Update Travis Walton: Did Agencies Protect or Coerce Klass?
---- Original Message ----- From: Evelyn Gordon
To: Travis Walton
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 5:19 AM
Subject: Travis, do I have this right?
Travis, I haven't changed anything in your story except at the end where I've eliminated the heavily redacted paragraph because it's difficult to follow, and rewrote the MEMO information. I especially need you to read the paragraph in larger type to see if I'm understanding it correctly. You're free to rewrite it. Might it be correct to say they used the threat of prosecution to get Klass to serve as a disinformation agent for the government or CIA?
Thanks again - Mary
---------------------
Klass was no friend of the FBI. He had derisively attacked the agency publicly for discussing the use of psychics in criminal investigations and for publishing an article titled "The UFO Mystery" by astronomer Dr. J. Allen Hynek in their internal publication.
Klass's FBI file (Bufile 62-116443, Serial 7) states that:
In view of Klass' intemperate criticisms and often irrational statements he made to support them, it was recommended that the Bureau be most circumspect in any future contacts with him."
The real smoking gun in this matter, however, might be the November 9, 1964 memo previously stamped “SECRET,” from J. Edgar Hoover to the Director of the CIA. In it Hoover said it looked like the Philip J. Klass matter was turned over to the CIA and then possibly some agency beyond that, and that a threat of prosecution over classified leaks might have been used as leverage to gain Klass’ cooperation.
More bombshells to follow in a future final edition of my book “Fire in the Sky.” – Travis Walton
EDITOR’S NOTE:The most recent edition (2010) of Travis Walton’s book about his abduction,“Fire in the Sky,”is only available through his website. He cautions that other sources are selling overpriced 1996 editions. A date for his final edition is not yet known because new material continues to come in.
From: Travis Walton
To: Evelyn Gordon
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: Travis, do I have this right?
Evelyn, The following explanation is probably of no use to you since it is far too lengthy for the brief simplified summaries you need. But perhaps it may clarify the meaning of my earlier response.
No , the rewording in your last paragraph still is not right. Just as I have done in my book I wish to separate the facts from any theories or conclusions I personally make about them. OF COURSE any discussion of how to leverage the withheld prosecution in order to gain coperation would not be included in the un-redacted parts of the memo. OF COURSE they aren't going to release the files with such admissions of impropriety on their part left unredacted.
{In past FOIA releases they used big solid black rectangles to cover the withheld portions. Now they use white boxes with a thin black line of an outline. Perhaps this practice was changed to conserve toner or make it look less starkly like they are withholding so much.}
There are two entire paragraphs redacted from the first page of the memo and other pages are so heavily redacted that on some pages little remains, making it hard to completely decipher. After 911 there was much discussion of longstanding noncooperation between the FBI and CIA and other agencies. So ANY memo from the FBI to the CIA is noteworthy, especially Director to Director. The significance of the memo is that the sole subject was Philip Klass, his security breeches and the FBI's decision not to pursue prosecution or further investigation.
So I ask, if the matter was closed, why report all the details to the CIA? The "...not to be of service to his government..." line I excerpted from the end of a large redaction from another document in the file supports MY OWN conclusion that such a scenario would provide the perfect circumstances under which cooperation as a disinformationist might be "persuaded." To me the implication of these points is clear, but it is NOT flatly stated in these files. However, this scenario would be entirely consistent with methods of recruitment known to be commonly employed by these agencies.
If there is still confusion about this perhaps it would be better to not even mention the FOIA files. Better to be confident in our accuracy than to condense it in a way that might create any unnecessary misconceptions. I really appreciate your diligence in fact-checking by having me review your distillation prior to putting it out there. I commend this as a very responsible approach. -- Travis