| After listening to Kean and Blumenthal on how hard they had to work to get articles in the NYT, I am completely unimpressed by the latest two articles.
First, whatever was said in the articles caused many of the UFO crowd to go wild saying the Pentagon has admitted they had crashed ET saucers, Lazar is vindicated, the Roswell incident was confirmed. None of the above were exactly in the article. Speculation overran what was written. If the article was not so sloppily written perhaps other newspapers and radical UFO fans would not be so encouraged to jump off the deep end.
By Jan Aldrich
The retraction on the Harry Reid quote was the first crack. Then, Reid issued a much more conservative statement.
Eric Davis is on record as opposed to Lazar’s story.
Davis is identified as a consultant to the Pentagon. What actually was missing are several important details. Was he a current consultant? Was he a consultant on UFO? Did he really say there were crashed saucers known to the Pentagon?
Being a subcontractor on a government contract does not mean someone is a contractor to the Pentagon. Being on the contractor’s employment rolls does not mean someone is a contractor. Maybe a fine point, but necessary in this discussion.
While the authors said elsewhere that they were in contact with the NYT Washington bureau. They couldn’t identify what committees Eric Davis testified in front of, but I think the Washington bureau may not have been able to find out what was said at the hearings. They, however, probably could confirm what committees took Davis’ testimony.
Former Deputy Asst. Def Sec for Intelligence, Chris Mellon said rather that Davis gave out leads and sources of potential information.
Finally, the follow-up article on the UFO beliefs is ironic as it quotes Margaret Mead. I don’t think they knew that Mead advocated serious study of UFOs after another well-known anthropologist and former OSS operative, Dr. Carlton Coon joined NICAP. In our scanning of the CUFOS files we have not yet encountered correspondence with Mead or Coon.
The articles were not news items. There was adequate time to vet the articles unlike breaking news.