SG> But it's most amusing to see you choose to parrot certain stories
 SG> you don't appear to understand well (like the Tehran case and the
 SG> MJ-12 hoax) -- it reminds me quite a bit of Laurie's repostings
 SG> of messages that he didn't quite understand and couldn't reply to by
 SG> himself....
 Come on Sheppard.  I posted Friedmans reply (for his book) to the debunking 
arguements used by Klass...you never addressed them, instead promising to 
forward my arguements to Klass himself (if I have some time, I will take the 
offer up).  All I disagree on is your claim that the documents have been show 
n to be fakes (pretty obvious you can not prove it, instead asking me to 
address Klass).
       With regards to the Tehran case.  Klass got it wrong.  All I ask, is 
that you read the DIA report, take note of the actions of the objects and 
then judge yourself, if his explanation explains the sighting.  For example, 
he interprets the report (very important since his meteor explanation is 
based on it) as saying, that the U.F.O fired a convention missile at the F4, 
which missed and hit the ground.  Yet the report states the two object come 
out of the U.F.O.  The one that followed the F-4 NEVER crash but returned to 
the primary craft and the second object never followed the crafts.  Instead 
it moved straight down from the primary object and landed softly on the 
ground.  He mixed it up....have a read.
       Regards George
--- FMail 1.22
---------------