THe "burned memo", a near "smoking gun"

www.majesticdocuments.com...

Recently Ryan wood released "Majic Eyes Only" which elaborates on this document. Forensic tests are indicating it is genuine. THis is important for a number of reasons:

1. Who would fabricate a document and wait thirty years to release it, knowing that other documents would have to be released by others for it to make any sense.

2. WE know that Kennedy's secret service codename was "Lancer" from the Governments investigations after his death(the Warren Commision). If this was genuinely dated to be from the eraly 1960s, my question is, wouldn't JFK's codename be known only to a select few? I may be wrong on this point.

3.In "Exempt from Dislosure", there is info that suggests JFK was asking for a lot of info on MJ-12'S activities, and ,considering the reference to "wet affairs"(Soviet lingo for assination) under the project environment paragraph in the "burned memo" is there now a growing body of evidence to support the idea that mj-12 had something to do with JFK's assasination?

I was under the impression that the MJ-12 documents were generally considered to be a hoax. Is that not the case? Or, perhaps it's only considered a hoax outside of ATS? Someone please point me to credible analysis of this...

Also, I'd like to vote for "smoking gun" as the most inappropriately used (and I think over-used) subject line. Everyone sees that and thinks, "Oh, WOW - finally there's the smoking gun I've been waiting for all my life!" And then (predictably) it is no such thing. And we all go back to our jobs and check ATS later for more "smoking guns".

Please, let's retire the phrase until it actually means something. I think we'll all know it when that day comes.

I'm not too crazy about what's implied by those "SPIKE" and "HOUSE CLEANING" references in regards to major population centers.

And that the weather should be "wet" if MJ-12 can't get Washington to cooperate.

I tell you, these guys are kooks on this site. If it's all hogwash, they must be commended for putting in the time necessary to wash that hog to a fine shine.

Sophismata,

THe Eisenhower Breifing document, sent to Moore and Shandera is probably what you are referring to. Along with the SOM . THat these are frauds is the general opinion, however, I have yet to see any of these claims not repudiated(is that a word?) by Stanton Friedman. Read "Top Secret: Majic" by Stanton FRiedman, there is a tremendous amount of research that points towards their validity.

I said "near, smoking gun", this word is often used, but I think this document is a very strong case.

Enkidu, could you re-phrase your opinion? I'm not too crazy about the "spike" and "house cleaning" either if you mean that they are disconcerting, though these are thought to point to crash retreivals, I believe. Keep in mind that MKULTRA and ARTICHOKE were CIA mind control projects. That is the scary part, that these programs could be used to delude the public should an incident like Roswell happen again.

*bump*

I know I rarely post but read often and this document is rarely mentioned but is significant.

I've read a great deal that "counter-debunks" Friedman's arguments for the validity of the documents, and the obvious errors in formatting should make any question of validity null anyway. The documents are great forgeries, but nothing more.

The thing in general that bothers me about the putative Majestic documents is how come nobody's still finding them? When was the last one found?

From what I understand, nobody's come up with a good one in years, which is a bit suspicious in itself. Are we to assume that all of the available documents have been found and uncovered? Seems to me that as time goes by, more documents should be found, not fewer.

That tends to suggest to me that whoever was cooking these documents up is no longer doing it for some reason, possibly because they served their purpose (to smoke out potential security leaks, muddy the waters around Roswell, etc.) and are no longer needed.

evanmontegarde,
Could you point me to some links?

I would think that the absence of a steady stream of document leaks would only speak to the limited involvement anyone would have, especially since only so many would know how to get info on the project.

The most recent news I know of is the private investigator tracking down the person who had in their posession the original SOM that was photographed and sent out. Something never talked about here but important. If someone could meet this man and analyze the original, almost all would be put to rest.

These are more believable than the ISSAC B.s complete with horribly rendered 3d images by some Alienware employee/contractor..

Originally posted by mj 09
evanmontegarde,
Could you point me to some links?

I would think that the absence of a steady stream of document leaks would only speak to the limited involvement anyone would have, especially since only so many would know how to get info on the project.

The most recent news I know of is the private investigator tracking down the person who had in their posession the original SOM that was photographed and sent out. Something never talked about here but important. If someone could meet this man and analyze the original, almost all would be put to rest.

I'd love to but unfortunately all my sources are printed books.

It's been a long time since I read it but I believe this book tackles the issue:

www.amazon.com...

There's also a book I have titled something like "Unexplained Mysteries" that does a fairly thorough evaluation of the MJ-12 documents and concludes that they were falsified. If I can find it lying around I'll edit this post with the full information.

Very interesting, when I get my DSL back I'll be sure to look at it Nice find

evanmontegarde,

Randle published an entire book about his opinions called" case mj12" in 2002 I believe.

Stanton FRiedman refutes many of his arguments on his website that surely are covered in the book you are referring to.

www.stantonfriedman.com...

You are welcome to the opinion that they are fraudulent, but I've never found Randle as reliable on anything, and have found Friedman to be very measured in his approach.

The last time that I read this website, this particular document had an authenticity rating of "low." Do you know what they have done to authenticate it? They didn't specifically say what they had done on the website.

Togetic,

I have some info on it in a book at home. I'll let you know later on.

I know that forensically it is dated to the 1960s and contains Kennedy's codename from the secret service(which I can only assume wasn't known at that point).