University"
Listed on page 75 of the 1995 Guide.
No negative comments, only praise.
--John Bear-College Degrees by Mail 100 Good Schools

"Columbia Pacific University"
Listed on page 170 of the 1996 Guide as a good, reputable school.
No negative comments, only praise.
--John Bear--College Degrees by Mail 100 Accredited Schools--Located in the Unaccredited schools section

This from 1999:
"Columbia Pacific lost its State Approval to operate in 1995 after failing a review by the Council for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education."
--John Bear --AED Thread--Dec. 1999

During and after this event your guides said, "Good." Now how would people buying your guides feel about their paid guide being caught with his britches down? Day late--dollar short.

More: The 1980 guide has you praising CPU as your favorite unaccredited school and going on and on about its quality and acceptance.
BUT--BUT-- There's This:
You make the claim that you have always made it known that you were connected to CPU. No place in the 1980 Guide-- when you were a minority owner- did you say you were connected to CPU. In 1980, in the middle of your ownership, you leave out the fact that you are shilling for a school you own stock in. When an owner praises his own business, it's called advertising, it must be made known. You used your guide to advertise, calling CPU your favorite school, and kept secret that you were one of the owners. Only later did you mention the relationship. Now that makes it shilling.

[jhc7]

More CPU:

"John Bear, who consulted with the two founders of CPU from before it existed (Late 1970's) into the early 1980's; no connection since then."
--John Bear--AED-- Dec. 1999

You have said that John Gray's degree from CPU is Unaccredited and say that's problematic, it holds a lot less weight, according to you.

Here is what troubles me about this stuff. You were an owner in 1983. Gray graduated in 1982. This makes him one of "YOUR" students. You are troubled by the lack of weight his degree carries.

OK--CPU had just as much weight as Les Carr, Richard Crews and John Bear wanted it to have. It carried the amount of weight John Gray was willing to carry and to pay for. The state of California said it was heavy enough.
If the owners of CPU wanted the degree to have more weight: I suggest it was up to the owners-Crews, Carr, Bear, to add more rocks. You made the rules and Gray followed them. You have no right to come back later and condemn Gray for carrying what YOU said was enough.

His degree was Carr-Crews-Bear "Approved."

[jhc7]

"When I was advising Columbia Pacific in the late 1970s, I wrote to about 100 regionally accredited universities, asking if they would, or might, accept the unaccredited CPU. About 30 wrote back saying they had provisions to consider people with none at all, and they wouldn't hold a CPU degree against applicants, so yes, they would consider it. These schools include Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, and their replies were reproduced in some CPU literature of that era. I am not aware of any regionally accredited school that accepts unaccredited degrees as a matter of policy."
--John Bear--Accelerated Bachelor Degree Online

[jhc7]

Now see how ths bit of research was modified:
"Many major universities, including Harvard, Yale, and Princeton have expressed a willingness to accept CPU degrees."
-- John Bear-- Bear's Guide-- 1985 --Page 96

[jhc7]

Now the final fog is put in place causing the unsuspecting information seeker to see unaccredited schools as more acceptable than was suggested by the mini research/advertising ploy.

"For example one highly regarded unaccredited program reported that its students have transferred to more than 30 traditional universities, getting credit for work at the unaccredited school.

Another unaccredited university has received letters from Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, among others, indicating a willingness to consider their students for admission to graduate school."
--John Bear-- Bear's Guide --1997-- Page 22

It's obvious that these two schools are one, CPU, and that the information was from JB to CPU and not the other way around.

I ask again. Why would people be so eager to buy into the idea that unaccredited schools were so good and acceptable? Because our guide told them so and twisted the numbers to make it look wonderful.

One can only wonder how much and how often accuracy fell victim to the wants and needs of the GUIDE.

[jhc7]

John worked hard selling us the idea that unaccredited schools were good enough, certainly good enough for him -Greenwich-International Institute-CPU-Fairfax. It is obvious that he would play fast and loose with numbers and facts in order to hype CPU and probably the others as well.

CPU was never any better than most life experience schools, just better hyped. I don't intend any insult to the students of CPU. They did what the owners required, paid their money, and obtained legal degrees that in many cases met their needs. Too bad the former owners didn't put the same effort in defending their former students as they did in recruiting them.

[JohnBear]

As has been pointed out here, I am an old guy. Old guys get medical conditions. I am going to be taking care of stuff for a while, that that will mean much-reduced online time. So I’m backing off from this site, and many others, for a while. Nothing whatever to do with the level or content of criticism that still rains down upon me. See you later. If anyone wants to make personal contact, write john.bear@mac.com. If it's signed, I'll reply. If it's anonymous, I might. --John