UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Aug > Aug 28

Re: New Revelations On Origins Of MJ-12

From: Paul Kimball <TheRobieShark.nul>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:46:47 EDT
Archived: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:26:27 -0400
Subject: Re: New Revelations On Origins Of MJ-12

>From: Mary Castner m.castner.nul
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:46:01 -0500
>Subject: Re: New Revelations On Origins Of MJ-12

>You clearly _never_  intentioned  to let me or Barry see the
>paper before it was sent to MUFON. The so-called co-author
>couldn't even get a copy for review until a couple of days
>before press, but you passed off the paper to Paul Kimball weeks

>I happened to know about Kimball's site:


>and an earlier mention by him of your friendship... and still he
>supports you...

>"I had an advance peek at the paper weeks before the Symposium
>courtesy of Brad, and was going to provide some editorial input
>(mostly re: spelling, grammar, and overall construction, which
>it badly needed at that stage), but work and life got in the
>way, and I never got a chance to send back my suggestions, which
>Brad had asked for (putting the boots to any assertion that Brad
>can't take constructive criticism)."

Brad sent me the draft on the 17th to have a look at, primarily
because I had done related research into Wilbert Smith (which
you can find at my blog), and presumably because I had made a
film about MJ-12, and researched it over the past few years. He
swore me to pre-conference secrecy, which I kept.

>Obviously, Paul Kimball didn't have to deal with you over
>suggestions as he didn't give any.

Good grief. Look, I don't know you, Mary, so I have no idea who
put the bee in your bonnet, nor do I want to get involved in
this peripheral dispute, which as I noted at my blog is a waste
of time, in my opinion. But, as you have seen fit to mention me,
I'll tell you - I worked very, very closely with Brad for two
years on Best Evidence: Top 10 UFO Sightings, as he was our lead
'UFO' consultant. Even when we did not agree, it was always
cordial, and Brad took criticism as well as he gave it. I know
Brad can come off as cantankerous sometimes (who doesn't on this
List?), but my experience with him was 100% positive, and I'd
happily work with him again.

>Obviously, you knew Barry wouldn't go along with your changes of
>stripping out his information. Which I am sure was done before
>Kimball got a copy. Who was to be the co-author anyway Kimball
>or Greenwood?

You need to take a deep breath, and calm down. Me, as co-author?
Where do you get that from - or is it just some off-the-cuff way
to slam Brad?

As noted above, Brad sent the paper to me for a once over, which
it frankly needed in terms of grammar, and overall construction.
My only regret is that life and work precluded me from sending
him any suggestions.

I would also note that Brad made it clear to me that this was a
paper he had co-authored with Barry Greenwood, of whom he has
always spoken of highly, at least to me.


>Kimball plays down the money or AFOSI motivation as non-
>important. Least we forget in a court of law and life in general
>motivation carries a great deal of weight on passing judgment.

That is my own personal observation, which you have either
purposefully or mistakenly mischaracterised. My point was that
it doesn't really matter why the documents were hoaxed - all
that really matters is that they were. Time to move on from
there to more important things, like good cases.

>Obviously, you couldn't handle dealing with facts so you had to
>huff and puff all sorts of legalese about being sued as a poor
>excuse to strip out material and to create a fog to hide in.
>Well the sun is coming out and the fog is starting to burn away.

Mary, I'm just guessing that you don't know very much about the
law. I have no idea what Brad "stripped away", but libel and
slander are not things that one should ever take lightly, as
simple "legalese". From the sounds of it, the worst thing you
could accuse Brad of here is an over-abundance of caution -
which is always a good thing where the law is concerned. Better
to be safe than sorry. Of course, until I see what Barry had
originally written, I couldn't say whether Brad was right to be
cautious or not.


I have snipped the rest, because it's meaningless ad hominem
attack, and I've seen and had enough of dealing with that in
the few years I've been even remotely associated with ufology to
last a lifetime. I'll say it again - in my opinion, having
worked closely with him, Brad is a good guy, a top notch
researcher, and I've never had a problem with him and his
ability to take constructive criticism as well as he gives it.

Now, leave me out of this from hereon in.


Paul Kimball

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast