SUN 18 (Nov 1992)

Magazine Overview

This issue of the Skeptics UFO Newsletter, dated November 1992 and published by Philip J. Klass, focuses on two major UFO-related controversies: the Linda Napolitano abduction case and the 'crashed saucer' debate surrounding the Roswell and Plains of San Agustin incidents.

MUFON, CUFOS Leaders Meet with Budd Hopkins' 'Queen-Bee Abductee' and Her Critics

The lead article details a meeting held on October 3rd at Budd Hopkins' home in New York City, where UFO-abduction guru Budd Hopkins invited prominent UFOlogists Walter Andrus (MUFON) and Jerome Clark (CUFOS) to discuss the case of Linda Napolitano. Napolitano claims that in late 1989, she was abducted from her 12th-floor apartment by UFO occupants, an event she alleges was witnessed by UN Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar and two of his security guards. Hopkins has characterized this as the "MOST IMPORTANT" UFO-abduction case of the century.

Other attendees included David Jacobs, Penelope Franklin, and Antonio Hunceus, all associated with Hopkins' Intruders Foundation. Linda Moulton Howe, a TV producer, was invited but did not attend. Napolitano was accompanied by her husband and two sons; one son allegedly had been abducted prior to his mother's experience.

Notably, Hopkins also invited Joseph J. Stefula (MUFON's State Director for New Jersey) and his deputy, Richard Butler, who were described as "extremely suspicious of Linda's tale." Their suspicions were initially raised by letters from two men identifying themselves as "Richard and Dan." Initially claiming to be NYPD officers, they later stated they were security agents protecting Javier Perez de Cuellar. Stefula and Butler, both with law enforcement and VIP security backgrounds, challenged the authenticity of these claims. A "Mr. X," an experienced VIP security officer, also attended and questioned the men's purported role.

During the meeting, Linda Napolitano corrected her husband regarding the time of the alleged incident (from 3 a.m. to 10 p.m.). She also made claims about her ancestry, stating she is a descendant of Joan of Arc. Earlier, she had told UFOlogist George Hansen that her husband was born in the U.S., but at the meeting, he stated he immigrated at age 17.

Further Scrutiny of the Napolitano Case

The newsletter highlights further extraordinary claims made by Linda Napolitano, including being abducted twice in broad daylight by "Richard and Dan," who allegedly attempted to kill her. Hopkins stated he had been "pushing Linda" to report these incidents to law enforcement, but she refused.

George Hansen, in a "White Paper," criticized the negative response from some UFOlogists to the proposal of bringing federal agents to justice if the claims were true, emphasizing the risk to public safety. Jerry Clark, in a memo, argued for a "wait and see" approach, suggesting the case might be "politically sensitive" and involve a prominent political figure, making immediate investigation potentially counterproductive. Clark admitted to having "ambivalent feelings" about the case, finding some aspects "impossible" but also finding the idea of a hoax "simplistic and unconvincing."

Walter Andrus, who had previously endorsed the Gulf Breeze UFO photo case, took a cautious approach to the Linda case, which the newsletter attributes to a "once bitten, twice shy" attitude.

The newsletter draws a parallel between the Gulf Breeze and Linda cases, suggesting both might have been "staged events" designed for maximum impact due to the involvement of prominent figures.

The Spiral Implant in Linda's Nose

The article discusses the claim of alien implants, first popularized by Whitley Strieber. Linda Napolitano claims ETs inserted an implant in her nasal cavity when she was a child. She provided two X-rays showing a spiral-shaped object. Hopkins presented slides of these X-rays at a MUFON conference, but the implant had allegedly disappeared. The newsletter notes that in similar cases, ETs are often described as removing implants before subjects go public, thus preventing physical evidence.

Hopkins recounted that Linda first contacted him in April 1989 after reading his book. She recalled a bump on her nose from about 13 years earlier, which a doctor identified as a "surgical scar." This incident reportedly upset her. It was not until 18 months later, in November 1991, that an X-ray was taken by a "doctor closely connected with Linda" (her cousin). The X-ray was taken, but not developed immediately. Two days later, Linda reported waking up with blood from her nostrils and head, suggesting the ETs had removed the implant after learning of the X-ray. When the X-rays were delivered to Hopkins, his consultant, a neurosurgeon, exclaimed "Holy Cats!" but by then, the implant was gone.

The newsletter speculates that if the doctor had developed and examined the X-rays before Linda left, Hopkins might have had physical proof. It also mentions a bizarre incident where Linda's son, his friend, her husband, and her younger son all experienced severe nosebleeds simultaneously, which the newsletter suggests might be related to ETs mistakenly believing they had implanted one of them.

Plains of San Agustin "Crashed Saucer" Crashes with Stan Friedman's Credibility as the Principal Victim

This section shifts focus to the "crashed saucer" controversy, specifically the internecine battle between UFOlogists Kevin Randle/Don Schmitt and Stanton Friedman/Don Berliner. The article contrasts three books on the subject: "UFO Crash at Roswell" (Moore/Berlitz), "Crash at Corona" (Friedman/Berliner), and the upcoming "UFO Crash at Roswell" (Randle/Schmitt).

Moore/Berlitz claimed debris was found near Corona, N.M., with no ET bodies. They also recounted a tale from "Barney" Barnett about discovering a crashed saucer with ET bodies on the Plains of San Agustin. Randle/Schmitt claimed the saucer Barnett reported was on the Brazel ranch, not the Plains of San Agustin. Friedman/Berliner claimed two UFOs crashed, with one recovered from the Brazel ranch and another on the Plains of San Agustin, yielding one live ET and three ET bodies. This "1+3" scenario is based on the account of Gerald Anderson.

Anderson first went public after seeing the "crashed-saucer" incident on the "Unsolved Mysteries" TV show. His story was passed to Randle and Friedman. Randle interviewed Anderson and found discrepancies, but Friedman found his tale convincing. Anderson claimed to remember a "Dr. Buskirk" from an archaeological group. Despite Anderson claiming he hadn't seen Dr. Buskirk since 1947, a sketch of Buskirk was produced. Thomas J. Carey assisted Friedman in locating Dr. Buskirk, which led to Friedman's "embarrassment."

Dr. Buskirk, trained as an anthropologist, stated he was at Fort Apache Reservation in Arizona in the summer of 1947 and had never been affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania, contradicting Carey's earlier report. A curious coincidence noted is that in 1958, when Buskirk taught anthropology at Albuquerque High School, Gerald Anderson was a student there.

Anderson's student records, when sought by Carey, were initially withheld. A photocopy provided by Anderson to Friedman and Carpenter appeared to show a Sociology course, not Anthropology. A disagreement over the duration of a telephone interview between Anderson and Randle also highlighted inconsistencies. Randle tape-recorded the interview, which lasted 51 minutes, while Anderson claimed it was 26 minutes and provided a phone bill to support this. An official photocopy of the phone bill later confirmed the 54-minute duration, proving Anderson's copy was bogus.

Jerome Clark, in an editorial, expressed dismay that Anderson's "fibs" were still being preserved in a book by Friedman/Berliner, calling it "testimony to a real event."

Schmitt/Randle: No Credible Evidence of San Agustin Crashed Saucer

Schmitt and Randle have recanted their earlier acceptance of Barney Barnett's crashed saucer tale, stating that "no firsthand witnesses confirm the [Barnett] report" and that ranchers on the Plains of San Agustin insist no crash occurred there in July 1947. They now believe in a single-craft/single-event interpretation, concluding that ET bodies were likely recovered near the Brazel ranch, not San Agustin. They also dismiss Barnett's claim as a tall tale, despite his wife's diary indicating he was working elsewhere at the time of the alleged crash.

Schmitt and Randle acknowledge that the Barnett tale was important because it was the only story that spoke of recovering an alien flight crew. They mention other potential sources for ET body recovery claims, including Glenn Dennis, Robert A. Slusher, and Melvin Brown's daughter. However, they note that Randle and Schmitt failed to spot significant discrepancies between the stories told by Slusher/Brown's daughter and mortician Dennis. Despite contradictions, Randle and Schmitt have not responded to Klass's request for comments on these issues.

Schmitt reported on October 19th at a CSICOP conference that seven firsthand witnesses to the second (Brazel ranch) site exist, six of whom are former military and are "sworn to secrecy." He and Randle have discussed this with members of Congress, hoping for immunity for the witnesses, but Schmitt is not optimistic about the new Congress's receptiveness.

A Little Paranoia Is Good For You

This section discusses Budd Hopkins' conviction that the Linda Napolitano case "establishes the physical reality of the UFO abduction experience." Hopkins warns of attacks from "professional debunkers" and suggests the possibility of "officially sanctioned intelligence agents" within UFO investigative networks working to subvert the case. The newsletter notes that at least two advisors from Hopkins' Intruder Foundation privately disagree with his appraisal.

The author speculates about a possible covert U.S. Government interest in UFOs, suggesting that the government might strike a secret deal with a civil UFO organization, potentially using a code name like "CUFON (CIA UFO Network)." The director of such an organization might be instructed to criticize the government and accuse it of "UFO coverup" to maintain appearances. The article suggests that Walter Andrus or Jerry Clark could potentially be involved in such a scenario.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The newsletter consistently adopts a skeptical stance, critically examining UFO claims and the evidence presented by prominent figures in the UFO community. It highlights inconsistencies, contradictions, and potential hoaxes, particularly in the Napolitano abduction case and the San Agustin crashed saucer incident. The editor, Philip J. Klass, is portrayed as actively investigating and challenging these claims, seeking verifiable evidence and questioning the motivations and credibility of those involved. The recurring theme is the need for rigorous scrutiny and skepticism when evaluating extraordinary claims, especially those involving alleged government coverups or politically sensitive individuals.