UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2010 > Oct > Oct 20

Re: MJ-12 Redux

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
Archived: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:08:36 -0400
Subject: Re: MJ-12 Redux

>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993.nul>>
>To: <mailto:post.nul>post.nul
>Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 11:24:56 EDT
>Subject: MJ-12 Redux [was: Shostak's Search Shift?]

>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>To: <mailto:post.nul>post.nul
>>Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 04:33:22 -0700 (PDT)
>>Subject: Re: Shostak's Search Shift?

>>>From: J. Maynard Gelinas <j.maynard.gelinas.nul>
>>>To: <mailto:post.nul>post.nul
>>>Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:11:42 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: Shostak's Search Shift?

>>>Hi David; Stanton,

>>>Thank you both for your responses. My reply is once again combined
>>>into a single message to you both:


>>I would certainly acknowledge that there are many people on this
>>List and elsewhere claiming that the EBD, CT, TF items are
>>fraudulent. I believe I have dealt with all their arguments. I
>>keep asking for refutations of my refutations. All I get is
>>research by proclamation. "They are obvious frauds". I wish they
>>would add "because A,B,C... which with STF hasn't dealt".

>>I am off to a conference in Strasbourg... Back Monday.
>>I won't hold my breath.

>Stan, List, All -

>I can't just let this go unchallenged. The consensus is that
>MJ-12 is a hoax. Not a government disinformation campaign, not
>something designed to keep us guessing and chasing phantoms, but
>something created and designed to propel specific people back
>into the spotlight. Or, as has been suggested by one of those
>who released it into the world, to fool those who had knowledge
>of the Roswell crash into revealing information that was, and
>is, classified.

Thank you for providing examples of just what I complained
about: research by proclamation and a failure to examine
what I have written. It was the consensus that flight was impossible,
that space flight was impossible, that planes couldn't go faster than
the speed of sound. Take note of "Science Was Wrong"

>Although Stan attempts to shout down those of us who do not
>accept MJ-12 as authentic by suggesting that he has answered all
>objections to MJ-12, he has done so only in his own mind. He has
>not explained the lack of provenance, which contrary to what he
>has said to me, is not an indicator of its authenticity but is
>predictive of hoax.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I said that if the documents
are genuine, than the leaker is very much at risk for having
released classified material to uncleared people without a need
to know. Absence of evidence is Not evidence for

>Those who have researched the type style of the various
>components of MJ-12 (the Truman memo) say that it was created on
>a typewriter that did not exist in 1952. This is based, not on
>just a comparison of the upper and lower case letters, but on
>the various numbers and symbols, done with the complete drawings
>and specifications from the factory. It is evidence that the
>typewriter did not exist in 1952... And yes, I know he will say
>that Peter Tytell has not issued a formal written report but
>will not remember to say that it was he who sent the material to
>Tytell in the first place.

You have changed your tune, but it is still off key.

What you said in your book that Tytell had said was ; "It was
just perfect because the whole thing of the 12 pages or however
many pages it was. Most of the pages were just blank pages with
just five words written on them like Top Secret or Appendix A or
something like that". His memory was obviously very poor. There
were 8 pages and only one, page 7(not included by Kevin) had
"Appendix 8"... If there was a professional examination by
Tytell, no one has seen it. However, Bob Wood did hire a
forensic documents expert, James A. Black, to perform a
professional examination. On November 13, 1998, Black stated "My
knowledge of typewriter fonts permits me to conclude that the
letter was likely to have been typed by an Underwood Standard
Typewriter. The portions of the type font of the letter that can
be clearly visualized match those of a typewriter exemplar of a
Underwood Standard typed in May 1940". This statement is
included in the very lengthy article (4 long segments ) on my
web site for years now. It is also on page 227 of the 2nd
edition of my book "TOP SECRET/MAJIC".That has been out for 5

>I will note here that the information on the EBD is the state of
>the investigation of crashed saucers in 1982 or 1983 and not
>what it is today. This provides us with a clue as to when the
>document was created and that is not 1952.
How about saying what  that information is, Kevin?. The reality
is the reverse. We didn't find out that much information in the
documents was true until long after the documents had been
received.I have listed many items not known to be true until
later.. such as Twining beginning his investigation on July 7.
I found his Pilot log in a newly declassified box at the LCMD
years later. I also found the log of his pilot.They matched.. We
didn't know that Cutler was out of the country until years
later. How did the hoaxer know not to put a signature on it?
>etc etc
>I will note, though Stan will deny it, Bill Moore said, in the
>early 1980s, that he was thinking of creating a Roswell document
>to shake things loose. Moore said this to a number of people and
>it has been widely reported. Then, the MJ-12 documents arrive at
>the home of Moore's friend who was not well known in the UFO

Not being well known to the UFO community means what???

>It is interesting that here is a document that was created to
>brief the President-Elect but is incomplete. It mentions nothing
>about the Plains of San Agustin or Aztec, two of the crashes
>that are now said to be real. There is no reasonable explanation
>for these two events to be ignored if MJ-12 is real and those
>events are real... but remember, in the early 80s almost no one
>believed Aztec to be anything other than a hoax and Bill Moore
>knew that the only connection to the Plains was the rather vague
>information attributed to Fleck Danley. The Barney Barnett diary
>(or actually the diary kept by Ruth Barnett) has nothing,
>absolutely nothing, to suggest that Barney saw anything on the
>Plains, or that he was out on the Plains on the right days.

>And we have Herbert Dick, who was clearly on the Plains, in a
>position to see any UFO crash there (he arrived on July 1
>according to a letter he sent to a colleague in late 1947) but
>reported nothing.

Ruth's  diary indeed did say Barney had often been out on the
Plains including during the week in question. No Barney did not
tell Ruth about it. He had been  told to shut up and had been in
the military. Kevin. let us not stretch the truth. Dick was only
in the Plains 3 weeks that July.

Also I do not accept that you or anybody else we know is in a
position to know what should or should not have been in the EBD.
Are you conveniently forgetting that the EBD states "NOTE:This
document has been prepared as a preliminary briefing only. It
should be regarded as introductory to a full operations briefing
intended to follow.": Last I heard, full and preliminary are not

>But by the early 1980s, Bill Moore, among others, were
>questioning the validity of suggesting that Barnett's story
>had anything to do with July 1947.

Skeptical people question the validity of everything.

I question the validity of everything (rather than making
proclamations) which is why, for example, I checked Forrestal's
papers at Princeton and  Menzel's very surprising papers at the
Harvard Archives (and have been at 18 other archives, often more
than once) and why I talked at length with George Elsey who
worked for Truman the entire time he was in the White House. He
was very helpful about James Lay (Exec. Secretary of the NSC)
and Robert Cutler. I talked with family members of all but one
of the MJ-12 group.There is a difference between investigating
and proclaiming

>So, the MJ-12 documents mention nothing about either the Plains
>or Aztec because, in the early 1980s many knew that those two
>events were not well documented.

I am glad to know you are psychic and know what highly
classified material exists. I am not and don't.

Yes, I personally am convinced that indeed there was a crash in
the Plains, and that the very very extensive research done by
Scott and Suzanne Ramsey (soon to be published in a book)
establishes that there was a crash of an almost intact saucer at
Aztec in 1948. It is interesting that Roswell provided a mess of
small pieces. Aztec and the Plains provided almost intact
vehicles. Neither had extensive publicity in the 1940s. An
intact saucer is a whole other matter.

>Stan will say that I said I rejected MJ-12 because Admiral
>Hillenkoetter got his rank wrong. I have told Stan this really
>isn't important, though Stan has yet to find a document on
>which Hillenkoetter got his rank wrong. Rather than address the
>real issues, he'll attempt to divert the conversation to these
>other points.

Kevin, why not quote what you said in your book about Roscoe's
wrong rank being the crucial argument? Why not quote what I say
on my website and elsewhere that I found documents at the Ike
Library (not that far from you) proving that it was standard
practice at the White House to use generic ranks.? Ike's staff
secretary, Brigadier General Goodpaster, used them when listing
attendees at White House meetings including for himself "General
Goodpaster". But signing Brigadier General. You asked me early
on if I had found any other documents with Roscoe's signed rank
being Admiral. I had to point out that There is no Hillenkoetter
signature in the EBD I have shown that the White house calendars
sometimes listed him as Admiral.rank, sometimes rear.

>I will say that no one has ever found a document, an authentic
>document referring to MJ-12 in the 25 years since these were
>announced. The Cutler-Twining Memo, found in the National
>Archives was clearly planted there, something that Stan will
>tell you. But if the document was planted, and there is again,
>no provenance, then it does nothing to validate MJ-12. And
>that's where we are today. There is nothing that validates MJ-
>12. And the information we do have suggests that MJ-12 is a

It is the information that validates not the absence. Don't
forget Phil Klass paying me $1000. for proving him wrong about
the typeface on the CT memo. Pages 243-246 list a bunch of items
not previously known to be true. How did the hoaxer know?

>Yes, I know that Stan will say that we have no evidence that
>Bill Moore (and Richard Doty) were behind the MJ-12 documents,
>but there are some good clues. The dating format used by Moore,
>but not the US military or the US government is on them. Yes, it
>is used in Europe and in NATO, but those arguments are

I found the same dating format used by Hillenkoetter and Smith .

>Normally, I don't get involved in these discussions because
>they turn out the same way. But sometimes I just don't want to
>let Stan get away with his proclamations about the validity of
>MJ-12. I am surprised that he continues to defend MJ-12 when
>even Bill Moore says that he finds many of those documents to be
>of dubious provenance.

>The thing is, no matter how often you argue for the authenticity
>of MJ-12, it doesn't make it so. You need to have evidence and
>there is precious little of that for MJ-12.

>For a more comprehensive look at some of this, please go to:


>So, let the game begin.


Again I suggest looking at the MJ-12  article in 4 parts on
my website:


and in TOP SECRET/MAJIC.There is a great deal of evidence. You
might learn something.

ST Friedman

[Exposer of false arguments against the validity of the EBD,TF,
and CT and provider of proof that there are a bunch of false MJ-
12 docs. Also not an acceptor of the false doctrine that Absence
of evidence is Evidence of absence.]

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



These contents above are copyright of the author and
UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced
without the express permission of both parties and
are intended for educational use only.