UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2002 > Nov > Nov 3

Re: Cosmic Top Secret

From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 23:47:50 -0400
Archived: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 10:24:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret


>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 21:41:59 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret

>>>From: Anthony Cipoletta <cipey.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Subject: Cosmic Top Secret
>>>Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 19:04:44 -0500

>>3. The GAO, in its search for Roswell related documents, noted
>>on page 80 of their 400+ page overview background package that
>>they had noted documents classified TOP SECRET RESTRICTED even
>>though they had been told (Majestic 12) that no such designation
>>was in use at the time (1954).

>No, this is incorrect. I believe you are talking about
>Restricted Data and Formerly Restricted Data both of which refer
>to nuclear related information. Again, I would like to see such
>a document that can be independently obtained from an archives.

Sorry Jan. What I said was quite correct. I am very familiar
with Secret Restricted data as I wrote many such documents. As I
noted in my MUFON 2000 paper, , the exact quote  is "Date:
December 7, 1994, Ms. Laura Jackson and I reviewed records
pertaining to the Air Forces atomic energy projects and certain
mission and weapons requirements. These files were Calssified up
to and including top secret. The period covered by these records
was from 1948 to 1956. There was no mention of the Roswell
Incident. No information pertaining to the assignment was
obtained. In several instances we noticed the classification Top
Secret Restricted, used on several documents. This is mentioned
because in past references to this clas sification (Majestic 12)
we were told that it was not used during this period."

I spoke with the 3 GAO people involved. They could not make
copies of these documents  because they were still classified.
Furthermore as I had noted in my paper I had earlier found a
number of Confidential Resricted and Secret  Restricted
documents. No these were not SRD or CRD.

Please notice the term several. They did not say loads of or a
great many, but several .

>>I had also noted, in Archives, documents classified as SECRET
>>RESTRICTED and CONFIDENTIAL RESTRICTED..... When I worked on
>>classified programs relating to nuclear activities, one very
>>frequently saw SECRET RESTRICTED DATA and CONFIDENTIAL
>>RESTRICTED DATA on classified documents.

>Again, I don't think you saw Secret Restrict, but rather Secret
>Restricted Data (SRD)

Wrong again. Why do you think so??? Can you not read what I
said? They were SR and CR NOT SRD or CRD. Whether we expect it
or like it or not,that is what they were. As noted above I was
very familiar with SRD and CRD documents.

>The GOA Roswell investigators were cleared for access to nuclear
>weapons data and could see Top Secret Restricted Data.

Of course, but these documents were NOT SRD or CRD or TSRD

>One problem in researching at archives is that documents
>containing Restricted Data must be reviewed by the Energy
>Department for release in addition to the originating agency. A
>real problem when nuclear capable units of, say the Air Force,
>are involved.

>>In addition I required a Q clearance which was normally thought
>>of as being somewhere between SECRET and TOP SECRET.

>This is completely false. A Q clearance was necessary for access
>to nuclear data. It is not between anything.

This has been discussed here before. The Q gave me access to non
nuclear data as well. some of it at TOP SECRET level. in certain
circumstances when I had a need to know.

>Security manuals are readily available to researchers so
>mis-statement like this could easily be avoided with a little
>reading.

Jan, you make it sound like every installation follows the same
 set of rules. They don't all follow the same rules. Some
documents have unusual classifications. Check out page 80 of the
big GAO equivalent to FOI volume re Roswell. I suppose I could
dig out some of the SR and CR documents. I believe I mentioned
this in my 1990 Final Report on Operation Majestic 12.

Absence of evidence in your hands is not evidence of absence.
Proclamation is not the same as investigation.

Yes, a little reading would be a good idea. You remind me of Ed
Stewart proclaiming that all TS documents had TS control numbers
on them. FALSE. He also proclaimed that all the documents in RG
341 were TS and all had TS control numbers. FALSE. Yes, a little
reading would have helped him as well.


Stan Friedman


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com