Dispatches from Richard Boylan
From: rich.boylan@24stex.com
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 98 10:04:31 -0800
Subject: rebut Friedman
[A Note of alleged refutation from Stanton Friedman]
Amy:
Thanks for the kind words. I anxiously await the UPN show.
Mr. Friedman was presented as an expert on that show which turned out to be
a hoax about "alien abduction in Lake County. He didn't bother to check. So
much
for his "careful" inquiry methods.
Boylan has been putting out similar garbage for months. Just about everything
in
his Jan. 22, letter is false.
Strong claims, but no proof offered. The dodges below are certainly not
that
"proof". Even more telling is Friedman's dodging of many points about his long
and
deep involvement in, and knowledge about, the world of national security
projects and secrecy.
1. I have never had a TOP SECRET Clearance.
Of course. I did not state that he did. Notice how Friedman tries to make
it look
like he's rebutting something.
2. I have never worked on Black Budget programs.
Dr. Wolf says that you did. Can you prove you never worked on Black Budget
projects? Where is your "evidence"? (Ahem.)
3. My classified work in industry ended in 1970. I had a Q clearance and
in some places a SECRET Clearance.
While Mr. Friedman claims that his classified work IN INDUSTRY ended
in 1970, he did not state that he has not been involved in other classified
work. Also
note that he does not say how high his Q clearance went.
4. I certainly used the right name for Wolf when I called MIT (3
offices) and McGill (2 offices) after finding his listings for NYAS and
AAAs via the phone.
Without the right need-to-know security clearances, Friedman will not be
able
to gain access to "erased" documentation of Dr. Wolf's studies, work and
degrees. Any
first-year logician knows that you cannot prove a negative.
5. The notion that Wolf can tell all about the inner workings of a Black
Project and not the name of his thesis adviser is absurd.
As Friedman must know from his involvement in Secret and Q projects,
insiders
are not allowed the reveal "sources" (named individuals) and "methods"
(classified details,
and the way classified data is acquired.)
6. I did point out that it seems rediculous [that's "ridiculous", Stan] that
such a
distinguished "scientist" didn't join the AAAS and NYAS until the 1990's.
Neither
checked his slaied [that's "stated, Stan] credentials. Just what specialty
groups does he
belong to such as the AMA, The American Physical Society etc?
Since Mr. Friedman has contacted and spoken with Dr. Wolf on several
occasions,
he has had ample opportunity to ask these questions of him. Notice the
grandstanding for
the "audience".
7. When people question me about credentials I provide an 8 page CV
which lists professional affiliations amd many publications. Some are
readily available in a good Tach Library. I provided diplomas and
listings in alumni directories, and directories of professional groups.
We have seen absolutely nothing from Wolf..no copies of licenses and
diplomas.
It's clear that Friedman is unfairly trying to use the low-profile
restrictions
that Dr. Wolf is required to operate under in making measured and partial
disclosure
of facts from inside the MJ-12 scientific studies, in order to try to discredit
Dr.
Wolf. A more reasonable approach would be to weigh Dr. Wolf's statements and
disclosures against other reliable sources. They match up very well.
He claims a bad accident. Any evidence [of] obituary date and location?
Why didn't Mr. Friedman ask Dr. Wolf during one of his contacts with him?
8. Of course I never claimed that a PHD in physics would not work on
Black Budget programs. I have claimed that there is no evidence Wolf
has a degree from anywhere. For that matter how about a BS from some place?
Investigator James Courant was able to locate an additional Master's degree
that Dr. Wolf received that he didn't even refer to in his book. How hard did
Friedman
look?
I hate wasting time on this sort of garbage.
My feeling precisely.
The burden is on Wolf and Boylan.
The burden is on Mr. Friedman to do thorough research, and use the correct
name, and present findings fairly within a national security
restricted-information context.
If he did so, we wouldn't be listening to his complaining.
and I will explore legal action against him if he doesn'tstop lying
and defaming me.
It appears that the defamation has been issuing from you.
After all there should be no problem establishing Wolf'ss [ that's Wolf's,
Stan]
background[,] even if he worked on Black Programs.
Friedman's assertion might be considered comical for the sophisticated
audience, all too aware of the extreme ultra-secrecy UFO matters are shrouded
in.
Stan Friedman.. feel free to distribute this.
Posted by: Stanton Friedman (by way of "Vamguard" [that's Vanguard, Stan]
<yelorose
- Richard Boylan, Ph.D.
|
Created: Wed Jan 28 13:05:37 EST 1998