Tweet |
MJ-12 Debate Continues: Kevin Randle Queries Stanton Friedman
By Kevin Randle The UFO Chronicles © 10-7-14 |
Seriously? You trot out that old chestnut? Do you make the same comments about writing fiction to Bruce Maccabee, Nick Pope or Whitley Streiber or is it just me? Are you following the propagandist rule that if you say something loud enough and long enough someone will believe you?
I notice you continue to dodge the questions. You have no explanation for the lack of provenance. This is a major flaw.
Since you bring up Kaufmann, how about Gerald Anderson? He forged a document and admitted that. You know the diary he submitted about the 1947 event was written in ink that didn’t exist prior to 1973. And he took the class from Winfred Buskirk. How do I know? Because I was able to access the records before Anderson demanded that they be closed and those records proved that Anderson took Buskirk’s Anthropology course. I can say that now because those who helped me have retired. It was the same information that Buskirk received when he called his friends at Albuquerque High School and told me to check it out myself.
The December 6, 1950, alert has no relevance. It was based on a possible intrusion of American airspace by an unknown aircraft. It lasted about an hour and had nothing to do with a crash of anything in Mexico. Zechel changed the date of Willingham’s case for that very reason… and you have no idea what sources of information I have been able to tap.
But this second crash mentioned is the fatal flaw because it never happened outside of the mind of Robert Willingham. He invented the tale and this is the only source of information about it, unless, of course, you have something to prove it did happen.
And you haven’t bothered with the altered Truman signature on the memo. You forgot to mention that you approached Peter Tytell, a questioned document expert who told you to wash your hands of MJ-12 because the clues he found screamed hoax. And you know that he has not produced a written report because no one has paid his fee but anyone who talks to him learns the same things about that investigation.
You still haven’t commented on Bill Moore’s idea of creating a Roswell document. Nor have you commented on the original plan being laid out in his book Majik-12. Nor that Moore said the EBD contained disinformation which is, of course, a nice way to say that it filled with lies. And you haven’t mentioned Moore’s “confession” in Las Vegas that has badly damaged his credibility, which in turn, damages MJ-12. (And don’t ask how because it was Moore who provided the EBD to the world.)
No matter how many times you say it, you still haven’t been able to explain some of the major discrepancies. You are reduced to asking how the forger could have known some obscure facts when the answer is simple… blind luck. He also missed on some very big items.
Oh, by the way, drafts of highly classified documents are normally destroyed once the final is completed. They also destroy the notes, the typewriter ribbons and even the blank pages left on note pads to ensure that the information isn’t compromised. Until you can find some actual evidence of authenticity for the MJ-12 documents, these conversations go almost nowhere.
See Also:
MJ-12: Stanton Friedman Fires Back; The Disputation with Kevin Randle Continues ...
MJ-12: Kevin Randle Rails Against Stanton Friedman's Rebuttal
MJ-12: Alejandro Rojas Accepts Stanton Friedman's Debate Challenge
MJ-12: Renowned Ufologist, Stanton Friedman Issues Debate Challenge To Naysayers
More False Claims About Majestic 12
The Myth of MJ-12: Appendix A –Pt 1
The Myth of MJ-12: Appendix A –Pt 2
The Myth of MJ-12: Appendix A –Pt 3
"Appendix A: The Myth of MJ-12" An Annotated Commentary By Barry Greenwood
SHARE YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE
No comments :
Post a Comment
Dear Contributor,
Your comments are greatly appreciated, and coveted; however, blatant mis-use of this site's bandwidth will not be tolerated (e.g., SPAM etc).
Additionally, healthy debate is invited; however, ad hominem and or vitriolic attacks will not be published, nor will "anonymous" criticisms. Please keep your arguments "to the issues" and present them with civility and proper decorum. -FW