Thursday, June 01, 2006
Stan Friedman...on Stan Friedman...
I am treading on thin ice here...I just read the following on UFO Updates...
Stan Friedman wrote:
May I respectfully suggest my Review of Case MJ-12, a 28 page,
January 2003 paper. It is posted on my website at:
Or available from UFORI, POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958.($4.00)
Including S and H) Either way it would be much easier than going
back through UPDATES and contains material that is not on
Updates. It is far more than just opinions.
It contains evidence that Kevin's statements are often flat out
wrong.It also shows that a number of Tim Cooper's purported MJ-
12 documents are emulations.
I would also suggest the new Chapter of TOP SECRET/MAJIC
which deals with many specific objections. I wonder how many
people on this list who claim that the arguments are just
dueling opinions have looked at the facts that are
presented.Phil Klass said PICA type wasn't used . I provided a
number of examples.
Many said TOP SECRET Restricted wasn't in use. I provided a
statement from the GAO that they found a number of examples.
Some complained that all TS documents required control numbers.
I provided both examples and statements from an archivist at the
Eisenhower Library that they had many such. Kevin didn't like
the use of Admiral Hillenkoetter as opposed to rear Admiral. I
provided strong evidence that the use of generic ranks was quite
common etc etc etc. These aren't opinions. They are facts.
What is interesting here is that the things Stan says here are all correct...they are facts. They are things he responds with when people claim the MJ-12 documents contain errors that prove they are fake.
However, as a response to someone saying he is not convinced that MJ-12 is real, this is intellectually dishonest.
Now, I respect Stanton Friedman immensely. But these words were in response to someone saying he has not been convinced of the validity of the MJ-12 story. I also have not been convinced.
When I say that I am not convinced that the MJ-12 documents are real, and that I require proof before I accept them as real, I am making what I believe to be a reasonable request.
So, what does Stan say to that? All he can say is as above...that he has proven that the types face was in use, the paper was in use, the words were in use, the watermark is correct, the classification was in use, etc.
My queston is..."which of these statements proves that the MJ-12 documents are real?".
Well, none of them.
My next question would be, "Where did these MJ-12 documents come from?"
Stan would have to answer, "They appeared in the mailbox of a film producer".
I say, "Well, I cannot accept any documents you got from a mailbox from some anonymous person as real".
Stan's reply might be, "Well, the documents pointed to another document...the Cutler-Twining memo...which was found in an archive just as the mailbox documents said!!!".
I say, "Wow...now we're getting somewhere. What does the Cutler-Twining memo say to prove MJ-12 is real?".
Stan might respond, "Well, it says nothing about MJ-12, but instead says something about when Cutler would be in his office, and what should be done with his paperwork while he was out."
So, in light of this we have the following...
A bunch of documents (on film...not the documents themselves) appear in a mailbox. I cannot accept these documents as real since their provenance is unknown.
We have a document that WAS found in an archive that has nothing to do with whether MJ-12 was real or not, but instead addresses a side-issue that is all but unrelated...UNLESS you accept the "mailbox" documents as real.
We have NOTHING else.
So I ask, is it reasonable to remain unconvinced that the MJ-12 documents are real?
I would say it would be unreasonable to be convinced otherwise.
Now, since these documents were received there have been other documents supposedly related to MJ-12, but Stan is convinced that THEY are fakes. Okie dokie. So he admits that there ARE fake MJ-12 documents out there, but that HIS are real. Hmmm.
There have been no more documents to corroborate the existence of MJ-12 that are not of similarly questionable provenance. If someone in the military "leaked" the mailbox documents, why has he or his confederates not released more? Surely he could not have thought that these documents alone would be accepted at face value, and presumably he risked freedom and perhaps his life to "leak" them.
Now, there is also this detail. A military man named Richard Doty talked to one of Stan Friedman's associates about faking some UFO documents to create "buzz" that might get some official documents released in rebuttal. This conversation was BEFORE the mailbox documents were found. Plus, this military guy was based in New Mexico, and the mailbox documents were postmarked from New Mexico. Hmmm.
Is it possible that the mailbox documents were fakes?
It is posssible that Richard Doty provided the mailbox documents?
Is it possible that whomever provided the mailbox documents also planted the Cutler-Twining memo to help "prove" the mailbox documents were valid?
Yes, especially if he was involved with military intelligence and disinformation programs (which Doty was).
Is it possible that MJ-12 was non existent and was never real?
Most important...Can Stanton Friedman prove that any of the above statements are false?
So, when someone claims not to be convinced that MJ-12 is real, what leg does Stan have to stand on when he asserts that such a claim is "research by proclamation"?
I don't know, but I will say that if he were the Emperor he'd be a little chilly...
If you have proof that MJ-12 is or was ever real, I'm ready to hear or see it. However...
If all you have is the mailbox documents, the C-T memo, the EBD, etc, etc., you haven't convinced me.
And if you want to call that proclamation, you're just being obtuse. Or intellectually dishonest.
If I wrote that, I'd be on Mr. Lehmberg's front-page as the anti-Christ (or whatever). :-)
Keep your head down!
P.S. Spot on, by the way.
Perhaps so. But the point is that Stan was castigating someone for not being convinced...and even Alfred can leave room for someone who remains to be convinced.
It is the declaratory, "I will NOT be convinced" that Alfred rails against, I think...I trust.
While some may consider this a "rabbit pellet", I maintain that there are many who might agree with Stan that some UFOs are real...and yet I also maintain that just because one is not convinced about MJ-12, that is NO reason to castigate them for "lack of evidence".
Thanks for writing!
And, Kyle: of course UFOs are "real" that's not the question! What they are, -- now, that's the question. (sorry, couldn't help myself.)
HI!! Thanks for stopping by.
You make aoms execllent points. My point here was mainly just that because you aren't convinced doesn't mean you're not listening.
Stan was trying to get a guy to say WHY he wasn't convinced, when that's not a fair question.
Like obscenity. you know when you see it.
I cannot tell Stan he doesn't have enough evidence. But I can tell him he doesn't have enough evidence to convince ME. LOL
Again, good to see you!
No question...if the MJ-12 documents were released due to a FOIA request, I'd lend them a LOT more credence. But popping up in a mailbox? well, that's not good enough for me.
And you're right. Real UFOs are sighted all the time...what they are is definitely the question.
Plasma? Sure maybe some. But others.....? Not so sure.
"One would not use," Hynek writes, "a spectrograph that has not been validated to observe a distant galaxy and then trust the results of that observation. The unvalidated spectrometer might just be capable of creating entertaining but inaccurate smears of separated light... ...but a validated instrument would be trusted without question because its calibration has been assured."
Do we have instruments to trust? I think we must.
I submit Stanton Friedman has demonstrated sufficient calibration over the years... ...even as SOME have not.
I suspect we may trust our calibrated instruments and dismiss those instruments who have yet to demonstrate a similar efficacy, eh?
As to anti-Christs? Well, I suspect that the anti-Christ is as the anti-Christ does. _Your_ head is safe, Kyle.
AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/