Rendlesham Forest 1980 Pt II - Will There Be An Answer?

originally posted by: Baablacksheep
a reply to: mirageman
Quote Gary Osborn.

And then there's the strange 'synchronistic associations' I've had with certain people in the past going back to the 1990s - Nick Pope to give one example - so-called "chance" meetings with people that are now either directly, or indirectly involved in the RFI.
It does look as though this has all been manipulated from a point in our future or from a point outside of Time . . . BUT, I wouldn't say this for definite yet.

Let's say that perhaps someone is prone to liking time travel theories.

Might they not confirmation bias themselves into this explanation,
when in fact regular humans are just playing games with other humans
(stalking them... finding them... infiltrating their circle of trust,etc.)?

Kev

originally posted by: KilgoreTrout
As is, if Cookie's account has any veracity and the whole thing was a co-ordinated experiment or operation, then the whole base, command chain included, were subjects and therefore Halt and Conrad were not in a state fit to make command decisions and cannot be held responsible.

But yet again (apologies for repetition, but an unavoidable symptom of a 300-page+ thread), my mind springs back to the mid-January sighting by Palmer and LaPLume, when an excited Gordon Williams and family accompanied Halt as they rushed to see the lights' return, Halt fulfilling an earlier promise to Gordon who must have felt left out. The merry atmosphere says it all really, arguably making a mockery of co-ordinated black ops and shadowy OSI agents etc...

... OR DOES IT? Palmer's activities may indicate otherwise.

LaPlume gave his most comprehensive account in May 2009 on the Rendlesham-I ncident.co.uk. Curiously, he mentions various airmen at the base sharing bad dreams after the RFI, as well as one being visited by a female 'ghost', but putting that aside, his 2009 version clarifies he had two sightings on the same night...

It was up in the sky high in the sky about 45 degrees off the horizon. What I saw looked at first like a satellite moving across the sky. It was maybe a bit brighter but not by much. I mentioned it to Palmer, he turned and looked. It was not traveling right to left on a even trajectory. It was dancing in the sky. Up and down to a rhythm I can only liken to a heart monitor but it was doing so really quickly. I bet it was going in either direction up and down while it went right to left about 10 degrees either way. Jut real fast up… down up down…. It was a fast mover. I asked Palmer if he saw it too. He confirmed he did and we looked at it for a few moments.

As confirmed by Halt, Palmer made the call to CSC, leading to the Scooby Doo gang bombing up...

After the arrival of Col. Halt the stream of officers and higher ranking personnel kept coming. There was the Deputy Base commander, I believe of Wood bridge base who brought his wife and teenaged son. Eventually the recently promoted General Williams our Wing commander came. I was told by Lt Englund not to be nervous but he had just made General. Report my post as all safe and secure and simply tell him what I saw... When this was going down I was beside myself. Why did all these people show up. Why was this officers wife and kid here on official Air Force business? Why did she have a 35mm Nikon camera and make the comment. “I hope we get to see one!”

It was a very exciting time for all of them. I was completely clueless as to the events of December 1980... I did not understand why they insisted on going into the Forest. What the **** is going on here? Is about all I could think. Palmer and I goofed around with the scope and basically sat around crushing our nuts until the officers all came back form the forest area. Nothing happened, we saw nothing, and when they returned they seemed a bit let down.

Later that night, we're on more familiar ground when LaPlume and Palmer witnessed a cigar-shaped craft the length of three football fields, with a bluish light tracking the ground, and a 'hatch-like square' underneath, alongside several coloured lights. LaPlume has an issue with Palmer who joined AFOSI very soon after...

"He seemed to know something or be in on something... I think Palmer was involved somehow in a sinister manner. I think maybe I was the subject of an experiment of some sort whether by aliens or by a government agency. Did I see a real UFO from outer space? I have no idea. I saw something that was unlike any craft I had seen before or since, that made no noise and moved fast.

And then Andrew Pike pops up to reply, clearly sick of investigating the case due to the flak received for being an open-minded scientist. But all that was covered in MM's thread with input from Ufology's Godfather Isaac Koi.

And yes, Gut, there's also a load of Frank Camper stuff recounted by LaPlume in that old, dead forum.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Good post. God father Isaac😂 . Yep the Camper stuff is interesting.

a reply to: Baablacksheep

LaPlume's mention of Gordon Williams' new rank stirred a memory in me, Baa - didn't Larry Warren become Williams' bodyguard upon his promotion in January?

Which is sort of surreal given the circumstances of Williams' alleged involvement in LAEG.

BTW, in anticipation of the 'Capel Green' film and giving it a fair hearing, I've been watching some of Larry Warren's old interviews across the decades, and am still struck by how articulate, likable, consistent (more or less) and straight-shooting he is. Putting aside the boozing, reckless online behaviour and the ugly fallout with Robbins, there is STILL something about Warren that prevents me dismissing his story.

Heseltine clearly senses it, too, and he's not an idiot by any means. So yes, I'm feeling strangely sympathetic towards Larry these days whilst still clutching a heavy sack of salt.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

I've been watching some of Larry Warren's old interviews across the decades, and am still struck by how articulate, likable, consistent (more or less) and straight-shooting he is

Yes. I will leave the rest to Mirageman, its like the binary, its not a loved subject, Larry is the devils child.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

You've even said yourself

Putting aside the boozing, reckless online behaviour and the ugly fallout with Robbins, there is STILL something about Warren that prevents me dismissing his story.

Are you in some way involved with the documentary? You do keep mentioning it. So people will quite rightly be a little suspicious of your motives and that you are stealthily trying to advertise it. I am sure you understand that even if you aren't.

Heseltine smells money and is behind that documentary. As an ex-policeman then he's certainly missed a lot of obvious clues. The problem is that Warren is his meal ticket and easily accessible because he lives over here. So he will use and consume him as he sees fit.

Robbins took years before he finally parted company with Warren and withdrew their book from sale. I've seen enough and heard enough to convince me he's been found out as a liar and has little credibility. The evidence is there that he's faked photos and documents and is a liar. Being articulate and likeable do not make someone truthful. Yes he was at Bentwaters around the time. But at best he was on the periphery of events.

Whatever you want to think about Warren is up to you of course. If you want to throw money at that DVD be my guest. But I don't see the point in dredging up his story again because he was full of it. It became a rather ugly, unsavoury and very public spat with people who were his biggest backers for years.



He was just another liar who got found out. Not just about Rendlesham but other aspects of his life. Yet lying about the Rendlesham Forest Incident, sadly, isn't the sole preserve of Larry Warren either.

a reply to: mirageman

Very strange, there is material out there from Penniston claiming Robbins already knew re Larrys alleged wrong doings.
And that is several years ago not in recent times. I shall leave that element however as there is much more to the larry situation so it appears. But then this could be applied to the whole RFI situation in general.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I think going back in time to the original Bentwater cottages and even much earlier to look for clues would be fruitful.
There is a superposition of information that is self canceling.
The myriads of bits that get lost are what you are NOT interested in.
All it would take is someone disclosing the proper keys.

This is one of the best remote viewing results for the craft, much deeper than it looks.

a reply to: Cauliflower

Am listening??

a reply to: Baablacksheep

Someone new who has not signed a non disclosure agreement could help.
It appears in the drawing that there is a missing chord in the top view of the drawing I posted.
If it were a musical note it would be about 8 cents above D9 but I'm talking about a geometric chord.

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

You've even said yourself

Putting aside the boozing, reckless online behaviour and the ugly fallout with Robbins, there is STILL something about Warren that prevents me dismissing his story.

Are you in some way involved with the documentary?

Good God, NO..... LOL, as Baa knows full well, older posts will display my open cynicism towards Warren.

Instead, I'm being charitable and flexible in my assessment of Warren - more open-minded, questioning and prepared to be tolerant at least until the film's release. Same as I was for the Skinwalker docu which ended up a non-event. If this film is BS, you'll hear me bellowing so from the rafters, mate.

Heseltine smells money and is behind that documentary. As an ex-policeman then he's certainly missed a lot of obvious clues. The problem is that Warren is his meal ticket and easily accessible because he lives over here. So he will use and consume him as he sees fit.

We have discussed these two before, MM, and Heseltine strikes me as far more grounded and less gullible than Mr Robbins. Warren IS a liar and has faked pics, granted, but I can't dismiss his original account until the mess of the final hours of the third night is resolved.

Robbins took years before he finally parted company with Warren and withdrew their book from sale. I've seen enough and heard enough to convince me he's been found out as a liar and has little credibility. The evidence is there that he's faked photos and documents and is a liar. Being articulate and likeable do not make someone truthful. Yes he was at Bentwaters around the time. But at best he was on the periphery of events.

And Heseltine took a long while to divorce Halt before becoming Larry's new squeeze.

I'm also reminded of the expression, "You can't be a good BS artist with a DIShonest demeanour". After 20 years as a criminal Judge's Clerk, I've seen my fair share of scammers and attendant mitigation, trust me, but Warren, in relation to his original accounts, still hasn't reached the Debunked Bin - only 70% in it. As opposed to TTSA’s 95%.

Whatever you want to think about Warren is up to you of course. If you want to throw money at that DVD be my guest.

I will be your guest and, as with SWR, probably the first to report back on it, and do so honestly - you can sure bet on that.

originally posted by: Cauliflower

This is one of the best remote viewing results for the craft, much deeper than it looks.

Why would a remote viewer add Penniston's home address?

That IS impressive!

Seriously though, when did this now-annoying pic emerge? Clearly not drawn while near the 'object' if Jim's alleged contemporaneous handwriting and drunken-spider-scrawled symbols are anything to go by.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Fair enough.

I don't know how much you know about those unsavoury social media battles that were ignited by the Warren Emissions. Personally I don't think we need to revisit any of it. It made the jokey satirical nature of the previous RFI thread (even though some people could never tell) look very tame by comparison!

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

I don't know how much you know about those unsavoury social media battles that were ignited by the Warren Emissions. Personally I don't think we need to revisit any of it. It made the jokey satirical nature of the previous RFI thread (even though some people could never tell) look very tame by comparison!

As we both know, the ghastly 'Halt Perspective' spent far too much time on that spat, demeaning Hanson's incoherent book even further.

That was my first exposure to it, and it is truly grisly; hopefully Heseltine has slapped some sense into Larry since then. He sure has been notably quieter.

Of course, we can still place bets on Heseltine announcing next year, "It is with great regret and considerable sadness that..." ....... Robbins knows the drill.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

alleged contemporaneous handwriting and drunken-spider-scrawled symbols

Leonardo Da Vinci used to mirror write and substitute the Y for the X axis in his paintings.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Yeah, thanks for that link, CB. Those posts--or possibly the previous one Steve mentions--is where I first noticed and became interested in LaPlume.

Quite a few things stand out to me there and I'll probably get around to commenting on them at some point. Rereading that leads me to the thought that if Larry Warren was himself a victim of a manmade mind-effing it would explain a lot as to why he fits and doesn't fit at the same time.

RFI, like Roswell, held much hope for me as possible evidence of the ETH until the last 7 or so years. Almost all of the evidentiary items related to it point to testing of some sort as far as I'm concerned. Sounds like many of the witnesses/victims feel or suspect the same---and maybe that's why Burroughs has indicated he's come to some kind of closure to it.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Fair assessment. And would agree with it in most part. There is without any doubt more to the larry situation.
lets see what the future brings. There are also claimed new witnesses to boot.

a reply to: The GUT

There is an interesting post on Burroughs page going back quite a while back. It is from the mysterious David Rochon, in that it mentions some things re Larry, Burroughs found it of interest. I have no time now to dig his post out, perhaps later .

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit

originally posted by: Cauliflower

This is one of the best remote viewing results for the craft, much deeper than it looks.

Why would a remote viewer add Penniston's home address?

That IS impressive!

Seriously though, when did this now-annoying pic emerge? Clearly not drawn while near the 'object' if Jim's alleged contemporaneous handwriting and drunken-spider-scrawled symbols are anything to go by.

I am totally lost with this one. Can there be some explanation on exactly why remote viewers are mentioned? (From Cauliflower)
The writing you mention of Jims, has nothing to do with drunken states? Or is that your humour CB )

originally posted by: Cauliflower
a reply to: Baablacksheep

Someone new who has not signed a non disclosure agreement could help.
It appears in the drawing that there is a missing chord in the top view of the drawing I posted.
If it were a musical note it would be about 8 cents above D9 but I'm talking about a geometric chord.

Am not really sure about this, you might have to explain a wee bit more ?