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

page: 32
47
<< 29  30  31   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 08:54 AM
link   
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 :

self.gutenberg.org...



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
link   

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
link   
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
jimharold.com...

Nick Pope on Coast to Coast AM (for those with C2C insider membership)
www.coasttocoastam.com...

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

Jim Penniston on Nightwatch radio
www.nightwatchuniverse.com...

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
www.nationalatomictestingmuseum.org...


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

www.abovetopsecret.com...
************************************************************************************************************************************

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





 
47
<< 29  30  31   >>

log in

join