SUBJECT: THE KLASS LIE FILE: UFO2486
* Forwarded from "INFO.PARANET"
* Originally by Jim Speiser
* Originally to All
* Originally dated 9 Aug 1993, 22:12
One of the major points of contention in the Walton case, and the central
point about which Klass spins his "alternative scenario," is the status and
resolution of Mike Rogers' Turkey Springs logging contract. Specifically,
Klass contends that Rogers was too far behind on his contract to be able to
complete it by the deadline, which had already been extended once.
Therefore, says Klass, Rogers cooked up a UFO hoax in order to qualify for a
default termination, in which case he would receive his 10% retention and be
done with the whole deal.
Ancillary to this is Klass' contention that Rogers was deliberately
deceiving the US Forest Service, because he was "moonlighting" on the
contract, trying to complete two other contracts at the same time without
the Forest Service's knowledge.
In a personal letter to me on May 4, 1993, Klass wrote the following and
asked me to pass it on to Tracy Torme for comment. I told him I would
bypass Torme and send it directly to Rogers.
<< ...On Oct. 16, 1975, US Forest Service inspector Tom Hentz reported to
Contracting Officer Maurice Marchbanks that Mike Rogers had used up
approximately 80% of his contract-extension time but had completed only
37% of the 353 acres under contract. Further, Hentz told Marchbanks that
Rogers could not possibly complete his con- tract work assignment by the
deadline of Nov. 10.
Four days later, on Oct. 20, 1975, Rogers wrote a letter to Marchbanks
which said (in part):
"I am writing to tell you personally of our progress on the
Turkey Springs thinning. I cannot honestly say whether or not
we will finish on time. However, _we are working every day_
with as much manpower as I can hire..." (Emphasis added here
[PK].)
I invite you to send the enclosed photocopy of this letter to Tracy Torme
and seek his answer to the following question:
_Was Rogers being truthful when he informed the Forest Service
on Oct. 20 that "we are working every day" or was he resorting
to intentional falsehood?_
>>
According to Rogers, Klass is attempting to demonstrate that Rogers was
engaging in deception because he had NOT been working every day on the
contract, since he had two other contracts to complete. But, Rogers says,
they HAD completed the other contracts by October 20 and were indeed
starting to devote full time to the Turkey Springs contract.
But did the Forest Service know about the other two contracts? First of all,
says Rogers, there is no question of deception, since he is not under any
obligation to inform the Forest Service about other contracts he may be
performing. But second, and more damaging to Klass' case, the answer is
yes, the Forest Service had been informed. Rogers had told Tom Hentz of the
other contracts, and felt no compunction to also so inform Marchbanks, who
was Hentz' subordinate.
As a final flourish, Rogers adds that Klass should ask Marchbanks if he at
any time felt deceived by Rogers' Oct. 20 letter.
**********
ADDENDUM:
The above was sent to Phil Klass as is. Subsequently (but prior to my
receiving Klass' response), Mike Rogers provided me with two minor
corrections. First, Marchbanks was Hentz' superior, not subordinate. Second,
Rogers did not tell Hentz verbally about the other two contracts. He told
him about one of them, and assumed he knew about the other, since there was
paperwork on it in the Forest Service Inspector's office, and it was Hentz'
job to know about such things.
Klass' response will follow, to be followed by more comments from Mike, and
some of my own observations.
Jim
Philip J. Klass 404 "N" St. Southwest Washington D.C. 20024
Here are my comments on Mike Rogers' statements contained in your letter of
July 12, 1993:
(1) Rogers now claims that he and his crew "HAD completed the other [two
"moonlighting"] contracts by October 20 and were indeed starting to devote
full time to the Turkey Springs contract."
PJK comment: But in Rogers' letter of April 19, 1977, to APRO's Jim Lorenzen
Rogers wrote: "Between 10/16/75 and 10/28/75 [the date of inspector Hentz'
next visit] the inspectors (sic) diary clearly shows we lost 3-1/2 days one
week alone due to some unfortunate circumstances. The 1/2 day accounts for
the other 4 acres [which were completed at Turkey Springs between 10/16/75
and 10/28/75] The other 8 days were spent [working] on another job..."
(Emphasis supplied)
If Rogers was being truthful in his April 19 letter to Lorenzen, between
Oct. 16 and Oct. 28 "8 days were spent on another job." If one makes the
most favorable assumption for Rogers, those 8 days were Oct. 16 to Oct. 24.
Thus, on the night of Oct. 20, when Rogers wrote contracting officer
Marchbanks in regard to his Turkey Springs contract and told him: "We are
working every day with as much manpower as I can hire," ROGERS WAS TELLING A
BIG FAT LIE.
(2) Rogers claims he "had told [inspector] Tom Hentz of the other contracts
[NOTE PLURAL], and felt no compunction to also so inform Marchbanks, who was
Hentz subordinate."
PJK Comment: On the evening of July 11, 1976, during a telephone
conversation with Rogers (which we both tape recorded by advance agreement),
he accidentally let slip that the real reason he was so far behind on his
Turkey Springs contract was that he and his crew were moonlighting on two
other jobs. When I asked if contracting officer Marchbanks knew that Rogers
was working these two other jobs and was not working Turkey Springs full
time, as he claimed in his 10/20/75 letter, he said he assumed that
Marchbanks knew about one of the moonlighting jobs because Rogers claimed
that inspector Hentz knew. I told Rogers I planned to call Marchbanks the
next morning to find out.
If, as Rogers now claims, he "felt no compunction to also so inform
Marchbanks," why did Rogers get up very, very early the next morning (July
12) and drive 60 miles to Springerville so he could inform Marchbanks before
I called? When I called, Marchbanks told me "I was not aware of it until
this morning." And Rogers did NOT tell Marchbanks about his SECOND
moonlighting job, only ONE.
CONCLUSION TO KLASS' MAY 4 QUESTION AND HIS JULY 17 COMMENTS
FROM MICHAEL H. ROGERS
Philip Klass' foregoing comments have once again given us an excellent
example of his true modus operandi - to falsify documents and generate
outright fabrications in a loathsome attempt to cover up the real truth
about our experience.
A skeptic is one who has the right to disbelieve in things which can not
actually be proven to exist. But, an honest skeptic is one who will also
look at the surrounding documentation with complete, unbiased appraisal.
I have some friends, one close friend in particular, who have seen and
pondered all the documentation of our case. Displaying his right as a
citizen of a free country, and from the lure of his own desire, he has come
right out on a couple of occasions and stated that he is not sure he can
actually believe in extraterrestrial visitors, but he fully acknowledges, in
the same sentence, that the documentation as a whole proves that we are
telling the truth and honest in all the surrounding issues, and that Philip
Klass is quite obviously a dishonest skeptic. Even though my friend is a
skeptic he is an honest skeptic, and he is, among others, still my friend.
**********************************************
* THE U.F.O. BBS -
http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *
**********************************************
