CIA & the Rendlesham forest incident

[Observer]

Hi
One such theory recently put to me was that the Rendlesham forest UFO has been linked to the CIA. Quite what the CIA has been up to in that area is a mystery, let alone for what reasons and not to mention just what the 'craft' was that many people saw?
Any body any thoughts on this?

Observer

[Guest]

Could it be disinformation? They are always somewhere lurking in the background when theres an extreme report.

[Observer]

Hi Guest
I guess you could be right concerning the CIA, they are always lurking ready to get involved when these sort of episodes take place especially when it involves the US military. Its always seen by the CIA as a possible threat to the USA.
I do know that they have agents posted in all the US military. I'm not sure if they are covert or overt though?

The big mystery for me is, if this incident in Redlesham forest was 'man' made, it begs the question as to how technology of the late 70's and early 80's could achieve what was witnessed. Even with todays technology it is hard to understand how it could have been done.

Unless of course, it was technology either gained from unknown sources or they do have man made technology now that can do these things.
Hang on though, this happened in 1980!

Observer

[schooner]

Hi Observer,

I was the guest, I forgot to log in.

The witnesses could have been exposed to electromagnetics causing sensory changes. This incident (machine) may have produced sufficient wave to disorientate the witnesses. They all saw something with lights and colours. They complained of static and slow motion.

Experiments have been carried out on this subject and information is available in the medical field. I am pretty certain that Paul Deaveraux the 'Earthlight' experts did some sort of experiment to do with this.

Electrogravatronics was big in the 50s and 60s. Scientist were suggesting transportation via this method within a decade. For some reason most of the public domain science and experimentation on the subject stopped as a result of ridicule and financial restraints. Curiously, during the same period certain Universities - linked to very important aerospace companies - were given money for lots of little research projects in the field of electrogravatronics. These compartmentalised projects had very specific objectives set by the paymasters.

May be some of the scientist are multifaceted. They may even be CIA agents?

But what has electrogravatronics got to do with the security of the USA?

Maintenance of global stability by domination?

How do you do this?

By keeping a good military differential.

How do you hide this differential?

By disinformation.

Regards

Schooner

[Observer]

Hi Schooner
Some good theories and not unreasonable explanations.

The highest known sources of electromagnatism exposed deliberatly to man are the MRI and Cobalt scanners used in hospitals. These machines weigh a ton. Have patients ever complained of disorientaion or feeling strange when being scanned? I personaly don't know.
If the Rendlesham UFO was emmitting these sorts of electromagnetic waves, enough to make the airmen feel 'strange', then it must have some sort of technology we don't know about.

Its interesting to point out that an opposing magnet (rather than an attracting one depending on which poles you use) is the only physics known to man that neutralises gravity. (Rutherford, Cambridge university). I suspect that this could be the technology that we or aliens have developed.

[schooner]

I've had an MRI Scan, I like to think that I am a rational and sane person. I dont consider myself to be claustrophobic having held a certificate for entry into confined spaces. For some reason beyond my comprehesion I pressed the panic button while under an MRI test. I felt grossly unwell and had wierd thoughts and sounds that lasted throughout the experience. I will never go through it again. Its left me traumatised!

Do not MRI scanners use a specific wave length and are used at this level due to their so called harmlessness.

I am just suggesting that electromagnetism could be a source given that it is in daily use today ie: mobile phones and its been used by many people well before the Rendlesham Forest Incident i.e. Nicola Tesla to demonstrate extraordinary phenomena.

Regards

Schooner

[schooner]

What do people think about the witnesses suggestion that they were asked to take truth drugs and subject to hypnotic regression?

This could be a good way of getting the disinformation into the public domain especially from the actual witnesses.

Apparantly, hypnotic regression taken with truth drugs can induce a level of reality within the brain so that the witness actually thinks something happened when it did not.

Witnesses say they were subject to these tests by AFOSI or CIA or both.

AFOSI had the highest level of authority on the bases and were functional to the existing management hierarchy - in effect independent of them.

Schooner

[Observer]

Hi Schooner
You are quite right about your MRI experience. A friend of mine who is a Sister in my local hospital said that some patients have a bad experience from being scanned. My mum was scanned and reported no ill effects.
However, the Sister did point out that a small percentage of patients have panic attacks which can lead to all sorts of unpleasant side effects. An even smaller percentage do complain of unpleasant after-effects even though they did not have a panic attack during the scan.
There are NHS stats on this subject

I am not an expert on the RF fields and wave frequencies given off by the scanners, but i do know that they on occasions did interfere with my radio control equipment.
I don't feel qualitied to comment on the CIA and truth drugs etc as it remains a conspiricy theory?

Observer

[schooner]

Hi Observer

May be its worth chasing up these incidents, I will do some digging. The experience I had was surreal, I honestly thought I was being killed and battled with these thoughts to try and rationalise the situation but the adrenaline just kept pumping, my heart rate must have hit an all time high and I was lathered in sweat. The sound played its part in this. Even with ear protection the sound penetrated deep inside your head - weired! These machines ought to have a government warning.

In respect of the drugs and hypnotic regression, Jim Penniston one of the main witnesses underwent hypnotic regression and had sodium pentothal administered with his permission so that the AFOSI could get at the whole truth. The AFOSI have denied any involvement in the incident.

Apparently its not a theory and the CIA/US military and their scientists worked on these programmes to wipe minds and make up multiple memories to confuse the person.

[Observer]

Hi all
This is just my observations on Rendlesham so far.
It seems to me that there are now so many witnesses who said what, when they said it, when their statements were challenged or disproved, Who did what to what and when not to mention several books on the subject which may or may not contain inaccuracies that this incident is now a mine field of contradiction.

The waters are now so muddy all caused by us humans that it is going to be extremely difficult to pick out the pieces that look genuine.

Roswell is one such case that ended up in a complete mess due to too many 'players' most of which joined the 'band waggon' at later dates.

We found in the Police that witnesses first impressions of an incident were often nearer the truth than later statements.
I there for suggest that those wishing to scrutinise statements should look at what they first said. We also have to keep in mind that US citizens are quite famous for jumping on the band waggon to make a fast buck. I'm not saying they are all like that but they do have a reputation as do a few British citizens! Some where in this mire is lurking a general concensus on the incident that is up to us to find.

Observer

[schooner]

Observer I agree with you but theres a problem with some of the the witness statements. Jim Penniston suggests that his statement was written and Ed Cabansag states that he signed the statement without looking at the contents. It also appears that some of the witnesses were not asked to make, or did not make official statements.

Jim Penniston says that his typed statement he saw was fairly accurate but a summary of the event. Georgina Bruni states he is the most reliable witness. His view of the event has not changed from the date of the incident.

He states that he cannot conclude what the object or incident was about but that it was of biblical proportions. Does he mean an enormous natural event or something that will change the way we view the world and our species?

Schooner

[Observer]

Hi Schooner
We seem to have general aggreement on most of this incident!
We and others can scrutinise statements untill kingdome come and i suspect that very little will emerge as definitive. Having said that, i still maintain that initial statements are the ones to take notice of.

Georgina Bruni has done a good job with her book and most of the content has not been challenged concerning her dictation of the various statements. We must also consider that the American's are far more god fearing than us Brits, so to use the words "of Biblical proportions" is saying in todays 'street' lingo 'awsome' or ' mind blowing'. The jargon of the late 70's was different to now.
We need to anylise all the statements to find a common denominator or general concensus, which i feel in part has already been established!

My own theory on this incident is that the Cobra Mist radar system that was on Ordfordness is or was instrumental in this phenomena and there are one or two theories on this, Jenny Randles being one such exponant.

Observer

[schooner]

Hi Observer,

I have an open mind on whether or not Radar/Bawdsey Manor/Orfordness had something to do with the incident. Again thres information and disinformation about these establishments and alot of theories about the effects of some of the experiments that may have taken place.

There are too many threads and loose ends. These need to be closed down or opened up if information is forthcoming.

One of the loose ends that niggles me is this unknown officer who may have rented a cottage, I am assuming at Capel Green. Its been mentioned by Dot Street and Georgina Bruni but looks as if it was never followed up.

We need someone local to the area who has evidence that USAF officers did in fact rent the Cottage. Facts about this person could move us on a little way.

Jenny Randles Time Storms book is an eye opener! Recently though she has become quite sceptical about the Rendlesham Forest incident. See Fortean Times, December 2005

[Observer]

Hi Schooner
I to maintain an open mind to the Rendlesham incident. But feel there just may be some connection with the local radar instalations such as Bawdsey Manor and Cobra Mist when it was in operation on Orfordness.

Tying up loose ends and double checking all statements is a mamoth task and i would suspect that even a Police force with all its computers would find it difficult. Its witness concensus that we need and somebody really needs to start collating the evidence with the aid of a Police soft ware programme. Don't ask me!

When i lived in the area, it was quite common for officers to 'dig out'
Rent a place off camp. Enlisted men were not allowed to normally unless married and their wives were with them. I know this because my mother was a local housing officer specialising in finding digs for US airmen off base. So to me an officer renting a cottage at Capel Green does not seem that unusual, unless of course there was some hidden agenda for him being there? A lot of officers were on a waiting list to live in English cottages out in the 'sticks', they loved it.

I haven't read Jenny Randle's more recent ideas about Rendlesham.

Observer

[schooner]

Hi Observer

Dot Street suggested that it was an American officer based at Bentwaters, not an American Officer with family. Are you saying that single officers were not allowed to rent digs outside the bases?

Most of the sightings and events of the Halt Incident are within close proximity to the houses at Capel Green. Given that the neighbours were interviewed by the investigators at the time of the incident, I think it relevant that this officer is identified given that this person does not seem to have made any statement or investigated by any of the journalists or investigators. It seems very odd that the person was not interviewed. May be the officer was?

Could Halts Incident be a decoy to take the heat out of what really happened on the initial incident with Jim Penniston and John Burroughs?

The 'object' was seen by Jim Penniston during the first encouter, he said it was kind of metallic and made drawings of the object. He touched the structure and knew it was not any type of USAF prototype.

The Halt tape describes lights nothing more. I accept that the beam of light takes some explaining, could we be back to UVAs?

But would it be possible to replicate the Halt event according to the tape and the initial statements made by the witnesses using 1980 technology available to USAF Officers?

Schooner

[Observer]

Hi Schooner
Officers married or single quite often lived off base. The USAF prefered enlisted men (privates) to be married with their spouse with them before letting them live off base.
It was thought that those married would be more law abiding and would not cause trouble such as in local pubs etc. It was taken for granted that officers would behave off base.

There was also a protocol on this subject as it was at the height of the cold war and even though they were in a 'friendly' NATO country, your level of security clearence dictated as to whether you were allowed off base or not to live. We had a Master sergeant living with us as a lodger for 6 months. What i am saying is, it was not unusual to find USAF personel living off base at all ranks and many lodged with English families.
They also loved living in old English cottages.
Deben council and Ipswich council had a housing policy for US airmen under a NATO aggreement.

As for the Halt episode being a decoy to the earlier events, i just don't know. I have a gut feeling that it wasn't.

You mention UAV's. They were under development in the 70's and 80's as they are today, but the technology of that period to my mind was not any where developed enough to do what was witnessed. Today UAV's can hover amongst trees and climb vertically but you will hear the electric motor or petrol engine working. On board computers today are so micro miniturised and sophysticated that its possible. 1980, i don't think so.

Observer

[Observer]

Hi Admin

Just a thought, if either of these two airmen were the person living in digs at Capel Green, would it not be quite simple to ask them. Surely they would remember this. People don't normally forget where they lived. Not sure though who would be in the best position to ask them? USAF domestic housing dep. would have records any way of who lived where.

Personel living off base had to supply address and telephone number to base security and other depts. for obvious reasons.

Observer

[mitch]

Hi Schooner
Officers married or single quite often lived off base. The USAF prefered enlisted men (privates) to be married with their spouse with them before letting them live off base.
It was thought that those married would be more law abiding and would not cause trouble such as in local pubs etc. It was taken for granted that officers would behave off base.

There was also a protocol on this subject as it was at the height of the cold war and even though they were in a 'friendly' NATO country, your level of security clearence dictated as to whether you were allowed off base or not to live. We had a Master sergeant living with us as a lodger for 6 months. What i am saying is, it was not unusual to find USAF personel living off base at all ranks and many lodged with English families.
They also loved living in old English cottages.
Deben council and Ipswich council had a housing policy for US airmen under a NATO aggreement.

As for the Halt episode being a decoy to the earlier events, i just don't know. I have a gut feeling that it wasn't.

You mention UAV's. They were under development in the 70's and 80's as they are today, but the technology of that period to my mind was not any where developed enough to do what was witnessed. Today UAV's can hover amongst trees and climb vertically but you will hear the electric motor or petrol engine working. On board computers today are so micro miniturised and sophysticated that its possible. 1980, i don't think so.

Enlisted living off base: it wasn't an AF preference, it was a rule. In order for a single enlisted guy permitted to live off base, one of two scenarios was required: 1) married or soon to be married or 2) no dorm rooms on base. In my case living in Tangham, it was a forestry rule they only rented to Americans with American wives because of U.K. "squatter's rights". True about the housing policies, but landlords also knew Americans would pay more!! UAVs: correct, technology was too new.

[Guest]

Hi Admin

So its possible that an officer could have rented the Cottage at Capel Green and theres a possibility that it could be John Burroughs, Jim Penniston or another?

It remains unresolved so how does one go about contacting Dot Street to see where the information originated from?

May be she knows about Lions Corner as well?

Schooner

[schooner]

Admin that would be great. I haven't read Skycrash just taken for granted what Georgina Bruni referred to in her book.

Do you know whether it is still in publication or is it another ebay search?

Are there any other publications for example: from Bufora that were published in the 80s that may help my understanding?

I've read the Timothy Good stuff, E Bowens Radar Days, and Larry Warrens Left at East Gate and several accounts from Jenny Randles over the years.

Regards

Schooner