UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1998 > Jul > Jul 1

Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 16:40:28 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 09:07:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'


> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:44:10 -0400
> From: James Easton <pulsar@compuserve.com>
> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>

> Regarding...
>
> >Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 22:48:23 -0300
> >From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Friedman's Laws for 'Debunkers'

> Stanton wrote:

> >As might be expected from PJK's 30 years of misrepresentation this
> >is a very inaccurate description of what I have said and how I say
> >it. In my longer college presentations I told the story of the CAUS
> >actions against the CIA and NSA and show every page of the 21 page
> >affidavit starting with very lightly censored to heavily censored,
> >leading to laughter. Far more dramatic than just showing a few
> >blacked out pages. Then I tell of the few very heavily censored CIA
> >UFO documents it took me 5 years to get, (3 out of 14) which the CIA
> >somehow didn't find and the NSA did. One page has 8 readable words.

> Stanton,

> There's no debate that some data which comes under the 'UFO'
> category has been withheld, however, clarification of the NSA
> document's contents and the NSA's submission was a welcome
> insight into some factors which we must take into account.

> The point was, if you arraign others as "demonstrating all 4 of
> Friedman's laws for Debunkers", notably, "What the public
> doesn't know, I am not going to tell them", it's a double-edged
> sword.

> No matter what you may, or may not, reveal to College audiences,
> when addressing a nationwide TV audience of _several million_,
> you stated on the question of a government 'cover-up', that this
> was "easy to prove" and cited as evidence:

> "A group of us went after the NSA. We found that they had over
> 150 UFO documents. They refused to release them to us, and to
> the Federal court Judge".

> Which was by no means a fair reflection of the true facts and
> served only to suggest these documents had never been released
> or further explained.

> Would you disagree?

Yes I disagree.

One cannot give lengthy explanations on TV.. What I said was
exactly true and was squeezed into a brief opportunity.

The NSA is and certainly was witholding information about UFOs
as was the CIA.. Remember that USAF keeps saying UFOs are not a
threat to National security. I gather that the CIA and NSA
disagree.

I have never said there isn't a very important national security
aspect to UFOs..

I have said that Klass is guilty of massive misrepresentation..
such as saying on a TV show here recently that all sightings can
be explained and claiming that a Confidential document somehow
establishes what isn't in TOP SECRET Documents..

Are you trying to suggest that the NSA has released enough of
each of those 156 documents so that we can make a judgement,
based on Klass' misrepresentation of them?

STF