Stanton Freidman's Open Letter to Kevin Randle  




Open Letter to Kevin Randle

Nov. 10, 1995

Mr. Kevin Randle
POB 264
Marion, IA 52402

Dear Kevin:

Thank you very much for taking the time and trouble to respond in detail (1) to my listing (2) of 38 FALSE claims you have made about Roswell. Life might have been simpler if you had replied to my earlier 22 item list (3) of FALSE claims or to the very polite questions I posed to you last year seeking a basis for some of these same FALSE claims. But done is done.

I also wish to thank you for providing numerous additional examples of your apparent inability to distinguish between various fascinating, but fictional, scenarios you have created in your mind, from what is happening in the real world outside. I am not surprised based on our discussions in Roswell in early July,1995.

To refresh your memory:

l. When I asked you about your strange unbelievable scene of Frank Kaufmann being assigned to watch a radar scope for 24 hours and even using mirrors to maintain his watch from the latrine, you graciously indicated that was a mistake on your part. Michael Hesseman tells me you told him you had confused a science fiction scene with Frank's activities.

2. After our meeting with Frank and Don, you told me that you could refute all 38 of my list of your FALSE claims. I first brought up your FALSE claim that Larry Henning of Albuquerque High School had stated that Gerald Anderson was in his class with Dr. Buskirk. As I told you, and also your attorney in response to his threatening letter (4) alleging "actionable allegations" on my part about you, that simply wasn't true. I spoke with Larry after your original charge at a meeting in Chicago. He had a vague recollection of a Jerry Anderson, could not recall what he looked like. Neither he nor 5 others in Dr. Buskirk's class could recall Gerald even after seeing his distinctive Yearbook picture. I checked again in July and this past week. He did not tell you or anyone else Gerald was in the class. This is clearly a FALSE claim. As it happens, Larry does know two other Jerry Andersons.

You spend 4 paragraphs and claim you spoke with 5 class members, yet are now NOT saying any said Gerald was in the class. Buskirk's response was initially that he didn't recall Anderson at all. Buskirk was, despite your comments about anthropologists, even anonymous callers, the closest to the Plains of all the anthropologists in early July, 1947. He was a military officer in WW 2 and in the reserves for about 20 years. Of course he would have lied, and rightly so, if instructed by the military. The students are much younger than Buskirk and clearly knew each other well. They recalled the other classmates..

3. Next I brought up your FALSE claim (my #34) in your new book (5) that your article in the Encyclopedia of UFOs (6) had noted that there was no evidence for a crashed saucer at Spitsbergen, Aztec, or Roswell. I pointed out that neither your article nor any other in the 1980 Encyclopedia even mentions Roswell. You insisted I was in error about my claim and pulled out a copy of the book to prove it. You read page one and said "See, I didn't say that." I said "Please, read it again. You did make the claim." You read it again and said "No, I didn't make that claim". I pressed you to read it yet again. To your credit you did and quietly said. "Well, I can see where somebody might think I said that." I demanded that you read it again. Your comment, after being kind enough to do so, was "Well, that wasn't what was in my head at the time". I pointed out that I am a physicist, not a psychic, and have to go by what is out in the world and not what it is in your head.

You are now (#34) claiming you didn't say in the book what I said you said. I gave the quote, written by you, not by me, which speaking of your article on Hidden Alien Bodies was "In it I made clear that none of the reports of crashed saucers had ever withstood objective investigation. The road was strewn with the remains of those stories starting with the Aztec, New Mexico, case and working its way to the Spitzbergen report and the events near Roswell, New Mexico." Read it again. You made the FALSE claim that you had referred to Roswell. You did not refer to Roswell. Wishful thinking is no substitute for Truth.

In your MUFON J. article you comment correctly that Roswell had been mentioned previously by Ted Bloecher and Frank Edwards. I, was, of course, well aware of their mentions. I hadn't said that Roswell had never been mentioned before I got involved, only that there was nothing about it in your article or in the Encyclopedia, which is true. I do maintain that I was the first investigator to talk to Jesse Marcel and many others as you so generously acknowledged in "UFO Crash at Roswell" but withdrew in The Truth about "The UFO Crash at Roswell". Your claim about having dismissed Roswell in 1980 was FALSE. I don't doubt that you believed it. It was wishful thinking, NOT reality.

In your critique, there are other examples of FALSE claims:

In your response to my #2 you seem to be ready to make FALSE claims about what Ruth Barnett's diary says. Perhaps you have forgotten that I have a copy? entry on July 2: "Barney went to the high country near Datil... Barney came home from Datil at 6 O'clock" Entry July 3 "Barney was in office most of the day". Datil is the closest "town" to the Plains crash site and he could have been out there again the morning of July 3 since the office was in Magdalena perhaps a third of the way there from Socorro. We don't know exactly what date either it or the Corona crash occurred, other than the Corona crash was several days before July 8 according to the Daily Record and before the July 5 trip to Corona by Brazel. The diary suggests July 2 for the Plains crash. Re. my #4. Neither niece Alice Knight nor the Maltais were told where the crash was. Barney did tell Fleck Danley in the Plains and we found out only a few years ago that he had told Harold Baca "in the Plains". The claim that he had told everyone "in the Plains" is FALSE. I wish he had told the Maltais and Alice.He did, of course,also tell retired officer Bill Leed about the crash in the early 1960s. Rancher Johnny Foard had heard about it as well.

re my #5. You told me that Barney's district included the Corona site. It did not. FALSE claim. Not a big deal. Apparently it was made to justify your claim that Barney must have been at the Corona site. As I am sure you recall there were no mentions in Ruth's Diary of Barney working anywhere East of Socorro in 1947.

Re item 6. The anthropologists were not there at the time and said they knew nothing about a crash. You wish to believe that is the same as saying "I was there then, and nothing happened." It is NOT. Absence of evidence is not evidence for absence.

7. You have vilified Drake, and Gerald Anderson repeatedly apparently because they don't say what you want them to say. Drake did talk about flying saucers with his companions during the car ride back to Albuquerque. He did NOT mention the ranch hand's tale about bodies. Gerald has admitted changing a phone bill trying to trap you after the vilification.

Selected topics

#10. I sent Gerald information about my professional background so he would know I was a scientist, not a fiction writer. I certainly didn't write anything about a red haired officer and black sergeant. Glenn had just mentioned the redhead to me a couple of weeks earlier in Roswell. One more wishful thinking FALSE claim.

#11. Yes, Buskirk suggests he was too busy. But if he was told to lie, he would have. He was working in Eastern Arizona near the New Mexico border less than 2 hours from the crash site. Remember that I called him well before you, while looking for Adrian Buskirk. He is the only one I have spoken to who immediately stated he wasn't in the Plains in 1947. Everybody else had to think about where they were that many years ago.

#12,13, 14. You have repeatedly cited the testimony of the nun's log, Sgt. Pyles, and Jim Ragsdale as overthrowing the conventional wisdom. Ragsdale insisted to me and others (with NO financial inducement in sight) that he was with his lady love 53 miles WNW of Roswell in a heavily wooded area, certainly a more sensible place for a weekend romp than the barren country north of Roswell. Neither the nun's log nor Sgt Pyles testified to a saucer in the sky, nor to a crash, or, obviously, a crash location. Pyles didn't recall the date or direction of flight of the fireball. No connection of any kind has been established between the log entry, or Pyles testimony, both about fireballs, and the supposed disc crash at a new crash site. This is wishful thinking and more FALSE claims.

15. Gerald Anderson passed a polygraph test about his crashed saucer witnessing. No questions were asked about phone bills. Where is Kaufmann's polygraph result? Surely you don't believe the story he told us about the radar screen near Alamogordo being filled with light, meaning there was a crash north of Roswell, and his sending a man from Roswell to check it out. That man saw a glow towards the West, drove back to the Base. Frank was notified, rushed back (more than 100 miles over a mountain pass), woke Colonel Blanchard and Jesse Marcel in the middle of the night, and they all immediately dashed north without waiting for the morning, or a spotter plane report, and not knowing what was there, and found the bodies!! Nobody, least of all Blanchard and Marcel, would go cross country in that terrain in the middle of the night in ignorance. Neither would Marcel and Blanchard have been so casual in response to the Sheriff's notification to Marcel about strange wreckage later that same day. Kaufmann was out of the service in 1945, he said. You said in 1946. He said he was in the "Paramilitary". Just what authority did he have to direct anybody anywhere? He is in civilian clothes in the yearbook and showed us two pictures with him in a suit, one with important civilians and the other with military people. Was he a guard? Driver? Guide? Hospitality chairman? I can see why he wouldn't let me tape the interview nor give out his middle name.

16. Re anonymous callers. You lavished praise (UCAR) about a report from an anonymous caller supposedly an anthropologist. Drake is NOT anonymous. I met with him. Another FALSE claim . Now you claim you know who the caller was... Why does that absolve you from the stigma of praising anonymous testimony?

17. I was told you told a third party that I knew all about your having a tissue sample. If you didn't say that, I apologize.

18. Jerry Clark says I suggested you and Don were government agents. I offered that as a possibility, but did not claim you were. Can't you as a successful writer of fiction recognize a scenario?

19,20. While I certainly appreciate the fact that neither you, nor Phil Klass, have claimed I faked the MJ-12 papers, you have repeatedly FALSELY claimed that, because I made the following statement, I had enough information to fake them had I wanted to: "The simple fact of the matter is that Moore, Shandera, and I had already picked up on all the names on the list prior to the receipt of the film (except for Dr. Donald Menzel) as a result of the many days spent in historical archival research." There are far more details (dates places, format, etc etc) than merely names in the MJ-12 documents. The Menzel exception is, of course, an incredibly important one. In my list of more than 30 pieces of information unknown before the roll of film was received (always ignored by you) but which turned out to be true, I mentioned dates and many format details. I can see why you never deal with the list. It seems strange that I should have to point out to a very successful fiction writer that a plot takes more than a list of characters. Your claim is FALSE and wishful thinking. Moore also didn't know about Menzel and the other details, such as Cutler being out of the country. Another FALSE claim.

21. As I recall, the FALSE claim was made, on a radio show, that the nurse had been found. If I am wrong, I apologize.

22. Re bodies. You hadn't talked to Gonzales or Holden when the claim was made about bodies. You have not provided anything demonstrating that Easley says he saw bodies. His daughter did tell me that on his death bed, he said "Creatures." I asked you about this several times. No new interviews were listed for him, but you certainly expanded his supposed testimony. FALSE claim. If there is any basis for Kaufmann's (or Osborne's or McKenzie's) many claims, please put it on the table. I have been politely asking for some time and asked Frank as well. Looks to me like he watched Unsolved Mysteries and the Sightings show with Gerald Anderson's testimony, and decided to enjoy a little fame.

23. You used the term doctor in conjunction with Glenn Dennis's testimony NOT with regard to Rickett's testimony. Glenn never said the mortuary officer was a doctor, though that would have been more impressive. Surely Glenn dealt more with him than did Rickett.

24. You stated that the nurses records weren't available. This was a FALSE claim. Absence of evidence is not evidence for absence. Based on the OMNI article, the search was inadequate. I found nurses.. not very helpfully.

25. I have met with General Exon and had several discussions with him. You FALSELY converted his reporting of probably reliable scuttlebutt to a claim of first hand knowledge. He spoke of who would have known of Majestic-12 NOT whom he knew to be on it. FALSE CLAIM. He did return my phone calls, if not yours and Don's.

26.I did misspell Marshal. My mistake. You still have not provided a basis for your claims about Easley. His daughter was at his death bed, you were not. More wishful thinking and FALSE claims. I don't doubt he said he couldn't talk about things that happened. How can you justify FALSELY putting words you wish he had said in his mouth?

27. Having directly discussed the flying wing question with Pflock, way back when, because of my knowing wing inventor John Northrop, your claim that Pflock accepted the flying wing explanation is FALSE. As a good investigator, he checked it out.

28. Here is your quote from UFO Universe, Spring 1992 p.32 : "But Friedman, and Bill Moore, overlook the fact that this was a report prepared according to the document itself, by one military officer for a president-elect who was also a military officer". Here is my earlier 1990 statement p.54 in "Final Report on Operation Majestic 12" ." One has to remember that the briefing was done, if it's genuine, for a military man by a military man." Clearly your claim was FALSE since I explicitly noted the fact rather than ignoring it.

29. Since I have found other examples of the MJ-12 date formats and many others, the date format isn't wrong and does not establish the document is a fraud. Different or uncommon, maybe. I found 7 different date formats in one Office of the Secretary of Defense file folder. Surely 6 of these documents weren't forgeries or frauds. The claim is FALSE.

30. The use of the date for filing purposes in the numbering of the special classified executive order is common practice in the State Department with examples provided by me in my "Operation Majestic 12? YES!" report which you have. Special classified executive order is NOT the same as Executive Order.

31,32, You are on record as saying that if the Plains crash happened, the MJ-12 documents must be fraudulent since they don't mention it and that if the documents are legitimate, since they don't mention the Plains crash, it must not have happened. Both are FALSE claims. The Briefing is explicitly described as preliminary NOT as complete. Ike did not become President until 2 months after the briefing date. The Plains crash was more important (intact saucer , intact bodies), and got no publicity, and would have been very highly compartmentalized.

33. Re rank of Hillenkoetter. In a group of 6 civilians and 6 military people, generic rank is perfectly OK according to General Exon, Commander Deuley, Colonel Marcel. Do recall that at one time you requested other items signed with the wrong rank from Hillenkoetter.. despite the fact that the briefing is NOT signed by him. More wishful thinking to fulfill your own imaginative scenario, but a FALSE claim

34. I discussed item 34 above. You FALSELY claimed you had dismissed Roswell. You did not mention Roswell in your encyclopedia article, no matter how much you wish to believe you had. Read page one of your book A history of UFO Crashes again, please.

35. Re Time and Newsweek, there was no better cover story than Aztec hundreds of miles from Roswell. No point in FALSELY suggesting that Barnett was programmed to distract with a Plains story that never had public telling at that time. Letting people know about the successfully covered up crash would have been utterly foolish.

36.I don't see what the FALSE claim about Forrestal had to do with Brazel, and appreciate your acknowledging your mistake. Don Berliner claims he heard Brazel speak of the sergeant in less flattering terminology than "Black". I asked Don as well.

37. According to the pilot logs of both General Twining and his pilot, they flew to New Mexico on July 7, 1947, from Wright Field. I have shown copies of the logs and discussed the trip with the pilot, though Twining himself flew part of the trip. Chalk up another FALSE claim. Twining was NOT in NM when the Roswell events took place, unless you are changing the date yet again, much as you might wish that he was. I think it is hilarious that you claim that I ignore the Alamogordo News articles. I was the one who hired the local researcher to find relevant articles in that paper. Your copies came from me to Don Schmitt. These included the July 10 headline piece "Fantasy of Flying Disc Explained Here" and the article about the supposedly routine inspection on Friday, July 11. It was not planned in advance, had much too high powered a group of specialists and there were no pictures taken.. hardly routine. The exact quote from a July 17, 1947, letter (published in my Final Report on Operation Majestic-12, pg. B-2, which you have) from Twining to J.E. Schaefer of Boeing, Wichita, states "With deepest regrets we had to cancel our trip to the Boeing factory due to a very important and sudden matter that developed here." Schaeffer had wanted him to stop by on his way to Seattle.

38. You were FALSELY claiming over 400 WITNESSES years ago when the number of real witnesses was far lower than that.


I noted the opinion about the typewriter for the Truman-Forrestal memo being from the 1960s on p. 58 of my final report rather than ignoring it. Of course, I also pointed out that the typeface of the "24,1947." portion of the date matches the one used by Vannevar Bush's office at that time including the use of the period. I mentioned my being airbrushed out of the movie because having a plot line that has Jesse Marcel trying to vindicate himself 31 years later is misleading just as the USAF report using your repeatedly FALSELY listed date (1978) for the National Enquirer article tabloidizes the story. The article was actually in 1980. Jesse never sought attention. I was referred to him by an old ham radio buddy of his, and Bill Moore and I did an enormous amount of research. Scientist seeks truth about saucer is a much stronger pitch than angry old man seeks vindication or courts tabloid.

I won't dignify the false charge that I tried to stop your book.

I will say that Don Berliner used the quotes from your witness interviews, apparently without proper attribution, presumably because the interviews were funded by FUFOR, even if its $10,000. contribution to your research wasn't acknowledged. I apologize for Don for this oversight, since my name is also on the book.

I think it is hilarious that you state (I presume with a big grin ) that you don't reference my "self-published" papers so you won't have to count your references. So what is the excuse for not listing all the ones published for example, by MUFON, in the Proceedings of a number of annual Mutual UFO Network Symposia??

If it is easy to verify your many footnoted claims, why have you been unable to provide the requested verification, as previously politely requested, with regard to Easley, Kaufmann, Frankie Rowe, etc? Are the CUFOS files of tapes open to me or am I considered an interested party?

You are correct that I had originally suggested that my 1995 MUFON paper be titled "Deceit in Ufology". I would have covered FALSE claims such as those put forth by William Spaulding, Robert Lazar, Frank Stranges, Guy Kirkwood, Milton William Cooper, yourself, etc. However I was requested to do a Roswell update. So I did. Maybe next year for the Deceit paper. Actually, I think we would probably agree on much of it.

In summary then, it seems very clear to me that you have been unable to differentiate between the exciting stimulating even fascinating scenarios, which you have created in your mind, from what is really happening in the world outside. This makes for fine fiction writing and helps explain your truly outstanding ability to produce more than 78 novels. But it really doesn't cut it for investigative journalism. I wish I could suggest a cure for this malady, but I cannot. Pity.

Most cordially,

Stan Friedman

Reference and Footnote list

1. Randle, Kevin D. "The Search for the Truth about the Roswell Crash", MUFON Journal, No. 330, October 1995, pp.9-15.

2. Friedman, Stanton T. "Roswell Revisited" Proceedings MUFON 1995 International UFO Symposium: Ufology: a Scientific Paradigm", July 7-9, 1995, Seattle, Washington, pp.243-264. $25. from MUFON, 103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, TX 78155-4099. Or as a separate item $4.00, autographed from UFORI, POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958.

3. Letter, S.T. Friedman to K.D. Randle, April 11, 1993. 1 page.

4. Letter from attorney in Iowa to S.T. Friedman, 1995

5. Randle, Kevin D. "A History of UFO Crashes" Avon Books, New York, $5.50, 1995, 276 pages.

6. Story, Ronald, Editor, "Encyclopedia of UFOs", Doubleday, 1980,3824 words