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

page: 32
<< 29  30  31   >>

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

new topics

top topics

<< 29  30  31   >>

log in