Open Letter to Kevin Randle
Nov. 10, 1995
Mr. Kevin Randle
Marion, IA 52402
Thank you very much for taking the time and trouble to respond in
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
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
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
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
#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
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
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
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
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.
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