It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Condign report. Is it a Red Herring or is it not in the Rendlesham affair?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on May, 31 2016 @ 11:20 AM
a reply to: uncommitted

Ok. John was indeed very ill, there is no disputing this.

But the cause is another matter. What we can see he
is pushing the Condign report constantly.

I guess I am not convinced re the claimed cause of his
illness .

posted on May, 31 2016 @ 11:46 AM
Thank you IsaacKoi !! I will check all of this out when I slow down from work.....I have never heard of this report or these people . Very interesting and I'm excited to dig into it..Thank you for your time in explaining this thread !! a reply to: IsaacKoi

posted on May, 31 2016 @ 02:49 PM
Personally I have no idea if John Burroughs was injured by an "odd Air Form that emitted Broad Band NIEMR"

If we are to believe those involved more closely with the case (including John) then his medical records remain classified from his time at Bentwaters.

Of course much of the details of the settlement by VA and John's medical condition are protected (quite rightly so) under the law.

So all we can go on is the statement put out when the case was settled.

Much of that is in this thread : "US DoD have confirmed the UFO phenomenon is real"

( I am sure you've seen it. It has a certain quote in it

The evidence presented that these injuries were sustained during the 25th/26th December or the subsequent claimed encounter of 27th/28th 1980 seems to be :

The well-reported Rendlesham Forest/Bentwaters event is an example where it might be postulated that several observers were probably exposed to UAP [Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon] radiation for longer than normal UAP sighting periods."

Condign was written by a 'defence contractor'. It does not mention any other well known UFO cases and in fact was based on a study from 1987 - 1997 (although I believe older cases were also considered) .

The statement quote, when broken down means exactly what?

The incident at Rendlesham is something where someone might speculate that a number of personnel were likely to have been exposed to UAP radiation Iwhat exactly does that mean) for longer than normal UAP events.

What is UAP radiation, what is a normal UAP event?

It all comes down to absolutely nothing as evidence. Isaac would probably be better placed than me to comment. But I might postulate that if challenged in a court of law this would not prove beyond reasonable doubt that John Burroughs heart damage occurred at Rendlesham.

In fact technically he was off duty on the 3rd night and off base. So I could postulate further why a claim took so long to process.

That all said, whatever the cause, I am glad John's claim was settled and his treatment was successful. We come on forums like this and talk about John, Jim, Chuck and Larry (plus others) and dissect everything they say on the subject.

But at the end of the day they are all only human.

edit on 31/5/16 by mirageman because: typo

posted on May, 31 2016 @ 03:27 PM
a reply to: mirageman

Right. But one would think Jim who touched the alleged craft should be just about dead?

posted on May, 31 2016 @ 03:27 PM
a reply to: mirageman

Right. But one would think Jim who touched the alleged craft should be just about dead?

posted on May, 31 2016 @ 03:39 PM
a reply to: Marylongstockings

Only if we are talking about one night - the first night. Burroughs was also present two nights later when something else allegedly happened to him.


You might like to go over this document too:

In 1979, Burroughs passed the USAF entrance physical and was assigned to RAF Woodbridge, where, in December, 1980 he was exposed to the effects of an anomalous vehicle. From the moment of the event, Burroughs suffered from a variety of symptoms, including those of eye, throat, and gum disease.

In the summer of 1981, Burroughs made a visit to a civilian emergency room and was found to have an unusual heart condition. Despite this, he was allowed to stay in the military and remain on active duty.

In 1988, when Burroughs left active duty for the reserves, his exit physical records show vision and heart damage, clearly implying that he incurred disability during the term of his service.

In 2011, while attempting to diagnose unfamiliar symptoms of worsening heart problems, Burroughs' civilian doctor asked for his medical records.

After filing a 2012 claim with former Arizona Senator Jon Kyl's office seeking assistance in obtaining records, Burroughs suffered another episode of symptoms of heart disease, resulting in the implant of a pacemaker.

So there is a window of at least 18 months and up to 2 and a half years (1979 - summer 1981) where Burroughs may have sustained possible heart damage.

edit on 31/5/16 by mirageman because: ETA

posted on May, 31 2016 @ 04:52 PM
a reply to: mirageman

Anything from "Earthfiles" makes me queezy am afraid.
Why is it the big announcements and such seem to all get lumped
onto that crazy site of which we are to take seriously?

Of course I hear you re the 1979 to 1981 window.

But......I will leave it at that for now.

edit on 31-5-2016 by Marylongstockings because: incorrect

posted on May, 31 2016 @ 05:18 PM
a reply to: Marylongstockings

That's OK you can shower after reading it.

You do know LMH Is an 'investigative journalist' . Although I am not sure why she always leaves out the word gullible from that title.

Of course I hear you re the 1979 to 1981 window.

That's the crux of it.

posted on May, 31 2016 @ 05:30 PM
a reply to: mirageman

Am very aware and more besides.

Lets just say, all that I know of these men, its going to take
a great deal to convince me of many things.

I don't dispute Johns illness of course. But I am cautious re what he is pushing out.

LMH has done very little for the subject, except to mislead the public (or those who
are easily led) with
a never ending array of fantastical gobble.

But yes, the crux of the matter would be the dates you mention.

posted on Jun, 1 2016 @ 12:39 AM
Here is something which others who pass may find interesting.

Unfortunately Andrew Pikes book is no longer available as many know. But I do ask him
things from time to time and of course the more recent the "Condign" stuff and John B.

Quote Andrew Pike "The key is the question: What is UAP radiation? That results in the mess they got themselves in with all that frequency range, etc. All I see there is fudged science, lack of understanding and twisting details to fill that gap in Condign where all the important science on UAPs is conspicuous by its absence.

There are certainly health problems with EM smog, etc, but these health issue could be got in other ways at other times. For those who have my book there is a great deal of detail in chapter 10, The Black File, and in chapter 8, Rendlesham and the 1990s, where I cover the 1993 WHO report on health issues from EM radiation in the range 300 Hz to 3,000 GHZ. These are the areas they cling to for answers because Condign is so lacking. Condign is an intelligence memo, not a science report. end quote.

So with this in mind, where does it put John?

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in