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.


Rendlesham Forest…, A Christmas Story from 1980 - Can We ‘Let it Be’?

page: 32
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 08:54 AM
John Burroughs has also been posting some interesting thoughts in the aftermath of the release of the ‘Encounter in Rendlesham Forest’ book.

Specifically he refers to a paragraph from the MoD Technical Memo 55/2/00 :

The linking of brain activity to UAP events, where the witness is presumably within near field influences, is currently only partially understood, since assumptions must be made as to the type of fields being encountered. Within the UKADR these close encounters occur only a very few times each year. The well-reported Rendlesham Forest/Bentwaters event is an example where it might be postulated that several observers were probably exposed to UAP radiation for longer than normal UAP sighting periods. There may be other cases that remain unreported..........

He also has a fair amount to say about Colonel Halt and the ongoing tensions in their relationship over this case.

...Col. Halt we know was personally a witness to the third night. He conducted his own investigations in the aftermath. He wrote the memo for the record that tried to reduce the entire event to some lights in the forest on the wrong dates. He has made two statements I find interesting. In an interview with Lee Spiegel who now writes for the Huffington Post, Halt is quoted as saying that if the full truth were to come out, "it would completely change the way people look at reality."

In another statement, Halt has declared that he would 'only tell the truth of the matter' when forced to raise his right hand and swear to it at a government inquest of some nature.

What is really interesting is that at the same time has urged me to drop the effort to put together a law suit that would require him to do exactly that: Raise his hand and go on oath in a court of law.

On Halt’s memo and he has this to say:

Why were the dates wrong?

Halt claims that he drew the memo up from the witness reports and other documentation. My written statement along with those of Lt. Buran, Sgt. Chandler and Airman Cabansag all clearly state the correct dates. If Halt was indeed using witness statements as his source, either he is guilty of sloppy journalism or saw fit to change the dates of the event for a reason. One reason would be that future FOIA information requests for documentation would more likely fail because of the incorrect date.

Interestingly, Sgt Penniston's written statement is NOT dated. Rather an odd omission for such an important statement after such a phenomenal event. And why is his the only one not dated?

Why did the erroneous Halt memo get transmitted up the official traffic channels, not to be heard of again for years, when all pertinent official records of the incident were whisked away to Ramstein in the custody of Gen Gabriel?

This first inner interpretation is a mildly intriguing scenario. Just a simple deception, cover-your-ass memo with a few induced errors that were designed to make it trackable, and deflect potential FOIA requests with a wrong date. No big deal, put it in the record and forget it.

Peel away yet another layer of innocence, however and a new, much more interesting set of questions present themselves:

According to Rendlesham Forester Thurkettle, a pair young British men in suits interviewed him shortly after the incidents. Between this and other accounts we can see that the British authorities were well aware of the incident almost immediately after it happened......

Technically, however, the MOD was first formally notified on or after the date of the Halt Memo. How did the British know to investigate the events if they had not been officially informed until mid January?

And also he says this about the involvement of other witnesses:

Why did Larry Warren know the 'wrong' dates to tell when, in principle, he would not have seen Lt. Col. Halt's memo until it was obtained via FOIA, over the personal objection of Col. Halt? Was he briefed, (or chemically debriefed) to present a version of the story with little green men in flying saucers along with inaccurate dates as part of a much more sophisticated pre-emptive disinformation plan? Or is it just the case that all Larry Warren knows came from the Halt Memo in the first place?

Why did Jim written statement of the events not have the same accurate date as the other witness statements?

And here is where it gets particularly intriguing. In Penniston's notebook, his dates, allegedly recorded during or immediately after the incident have the same erroneous dates as Halt's memo.

This raises the spectre that Penniston's chemical debriefing was more rigorous than has been imagined, with the story he was assigned to tell implanted via hypnosis, drugs or a combination of the two. That would imply that some form of cover story was developed almost immediately and fed to Penniston and perhaps others which would match the narrative of the eventual 'official' memorandum of 'Unexplained Lights'.

This is speculative, of course, but the pieces seem to fit. British authorities were informally informed, a higher group of US Security personnel took charge of the formal documentation and finally a carefully erroneous memo was sent to be placed in the archives.

Pry one more layer of interpretation off of whatever core truth there may be, and you have to wonder about this: What did Gen Gordon Williams mean when he told film maker James Fox that, in regards to the memo "the cat got out of the bag" and once that happened, that you "could not put humpty dumpty back together again?"

Source : John Burroughs Facebook Feed

Nick Pope has also been actively promoting "Encounter in Rendlesham Forest" which is down to £1.49 (UK) and $2.51 (US) at present on Kindle (**price may have changed by the time you read this so don't hold me responsible if it has!!). Although I haven't heard any interviews on podcasts as yet. Did anyone catch the ATS interview with him?
edit on 16/6/14 by mirageman because: Edit

posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 10:35 AM

originally posted by: HUMBLEONE
Penniston reports that during the download of information from the vehicle, he was told that "they" are "us" from the future. I observed a UFO during the 90's, during which in my mind I asked the question, "who are you"? ...the answer which popped into my head was "we are anthropologist 's". For years , that never made sense to me, Pennistons statement was for me a long awaited epiphany.

Very thought provoking for sure. Entirely plausible that people in the future have a time machine of some sorts. Maybe they can't travel back in time themselves but they can send computer operated probes and binary information. This would fit in with our current understanding of time travel. The thing that boggles my mind about it is that, being from the future, they would've known they caused the Rendlesham incident, otherwise they would've changed their history and that could've changed their future. Blah, time travel so difficult to grasp. If any of those anthropologists are reading this in 3000, how bout explaining it to me!
edit on 16-6-2014 by Sharted because: typooooo

posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 02:30 PM
Here are some recent podcasts that have featured one or more of Nick Pope, Jim Penniston and John Burroughs discussing their book.
Nick Pope, John Burroughs and Jim Penniston with Jim Harold

Nick Pope on Coast to Coast AM (for those with C2C insider membership)

Behind the Paranormal (Paul & Ben Eno) "Encounter in Rendlesham Forest" with Nick Pope and John Burroughs

Jim Penniston on Nightwatch radio

Nick Pope joined By Charles Halt in an interview with Allan Palmer, Museum Director & CEO of the National Atomic Testing Museum. Scroll down to the shows from June 28th and July 5th 2014

Many further free documents, videos and audio were also posted earlier in the thread.

I haven’t caught up with all of them as yet. From what I have heard so far there isn’t a lot to add than what has been discussed in the thread.

Nick Pope still maintains that an unknown craft landed, left markings in the ground, radiation traces above background level were recorded and of course that laser like beams swept down from craft in the skies on the weapons storage areas as Colonel Halt was traipsing round the forest. John Burroughs has claimed that the British MoD have still not released everything they have regarding the case and that he is in dispute over the release of his medical records. Penniston goes into a bit more detail about the Status of Forces agreement and how this allowed NATO troops to venture out onto British soil in the event of emergencies. Thinking an aircraft had come down then this would be ‘deemed’ such an emergency.

It is also mentioned that General Gabriel removed evidence on his visit shortly after Christmas in 1980 and that this seems to be where a paper trail goes cold.

At one point a question arises as to why Larry Warren is not mentioned in the book (other than perhaps fleetingly) and the excuse given is that it was necessary to stick to the official documentation. This seems a little contradictory as Penniston’s witness statement (which makes no mention of symbols on the craft and a binary code transfer) is totally different from his story in the book.

If anything interesting comes up in other podcasts I’ll update the thread at a later date.

edit on 11/7/14 by mirageman because: typo

posted on Sep, 6 2014 @ 01:58 PM

Peter Robbins who co-authored "Left at East Gate" with Larry Warren on the Rendlesham incident, has now expanded on his critique of the "Encounter In Rendlesham Forest" dealt with earlier in the thread.

In fact with the agreement of the staff at Phenomena Magazine this has resulted in the production of seven volumes of the freely downloadable magazine being produced. Peter has included his originally critique of the Pope, Penniston and Burroughs book and added a lot more content. It includes documentation, photographs and correspondence with the Mod and the USAF concerning the Rendlesham incident.


The documents represent a thorough and yet a fairly conducted in-depth investigation, which is surprisingly objective and at the same time, it has the all the precision of a surgical procedure. We believe that “Deliberate Deception: “A Case of Disinformation in the UFO Research Community” has huge implications, not only for the Rendlesham Forest incident but Ufology in general.

Steve Mera: Phenomena Magazine - Managing Editor & Brian Allan: Phenomena Magazine - Editor.

The magazines are all free to download. So all credit to Peter Robbins and Larry Warren for making this information available to whoever wants to take a look.

Just glancing through there are a number of documents which do not appear in the MoD Files and photographs and news clippings from the 1980s up until fairly recently.

In case you missed the earlier links the files are currently available here : Link

posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 05:56 PM
If there’s anyone out there still paying attention to the ongoing Rendlesham saga there have been a few developments recently.

Richard Dolan and Gary Heseltine will be appearing with Rendlesham Forest Incident witnesses John Burroughs and Larry Warren in Woodbridge at the Community Hall on Saturday (Sep 20th 2014).

Prior to the event John Burroughs issued a press release.

“Woodbridge UK, September 15, 2014 — The British Ministry of Defense is still withholding high-level UFO public policy papers, along with other key information, despite the public stance that all material has been transferred to the National Archives, according to John F. Burroughs, a retired USAF security officer...

...According to the National Archives web page dated 21 June 2013 they stated they had today released its tenth and final tranche of UFO files...

...This seeming act of transparency was apparently a ruse, as FOIA requests by Burroughs have revealed two further versions of the truth...

...In response to a follow-up FOIA request, the MOD revised its position to say that they were still maintaining 18 UFO documents as classified....

..."It boils down to this:" Burroughs stated, "Puthoff's predictions for effects of a drive capable of interstellar travel match the effects of the UFO Phenomenon noted by Vallee/Davis and they match the effects described by the MOD of the UAP Phenomenon under study." "Most significantly, the predicted effects of the theoretical interstellar drive on humans in close proximity match those of the MOD - which could not have known of Puthoff's theory at the time of the writing -- and they match the symptoms I exhibit from a close encounter with the phenomenon while on duty at Bentwaters."

Full article:

Meanwhile Colonel Charles Halt and SSgt. James Penniston, witnesses on the third and first nights respectively, appeared on the Eno’s radio show “Behind the Paranormal”.

Link to podcast

It seems that the Penniston/Burroughs relationship has deteriorated once again and they are no longer a team. Halt declares he is there to “support Jim” whilst Penniston figures it was a while since Colonel Halt and he were on a show together and he could add a lot to the program and discuss the 3rd night. John Burroughs is now referred to as “Airman Burroughs” by Penniston.

Penniston interestingly states around 16 mins in, whilst waffling on about the binary codes .... and referring to the distance from the base (Bentwaters).

“ ..I went home, 20 miles away....”

This throws even more doubt on his Boxing Day excursions.

See : My earlier post on this tight timeline

It was Boxing Day and 1980 traffic would be light. But by current estimates that means a 30 minute trip home from Bentwaters and a slightly longer return trip back to the forest to make plaster casts. In between ( I give him an hour and 15 mins max to do all this) he had to contact a friend, obtain the plaster of Paris from him, mix the solution, get to the forest, set out on foot (as we know even USAF vehicles could not reach the landing site), make the casts and wait for them to set whilst also avoiding other personnel and British Police.

Perhaps not impossible but thoroughly amazing timing and luck would have to be involved here. Unless of course the story is not as it seems.

Back in 2010 Penniston said:

Source : Penniston Quotes

Well now with hindsight (or the benefit of seeing what people like me write on the internet) Penniston actually recalls what Binary Codes are (about 14:00 mins in).

“Oh binary codes ..I mentioned that in hypnosis that’s when I made a connection......”

Yes he most certainly did mention binary, but still didn’t seem to understand what they were even though he mentioned binary codes during his hypnosis. When exactly did he make the connection??????????

Penniston then begins to distance himself from “Airman Burroughs” seemingly no longer able to call him simply “John”. From around 25 mins in to around 26:30 he mumbles on, nothing meaningful,about getting the “Binary Codes” out but seemingly having a little dig at “Airman Burroughs”.

Then we come to Colonel Charles Halt, who may or may not have some kind of hold on Penniston down the years.

He brazenly declares at different times :

I have a lot of things to say but I am not going to say them now because they are going to be very interesting when they come out..... I’m going to put something out there that’s quite revealing.

So it seems, reading between the lines, that Halt is preparing his own book on things. Perhaps Penniston is tagging along as well?

Halt claims he was misled by OSI that they had no interest in the case and had never been debriefed. Although he does mention a conversation years later he had with John Alexander (significant?).

Halt also mentions that immediately after the incident he made some tapes to remind himself of the events at around 32 minutes or so into the podcast.

..not long after the event I sat down ..with a small recorder and recorded everything I knew about it on to a tape. Made many copies, secreted them away several places, just in case somebody did mess with me. And I’ve listened to that tape and you know what? It still tracks.

What does that say about him placing incorrect dates on the infamous Halt memo? A memo he wrote 3 weeks after the events.

Penniston then joins in, sometimes incoherently, about making his own records but eventually saying “but those are personal logs you know”. He then goes off on a tangent about how people like Richard Dolan. Peter Robbins and Gary Heseltine have been at numerous conferences with him and never asked him one question about Rendlesham.

Then about 45 mins Penniston and Halt put the boot in on John Burroughs. Halt especially stating how the guy has problems with “anger management”. Penniston feels that Halt protected him by keeping him and Burroughs apart for so long and plays it like Halt's lapdog. The mind boggles at the constant changes in loyalties. Meanwhile Larry Warren & Peter Robbins do not escape without Halt slamming them either......

The full podcast can be heard here : Penniston & Halt interview

As I said a long time ago there is still a Machiavellian game going on between the main witnesses.

It does seem at times that Jim Penniston is totally and utterly confused when he's speaking and revises his story on a constant basis. Which is very suspicious.

posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 08:46 PM

originally posted by: mirageman

It does seem at times that Jim Penniston is totally and utterly confused when he's speaking and revises his story on a constant basis. Which is very suspicious.

Do you think it could just be that he's told so many different versions of his story over the years that he keeps getting things mixed up?
I've not followed this closely, so I may be off base, but it reads as if Penniston had an 'initial' version (likely induced - the 'chemical' debriefing?), elaborated significantly early on (trip home and back to make the plaster casts), and then elaborated a bit more here and there over the years at various 'anniversary' and UFO conference opportunities ...

It tends to look like - this is his claim to fame, and he enjoys the attention...? Well, also his mind could be a bit 'scrambled' from whatever 'hypnosis',etc techniques he was subjected to at times)
edit on 18-9-2014 by lostgirl because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 11:17 PM
a reply to: mirageman

It's odd that Burroughs would reference Jacque Vallee in his press release when Vallee is convinced that Rendlesham was most likely an American psy-op experiment...

Here's a link to an ATS thread where there is a post which quotes from chapter six of Vallee's book "Revelations"

Vallee on Rendlesham

Also, if anyone is interested I could dig thru my bookmarks, and provide a link to the paper by Vallee and Davis which Burroughs mentions in his press release (based on my memory, I don't think it actually even contains a correlation to Puthoffs warp drive predictions as Burroughs claims...
In fact, the paper is more concerned with the 'non-physical' or "high strangeness" aspects of the phenomena (Vallee's primary perspective is based on findings which he feels strongly suggest a 'non'-intersteller source for UAPs.)

edit on 18-9-2014 by lostgirl because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 19 2014 @ 09:20 AM
a reply to: mirageman
Thanks for the update. I don't know if this is such a great UFO case but all the drama between the players would probably make a better soap opera than some soap operas.

originally posted by: lostgirl
Do you think it could just be that he's told so many different versions of his story over the years that he keeps getting things mixed up?
Ever hear the saying "Oh what a tangled web we weave...."?

He's beyond mixed up. I have little doubt that he did not keep the little notebook he claims he kept, so his claims about that notebook are not those of a confused individual but someone who is being intentionally deceptive. Not that I side completely with Burroughs either in all the drama, but Burroughs has confirmed Penniston kept no such notebook. The most damning evidence isn't Burroughs testimony, but the long delay in producing this notebook, as there was never any mention of it in earlier accounts of his story. Others may see it differently but this is how I see it.

posted on Sep, 19 2014 @ 02:22 PM

originally posted by: lostgirl

Do you think it could just be that he's told so many different versions of his story over the years that he keeps getting things mixed up?

I've not followed this closely, so I may be off base, but it reads as if Penniston had an 'initial' version (likely induced - the 'chemical' debriefing?), elaborated significantly early on (trip home and back to make the plaster casts), and then elaborated a bit more here and there over the years at various 'anniversary' and UFO conference opportunities ...

It tends to look like - this is his claim to fame, and he enjoys the attention...? Well, also his mind could be a bit 'scrambled' from whatever 'hypnosis',etc techniques he was subjected to at times)

There are numerous problems with Penniston's story.

* His witness statement is the only one of the originals to remain undated and the only one to mention a craft of some sort (note at this stage he stated it was in the distance and nothing about walking around it).

* Whenever Penniston has appeared in documentaries he tends to bring something new to the story. In the 1990s "Strange But True" he introduces the 'glyphs' on the craft. In early 2000s "Invasion at Rendlesham" his notebook makes a first appearance. By the time the History Channels UFO files come up we have his story of touching the craft, taking notes and photos. Then in 2010 in Ancient Aliens he also has a binary code "machine to homo sapien" download to reveal to us.

* The plaster casts also play a part because Penniston's story of how he made them on Boxing day morning 1980 doesn't seem to fit the very tight timelines as discussed earlier.

Is he simply an attention seeker with a desire to maintain his rather low level of fame and unable to remember all the fine details of the fabrications he has let slip over the years? Or has his brain been muddled by certain techniques employed on him?

I have always tended to believe the latter . But Jim has also developed a habit of retelling his story and casually glossing over his previous inconsistencies in past interviews. The problem he has of course in this connected world we now live in is that every word he speaks in public is often archived somewhere on the web. Just as he can view this forum and many others and see what people are saying about him. Which does tend to make me question my own previous view.

Penniston's drift to an apparent alliance with Colonel Halt and his abandonment of his fellow witness John Burroughs so soon after completing the book suggests that these two men have differences with each other that were perhaps bubbling under for a long time and their collaboration on the book saw them rise to the surface.

Or maybe Penniston fancies another pay day as co-author with Colonel Halt in another book?

I really don't know. But Colonel Halt does appear to have almost a Svengali like influence at times over Penniston.

edit on 19/9/14 by mirageman because: typos

posted on Sep, 19 2014 @ 02:34 PM
a reply to: lostgirl

John Burroughs has been doing some heavy research into the Condign report and others and I guess arrived at his own conclusions even if some them differ from Vallee's.

posted on Sep, 19 2014 @ 02:48 PM
a reply to: Arbitrageur

It is indeed a tangled web. A story that has been going on longer than many soap operas on TV. No matter what the cause of the events the shifting relationships and changing alliances between the four major players remains an interesting one.

Although there are numerous other witnesses who pop up every now and again for a brief moment it seems John, Jim. Chuck and Larry simply cannot "Let it Be".

posted on Sep, 20 2014 @ 06:16 AM
The Forestry Commission have now added a steel sculpture of the Rendlesham UFO to their UFO trail in the forest. Although if you touch it be warned you may feel the need to scribble down a stream of ones and zeroes...........

Full story

posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 06:46 AM
Updates - Christmas 2014

Well it’s exactly a year to the day since I started this thread rolling and it’s my intention to keep it updated occasionally in this ongoing Soap Opera (or perhaps because of his involvement it’s more of a “Pope Opera” these days - after Nick, not the bloke from the Vatican).

So, for those who are still not bored of this incident, the ongoing “Rendlesham” reality show has continued to rumble on through the latter half of 2014:

Richard Bertolino (Present on 1st Night of Incident)

Firstly there is some back up for Jim Penniston’s notebook being (at least partially) genuine by Richard Bertolino. Bertollino was on the radio to Penniston during the incident on the night of 25th – 26th Dec 1980). This interview is actually not recent but I have only just stumbled upon it.

I'll never forget the one transmission that first made my hair stand up and it still does to this day. You could hear a little heavy breathing as he was walking through the woods. Penniston says, 'Security Control, the object is about 150 feet in front of us.'

And then it was just a matter of a couple of seconds and he (Penniston) comes back on the radio and his breathing is a little heavier and he asks, 'Security, do you copy that the object is behind us now?'

And that's one I'll never forget! We relayed some of the transmissions from Bunker Hill until Penniston left Cabansag behind to do a (radio relay). We had a great triangulation being on the hill to them in the Rendlesham woods to the object and to Security Control. ...They still had their same radios, but we could no longer pick up transmissions after they had been out there for about 45 minutes to an hour."

Later in the interview Bertolino confirms that he saw Penniston’s notebook with diagrams of craft in it immediately after returning from the incident. However Penniston never spoke about it again to him.

John Burroughs Interview

John Burroughs continues looking into the details of the Condign report after the well publicised comments specific to the Rendlesham case. He also appears to have got on quite well with Larry Warren during his stay over in Britain during the autumn.

"The well-reported Rendlesham Forest/Bentwaters event is an example where it might be postulated that several observers were probably exposed to UAP radiation for longer than normal UAP sighting periods. There may be other cases which remain unreported. It is clear that the recipients of these effects are not aware that their behaviour/perception of what they are observing is being modified"

Source : (Condign Vol 2, Working Paper 1, Annex F, page F-4, para 13).

Supposedly more MoD documents (there weren’t supposed to be any!) are now due for release in late 2015.
He has also revealed that there were underground facilities close to Bentwaters. A fact that Col. Halt and Jim Penniston both always refuted.

“There actually was an underground base with tunnels that lead straight to different locations from RAF Bawdsey to RAF Martlesham Heath and also Bawdsey to the Rendlesham Forest and to the RAF Bentwaters/Woodbridge base.............

Col. Charles Halt himself and Sgt. Jim Penniston said there was no way there could be underground facilities there (RAF Bawdsey). Well, there is.

So, does that mean there's an underground UFO base? Not necessarily. Does that mean that we were working on technology? Yes, we sure were! Is that an area where they were working on all kinds of technology?

Yep. And does it all relate to this? I believe so, and not only that, but there was an individual that worked for the MoD that was actually down in the area right prior to the (December 26-28, 1980 RAF Bentwaters/Woodbridge) incident and during the incident. He had no idea the incident was going to happen — so says he, his name is Andrew Pike — clearly he knew there was a phenomenon there and they were actually working on it and trying to figure out what it was. So, there you go!

....It's clear they've admitted we're dealing with something that's there, that's of defense significance. How can you trust somebody that lies to you? Once they've lied to you once for whatever reason, how can you believe anything they are telling you again? And the fact is it's clear that they (U.S. and U. K. govts.) want to manipulate it. So, what is there to believe? The governments have proven over and over again, they can't be trusted.

This does lead to something having to do with dimensional travel or warp drive travel. So, it's there and it's being worked on.

Source : Earth Files

It’s interesting that Burroughs mentions underground facilities as both Larry Warren and Adrian Bustinza were supposedly drugged and then describe being briefed in such a place and heavily interrogated during after the Rendlesham Incident.

Although I am not sure Andrew Pike was working for the MoD as Burroughs says. The article referred to a long time ago in this thread simple states he was working on a plasma physics project and he did not arrive until late on 29th December of 1980.

Clip Source : UFO Matrix Vol 2 2013

Burroughs makes his case for the US DoD and the UK MoD looking into manipulation of a phenomenon evident in Rendlesham Forest before and probably after those three nights in December of 1980. This phenomenon was obviously of defence (or defense) significance in both countries.

....continues below

posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 06:52 AM
Halt and Burroughs on web radio show Podcast UFO – Dec 2014

Next we have a recent episode of Podcast UFO. There were some technical difficulties getting Halt talking in the first 30 mins or so but he can still be heard. A most interesting conversation develops and the host Martin Willis hardly needs to intervene.

Various Sources :


Podcast UFO


Both Charles Halt and John Burroughs take part in this interview together and at times there is an uneasy tension between the two of them. However it is important to stress that during this interview both of them stated they did not believe that Jim Penniston created the infamous binary codes by himself. There was some debate about whether they were placed in his head by chemical and mental manipulation.

In the interview Burroughs goes over how he is still unable to retrieve his medical records from the USAF and how they even denied he was in the service during 1979 – 1983. Senator John McCain has been fighting this case on his behalf with no final result as yet. This is despite the fact that he had to have open heart surgery and the symptoms may be linked to what happened to him at Bentwaters.

He also reveals to Colonel Halt the information he has about the underground tunnels near to Bentwaters. Halt’s only response is to say that Larry Warren’s claim that there was an underground facility below the photo labs was incorrect. But the uneasiness in his voice becomes apparent as Burroughs outlines the possibility that this may be where the airmen were taken to be interrogated and drugged. Something Halt had implied earlier in the interview.

John Burroughs then directly suggests that it is a Colonel’s role to lead and that it would be a good idea to get all the 'players' together in a room. They could then put their cards on the table in an attempt to work out exactly what happened to them. Again Charles Halt becomes somewhat uncomfortable stating Bruce Englund won’t talk, he doubts Adrian Bustinza and Ed Cabansag would either and that he has lost track of how to contact them. Burroughs claims he has details of how to get in touch with the latter two whilst airing their ‘concerns’ about talking.

Peter Robbins and (right) Col. Halt’s arch nemesis Larry Warren

Halt states he doesn’t want to confront Peter Robbins and Larry Warren because he doesn't want to spend the day arguing with them. Burroughs clarifies that he’s only talking about the airmen who were there in 1980 and if an individual is not being co-operative they can easily be removed at the time.

Perhaps that was the trigger because then Halt launches a full assault on Larry Warren accusing him of “substance problems”. Brashly declaring “not just one but multiple and that comes from his friends who know him well".

Halt also declares that Bud Hopkins showed him his collection of material and how the host would love to get his hands on it. Then explaining he has heard some of Larry's regression tapes after having been given access to them.


It didn’t take long for Larry Warren to appear on the airwaves on Dark Matters Radio

Larry Warren quite rightly airs his concerns about being accused of “substance problems” especially as this could affect his career and his family life. There is also the rather worrying matter that Colonel Halt was given access to private recordings of Warren’s hypnotic regression. Patient confidentiality seems to have been totally violated there. Although I should stress that it was not necessarily Bud Hopkins who gave Halt access to these recordings.

It seems to me that Halt holds a permanent grudge against Larry Warren for blowing this story wide open back in the early 1980s as the whistleblower. Larry Warren has also been able to prove his presence on the base when for a long time Halt refuted it. Halt then accused him of being “meddled with” in later years and appears to have crossed a line in this interview.

Sadly Rendlesham really is becoming more of an entertaining soap opera instead of a search for the truth.

Perhaps the search now needs to extend beyond the experiences of Jim, John, Larry and Chuck over Christmas in 1980?

It seems that whenever one or more of them try to take things forward the squabbling reaches fever point again.

Adrian Bustinza has long remained silent and issued only a short statement in recent years. Ed Cabansag appeared for brief moment in the Sci-Fi channel special and then disappeared again. Steve La Plume appeared in this thread and gave his own thoughts on his experience some three weeks after the original incident.

Maybe John Burroughs will eventually get all the witness together for a serious discussion and new information will come out. Perhaps a look into the events beyond the 3 Christmas nights is also needed to gain a clearer picture as well?

Until then the doors keep revolving........

RFI Tales will return sometime in 2015 as there is still a bit more information which I haven’t got round to looking into as yet..... and of course it will be the 35th anniversary this time next year.

Anyway Happy Holidays to all/both of you still reading this.

posted on Jan, 2 2015 @ 12:38 PM
a reply to: mirageman

No, Andrew Pike is nothing to do with the MoD. Burroughs bit yet another hand that feeds him with that lie!

If you look on Andrew's facebook page Burroughs asks him in August when and why he was down there. Andrew makes it clear in his response, giving the same details as in the above 2010 article, and also given in his book from 2005. Yet Burroughs in October tells a clear lie in his interview changing the details. Now, bear in mind Burroughs also has a copy of Andrew's 2005 book and in there Andrew starts chapter one with details of where he was on Christmas night, where he was after that, and why, complete with dates, and later details are given about the bust-up at the university in July 1981 regarding UFOs entering the plasma physics investigation.

Given the time-line and clear details in the public domain, it is difficult to see this as anything other than a delibetate lie by Burroughs. And also bear in mind, Burroughs was fond of saying prior to the interview, if somebody tells one lie how can you trust anything they say - well, that works both ways!! Oddly that catchphrase of Burroughs' is suddenly no longer being used by him.

No proof, as is now standard in this case, was given by Burroughs for his comment, and attempts to get the real proof out is now ignored by Burroughs and Linda Moulton Howe because it shows them for what they are. The true facts have been a matter of public record for ten years.

Burroughs has a track record of jumping into bed with anybody he feels will support his agenda, but when that fails to matetialize he stabs them in the back - I predict he will eventually do the same with Larry Warren and in doing so create the next turn in this soap opera.
edit on 2-1-2015 by SkywatcherUK because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 2 2015 @ 04:58 PM
a reply to: SkywatcherUK

Thanks for the heads up. I have a Facebook account but don't use it for anything other than a way to message people.

It's fairly clear to me that Andrew did not work for the MoD too.

But, dear God! it seems he has had to put up with some serious business over that claim. I think for legal reasons I'll have to leave it there.

I haven't read his Rendlesham book as it's virtually impossible to get hold of a copy at present. But I found Andrew's article in UFO Matrix magazine and his findings very interesting. I also see he's posted a link to another of my threads on the 1952 DC UFO Sightings on his page. Again this is where I mentioned some of his findings, and Andrew if you are reading this, you are more than welcome to comment and put me straight on anything.

However having seen how people can act towards a specific 'personality' when shielded behind a computer I wouldn't blame anyone for not wanting to bother to interact with them.

posted on Feb, 18 2015 @ 04:03 PM
Steve La Plume (update)

Some of you may recall Steve La Plume joining this thread over a year ago and describing his own strange experience.

Although he was not a first hand witness on the 3 nights over Christmas, he was present on the base at the time, and also knew a number of the witnesses from those nights.

Steve explained his thoughts on the incident and described his own strange UFO sighting at Bentwaters in early 1981 starting about here (click this link)

Steve rarely gives interviews and generally does not speak in public. However he did make a rare appearance back home in New England in 2014.

A copy of his talk is now on Youtube. For anyone interested in the events beyond the famous 3 nights over Christmas Steve's story is a fascinating one and highly recommended listen if you have the time.

Once again I would like to thank Steve for joining the thread too.


Charles Halt (update)

There have been a number of radio/podcast shows in the past few months covering the Rendlesham story of varying quality.

This interview with Chuck Halt is notable for his claims that two radar operators in the tower saw the 'UFO' glowing red go into the forest.

He also contradicts himself over the whereabouts of Adrian Bustinza. Perhaps in (yet another) attempt to further discredit Larry Warren (at around 1hr 09mins in) he insists Bustinza was right by his side 'the whole time'.

But Butsinza can be heard on Halt's tape confirming " Well we're outta gas. We're at east gate. East gate, over" whilst Halt is out examining the 'landing site'.

Finally around 1hr 30 he issues his outright refusal of an offer to get together with the other witnesses stating "I'm not that interested".

Chuck obviously has a grudge with Larry. Whilst Jim and John appear to have gone their separate ways at present.

So it sounds like the Fab four simply can't work together and there won't be a Rendlesham star witness re-union any time soon.

Those doors revolve around again................

edit on 18/2/15 by mirageman because: typo

posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 03:14 PM
Was anyone else aware of [url=]this much older Bentwaters ufo incident? I know I was not. Only came across it from reading this new book I got about what the U.S. Presidents knew about ufo's. The conclusion from the Condon Committee was interesting. It said the "rational behavior of the ufo suggests a mechanical device of unknown origin." A very interesting incident in its own right.

edit on 08pm30pm5091 by data5091 because: (no reason given)

edit on 08pm30pm5091 by data5091 because: (no reason given)

edit on 08pm30pm5091 by data5091 because: (no reason given)

edit on 08pm30pm5091 by data5091 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 03:25 PM
For some reason having problems with the wikipedia link here....sorry about this.
Going to try an alternative. Source link This is working. Gives you a quick idea as to what happened.
edit on 08pm30pm5091 by data5091 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 04:28 PM
a reply to: data5091

Hello data,

Yes I am always finding cases and incidents I've never been aware of (or knew very little about). Despite there being a lull in really solid UFO cases for over a decade there are plenty in the past to mull over and view in a modern light.

Personally I was aware of the 1956 Bentwaters/Lakenheath UFO. It's not the most famous case in the British Isles by any means. But radar returns were recorded and something was seen by ground crews.

Dearly departed member JKRog08 did a great thread 6 years ago on the case (he really set a standard on ATS) : The Lakenheath-Bentwaters UFO Incident

He was not impressed by the unclear and confusing documentation available on the case. Nevertheless it seems it was considered a 'UFO' as something was tracked.

I did consider it may have been a forerunner of Project Palladium. But that would also mean explaining the visual sightings as well. Perhaps it was the Soviets with one of their magic trawlers? Or maybe something else.

It's an interesting one and others will probably like to follow up on this.

So to help out a bit -

Here's the video of Jenny Randles speaking with the RAF Venom pilots involved:

The WIki Link is : Lakenheath-Bentwaters incident

Also (I know you are aware of it) but for anyone picking up on this thread at a late date there is a 'parallel' thread to this one which has covered much of the ongoing story with Rendlesham during 2015 :

"US DoD have confirmed the UFO phenomenon is real"
edit on 8/9/15 by mirageman because: Typo

new topics

top topics

<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in