CIA using us

[Deep Purple]

I have read quite a lot about the Rendlesham incident, including Georgina Bruni's excellent book. I think the skeptics explanations are in general wrong. For example if it were the Orford Ness Light House then visual effects relating to this would be frequently seen. I am not a military man but I would have thought if this was the case it would have been evident on many nights after the event, and the commanding officer would have taken the frightened men back to the woods to show them the reason for the "UFO". Similarly I 'm not convinced about the police/ security car flashing lights, I really dont think this would have spooked security patrols who would have been used to the night.
One possiblity that might have happended is that the CIA faked something to scare the airmen and create panic so as to create a UFO flap to cover top secret aircarft being tested such as the prototype f117a which appears shortly afterwards or whatever else the Americans had. The Belgium UFO/ Triangle flap occurred not so long after this event; was this perhaps a top secret aircraft being tested launched from Bentwaters. The CIA are certainly capable of disinformation. Was Halt a party to the disinformation? He certainly was promoted after the event , which if the USAF, had thought he had cocked up they would not have done

[Deep Purple]

If Halt knew what had happened, then he could manipulate the story to suit the CIAs purpose, including apparent details of the flight of the UFO. The CIA hoax would also possibly explain why some airmen were sent straight back to the USA after the event --- to stop them talking. Also the CIA could " mine" the whole situation from scaring some airmen with oppressive interviews, to drugging others and implanting false memories. Also the very release of the tapes and documents could have been stage managed to add an air of reality to the event, and this occurred at the time when F117a , Blackbirds and what ever else they had could have been flying out of Norfolk or Suffolk. The CIA are less likely to have need to pull such a stunt in the US as their secret bases are in very remote locations , not like East Anglia. To this day the CIA may be feeding investigation with part truths, lies etc to muddy the waters
The other side of the coin is if this were the case why has the secret not come out yet?
For example during the mid 80s rumours started to appear of the Stealth Fighter with guesses at its shape etc, and this goes to show that we can get ideas about very secret projects before they come to light.
The answer may be to protect furture secret tests. If the US admitted it was using a UFO hoax to cover top secret tests, next time something unusual was spotted and tagged a UFO , aviation buffs/ spies etc would be on the case trying to see what was being flown, whereas now if anything is dubbed a UFO it is discredited by the media and establishment.
But these are only ideas and the event could still be amongst the best evidence ever of UFos, Halts contemperanous tape is fantastic evidence, here you have a ranking US officer observing something unknown and saying "this is weird".
Halt will hopefully one day open up and tell us a bit more of the jigsaw puzzle, which I'm sure he knows. Lets keep trying we may get some answers

[Observer]

Hi Deep purple

As a keen aviation enthusiast and ex member of the Royal Observer Corps i and the Corps in general followed the development of the new Stealth technology that the US was developing. We were in the know years before it was public knowledge. Chronologically, the F-117a was still in its prototype configuration in 1980 and we all suspected that it would remain at its US test site [probably Groom Lake] for several more years before risking overseas deployment.

The SR-71 along with the U-2 and Martin RB-57 were all operational at that time and i do know that the latter 2 were test flown for a very short period out of RAF Woodbridge.
In fact most flights were 'visiting' flights rather than 'based' flights. It was probably one of these aircraft that was on a visit that Lt Col Halt was not allowed near.

None of these spy planes could have caused the UFO incident in the forest. If it was then it could only have crashed into the forest which would have caused devistation and fire for at least several square acres, but it didn't, so must be discounted.

Cover up, possibly but what is being covered up, that's what we are all trying to find out.
My own theory is explained in the article, The Crucial Reason' part one and two.

Observer

[Deep Purple]

Hi Observer
Thanks for the reply.
It certainly wasnt an aircarft crash that was seen , I have been unfortunate to witness one, the famous MIG29 collision at Fairford and the resulting ball of flame that went up was terrible.
I have now read the Crucial Reason and it is certainly a possibility that does fit in with part of my thinking. If Halt knew what had happened he only had to hype up a few of the details , omit hearing any helicopters flying, a few witnessess roughed up or threatened by the security services and hey presto an Apollo Command Module Hoax is turned into a UFO flap. A good way of trying to find out about this would be to see if any civilian or policy records indicated helicopters flying in the area. Of course if there were helicopters flying in the areas this is why the radar tapes may have gone missing. Once the seeds of a UFO flap had been planted the rumours and disinformation would grow at a very satisfying rate for those planting them.
Of course there remains a possibility that someone is feeding you part truths/ disinformation to try and keep the real truth buried.
However if I was a betting man and asked to put money on the most likely explanation at present I would go with your explanation of a Command Module Hoax.
I know one person posted that aircrew would not do that sort of thing , but think about the pressures on a young airman perhaps aged 23, drunk , they would be risk takers and like most young men throw caution to the wind.

[Observer]

Hi deep purple

Although i am the author of the crucial reason, i have to admit to the fact that i only partially believe it myself.
Larry Warren in his book Left at East Gate mentions helicopters flying over head but to my knowledge, no body else does. I think he was seen by US authorities from the start as an 'unsafe' witness that needed to keep his mouth shut.

I don't think for one minute that local Police would know what they were looking at if they saw the Apollo cammand module sitting in the middle of a field. They probably jumped to the first conclusion they had that it was a nuclear weapon or a crashed aircraft.

For those who think it some sort of stealth aircraft that was seen, well what can i say other than to say these people are grossely ignorant of military aviation and i suggest they take up stamp collecting or some other inoffesnsive pass time.

My 2 articles were 'sructured' accounts even though they are not proveable. I'm waiting for some one else to come up with a different account which can give us all some more debate?

Regards

Observer

[pupil88]

Hi

When one is searching for a structure to an event, one necessarily reduces the elements of the event to a center, where one desires to find a presence of understanding. This necessarily leads to a new center of realism featuring ambigueties, undeciphered, elliptical events portrayed in another unique duration which deliberately weaken the initial connections.

There were three separate series of narrative. The first had two actors, Penningston and Burroughs. and a chous at the edge of the forest and at the guard house who witnessed an extraordinary event. The second had one actor, Halt, a chorus who were heard on tape reacting to the extraordinary. The third had one actor, Warren, a witness, Bustiza, and a host of onlookers. One who cried at the scene and was comforted. who later deserted but was found and returned without prosecution was found at his post, a suicide.

All the actors have been profoundly affected. Yet those who refuse to see the obvious, will search for new signifiers, and when they don't pan out, another re-structuring.

[Observer]

Hi

I kinda see what you mean, well only just as your analogy using a third party senario with actors just complicates the issues. Riddles just muddy the waters even more.

If you have a theory on the Rendlesham forest incident lets all share it.

[pupil88]

Some points of clarification

Regarding the helicopters
Bustinza who was with Warren on the field, looking at the large aspirin,
also saw two helicopters and heard the radio blaring “here it comes”,
“here it comes”.

Regarding the CIA
Although I haven’t read all the materials on the incident, I know that
Naval Intelligence Officers deals with the military sightings of UFOs
and their aftermath. The USAF and the US Army are not involved.

The two suits were not CIA they were field operatives of the NSA,
National Security Agency.

Most people believe in extraterrestrial intelligence elsewhere in the
universe. But when it comes to UFOs, there is a skepticism as to
their extraterrestrial origins. Advanced civilizations seem to loath to
communicate with us, as we would be to communicate with our
bacterial forbearers. This being said what are ETs doing here on earth
as they avoid contact with us even with so many methods of media?
Advanced civilizations must share an interest in other technological worlds
and may communicate with them as peers. If they have communicated with
us in the past, they have hidden their presence.

UFOs do exist, whatever their origins. I don’t think skeptics deny that. Let
me clarify that. Skeptics project the image of non-believers “trying their best
to be objective”.The method they use is to stress investigations, not of the
physical phenomenon, the craft, but rather of the people who do the observing-
questioning the psychology and background of persons and groups who report
seeing UFOs. I see this a lot in forums I look at. It is a tactic political types are
familiar with. This was the basis of the ‘Condon Report’ scandal. Though it
was caught in the bud and exposed, the techniques described are used today.
Calling some one a disinformation agent with no basis of fact, or characterizing
a person as a drunk,etc All UFO researchers should call out hoaxers and crackpots.
All manifestations of a superhuman nature may seem absurd to us. Yet, to deal in
Ufology is to deal in the absurd.

The Rendlesham forest incident manifests alien technologies which we cannot fathom.
I encountered then in 1954 as a security guard at RAF Mildenhall. Within 12 hours
what I witnessed was completely erased from my mind. I described what I saw in
a web site I created but which I’m shortly removing. .

I saw two aliens. I refused to acknowledge them initially. I don’t know if the are
“good guys or the bad guys”. They didn’t hurt me but they affected me deeply.
I’m certain I found there presence in the Mayan World.

Now, I’m on their trail, in the present.

[Observer]

Hi,

I see now the points you are making, Were you in the USAF or RAF at Mildenhall?

Ironically, its the Royal Navy who initially set up MI5/MI6 and still to this day carry out investigations into a whole raft of things.

My own take on alien visitation is like a team of 'human' scientists going on an expadition to the jungles of Borneo to look for a species of bird. They reconoitre the area, they find the species, they keep their distance, they look, they watch, they film but they don't make contact. May be this is the aliens modus operandi?

I also believe that there are more than one set of aliens from different galaxies and different time zones having a look at us.
Why us, there must be far more interesting planets to visit than earth because we are in the back of beyond in the galaxy scale of things.
However, no one yet has proved it or got decent news reel footage for us to see.

The Rendlesham forest incident is complex only because some people saw things that others did not. There are some who say that those who claim to have seen alien entities are lying through their teeth and there are others who say they were there but really were not. Everyone wants a piece of the action for what ever reason. There is already a conflict of statements and collectvely the whole episode has become murcky just like Roswell. There has to be an element of band wagon jumping by some as there is money to be made on the lecture circuite and interview programms. Roswell has already proved that.

It would be sensible to research and exlude man made senarios before acceptance of the alien angle. This has yet to be finalised.

Observer

[pupil88]

Hi,

This goes to the issue of the third night.
I clipped this out of a forum. The poster cited that it came from UFOmonthly -May 2005.
I hope this isn't old news and has been discussed.

LARRY WARREN - Rendlesham Forest— An update
The final presentation of the day was by Larry Warren.
Larry was involved in the Rendlesham Forest event in 1980 and co-authored "Left at East Gate" with Peter Robins. confirmed they will be made generally available. Before commencing his presentation, Larry expressed his thanks to the organisers and the audience.
Larry’s lecture was based on a paper that had been presented to the Crash Retrieval Conference held in the USA on 13th November 2004.
After initially giving a brief review of the Rendlesham Forest case his lecture focussed on what had happened to him after the incident.
Larry was given a de-brief by the Office of Naval Intelligence(ONI) and the National Security Agency (NSA). Note it was not done by officers from the Office of Special Investigations (OSI) as is widely reported.
Over the years since 1980 he has been the subject of considerable criticism in some quarters about his story because his account has been seen to change.
Colonel Halt (famous for the ’Halt Memorandum’) had stated that Larry was not involved in the incident at all. Halt has now acknowledged that he was wrong and fully accepts that Larry was involved on the third night of the sightings at the bases. Larry explained why this was. Perhaps understandably he said that he had been reluctant to disclose the true extent of his sightings because of their fantastic nature.
He then went on to quote from several letters he’d received from former servicemen who confirmed much of what he had been saying for years about the incident. Larry stated that he was forced to undergo medical treatments against his wishes that were at the hands of the military, some of whom had British accents!
He went on to discuss his belief that vast underground installations existed beneath the Bentwaters and Woodbridge bases.
He cited one visit to thebases with Peter Robins, Matthew Williams when they intended to explore them, however their hopes were dashed when they found that metal covers had been welded shut thus preventing access into them. Larry had originally intended to show the full version (2 hour) of a programme made by the SCI-FI channel entitled "UFO Invasion at Rendlesham". When it was later shown on Sky only 45 minutes of it was broadcast. Sadly we were only able to see a few short extracts of the extra material as a result of some equipment failures.

[Observer]

Hi

A good part of what you have written has been covered in this forum. Many people not just Larry have changed their story over the years which does not help their credibility. Never the less, its interesting that you mention who did the de briefing and interviews.

When i worked for the Met Police, if we had witnesses doing this, they would be termed 'unsafe' witnesses especially in a court of law.

As for the 'vast' under ground bunkers at RAF Bentwaters, all i can say is get in touch with Graham Haynes of the Bentwaters Cold War Museum who knows every square inch of the base and he will personally show you every instellation and what it was including welded down hatches etc.

None of us doubt that Larry and others were given the third degree by certain authorities after the event which was in simple terms a damage limitation exercise. However, it has been suggested that these interviews took place some where else and not at Bentwaters or Woodbridge.

It will be interesting to hear what Halt has to say in the new version of Rendlesham to be broadcast on Dec 26 on the history channel. He apparently has more revelations to disclose. He now apparently says there were entities which he totally denied in earlier interviews.

Observer

[Deep Purple]

Certainly witnesses chanaging their testimony will provide a gold mine for defence barristers, as one pointed out to me the other day all they have to demonstrate that charges are not beyond reasonable doubt! to get scroats acquitted.
The Rendlesham incident is strange however, because star witnesses could be manipulated by US/UK security services to serve whatever purpose they have in mind.
The problem is also that the evidence at any stage could be false, for example how do we really know that the Halt Tape was recorded at the time it was said it was and not four years later when the "memo" surfaced!
Why do people turn up years later and suddenly remembers things?
Also money is involved in this people are earning good money from this, why have they any interest in the real truth any more than a criminal defence barrister who knows the person who he is defending is probably guilty, but gets them acquitted and goes off with his fee.

[pupil88]

Certainly witnesses chanaging their testimony will provide a gold mine for defence barristers, as one pointed out to me the other day all they have to demonstrate that charges are not beyond reasonable doubt! to get scroats acquitted.

Nearly every article I've read on the Rendleston incident was riddled with errors of date, names and places. Now, assuming that you have sorted it out, what changes of testimony do you feel is crucial to the center of the argument, encounters with UFOs and an alien presence?

The Rendlesham incident is strange however, because star witnesses could be manipulated by US/UK security services to serve whatever purpose they have in mind.

Do you assume the services succeeded in their efforts?

The problem is also that the evidence at any stage could be false, for example how do we really know that the Halt Tape was recorded at the time it was said it was and not four years later when the "memo" surfaced!

On the audio tape were the voices of Halt, Lt.Bruce Englund, Sgt. Bustinza, Sgt. Bobby Ball and Sgt. Neville. This asumes a conspiracy of all of the above and also assumes all were still stationed at either of the two bases.

Why do people turn up years later and suddenly remembers things?

100 years ago, Freud called it repressed emotions.

Also money is involved in this people are earning good money from this, why have they any interest in the real truth any more than a criminal defence barrister who knows the person who he is defending is probably guilty, but gets them acquitted and goes off with his fee.
" the real truth"

When witnesses report "right angle turns at enormous velocities", "instant stops", "incredible instant accelarations","objects changing colors and shapes", or" simply disappesr". Nearly all of the above, were witnessed in episodes of the Rendlesham forest incident. Were the changing testimony related to these reports? I don't mean to be contentious.

[Observer]

Hi

Being contentious is what keeps this forum going as it adds new angles and perspectives not to mention new talking points.

To my simple mind the alleged cover up and disinformation really is only applicable to some 'horrendous' man made cock up. I cannot for the life of me see why a UFO would require the same amount of effort by so many different US authorities.

Some thing happened in that forest that was probably extremely embarrassing to the US Government. It possibly even threatened the treaty allience and NATO.

I'm pretty sure that the US authorities were fearfull of British reactions if they found out what had happened? This is my theory for the cover up.

Even the local British Police were kept out of the area which to the Americans would have been a leaky route to the British Government.

Concocting a UFO story is a great way to take the heat off.

Having said all that, the many witness statements describing what took place seems a wee bit ellaborate, unless of course they are all telling the truth????.

So folks, it remains a mystery.

[Deep Purple]

I think all I am trying to say is that be careful assuming that any evidence in this case is truthful, it may be, BUT it might not be.
You need to look behind whats on the evidence table and recognise the influences upon those giving the evidence and keep a very open mind as to what happened. The whole thing could be a huge cover up for something as Observer has said , and maybe nothing to do with aliens etc.
As for evidence think very careful about what you assume to be true. For example the "Halt " tape could easily have been recorded several years later, and the fact that you can hear four different people on it means nothing. Its not difficult to persuade four airmen to cooperate, think outside the box , four airman brought together told a story, you need to say xyz happened in the national interest as we need to cover up zyx, you are doing this service as pround American servicemen and you will receive $xy per month for doing this. dont do it and your looking at 20yrs in a military jail. The very fact that Halt is supposed to be saying something new this xmas makes me think that the forum has got someway to understanding what has really happened and we are being draw away from the truth.
The anon email was strange the other day and where it came from. This Forum is not something you would just find by chance so somebody must have been watching and analysing, and what was said was quite specific, ie it was not anon spam. Security services could easliy have hijacked a local authority computer and sent the email, they would have the technical capability to do this, also the fact that is was Suffolk council as opposed to some where else seems to have a meaning.
My advise is keep digging and thinking, we've some good minds on this forum

[pupil88]

What you are in effect saying is that despite a situation where a notion of truth is put into crisis, that is, to introduce a UFO visitation on Earth without overwhelming proof, it is permissible to use the "powers of the false". It's a question of tolerating possible yet incomplete and contradictary perspectives on the true and continue to question the 'presence" as a fiction and illusion. and to applaud the powers of government to suppress any evidence to the contrary(while accusing it of ineptitudes - sort of having your cake and eating it too)

No one has yet proved it or got decent news reel footage for us to see.

When thought keeps moving to a predetermined end and put in a position of judging and knowing that it will be right, you get what you wish for.

My own take on alien visitation is like a team of 'human' scientists going on an expadition to the jungles of Borneo to look for a species of bird. They reconoitre the area, they find the species, they keep their distance, they look, they watch, they film but they don't make contact. May be this is the aliens modus operandi?

Translated- ET will act just like an educated earth man.
My observation- ET is not interested in Encyclopedic Knowledge.
It's reality is not ours.

[Observer]

Hi deep purple

Interesting points raised, i cannot see the Halt tape as anything but genuine and recorded as it happened. Of course, anything is possible.

The CIA generally only get involved when there is some spying to be done or there are problems with enemies of the USA. At that time the arch enemy was the Soviet Union.

I would have thought the NSA would be more active than the CIA on this issue.

Having said that the CIA also kept an eye on allies of the USA which included the UK as left wing dissadents were pretty active especially under the Wilson Government.

Observer

[puddlepirate]

Gentlemen

I believe we might be looking at an accident involving DU ammunition. This is one example.

6.3 A-10 Warthog Aircraft Crash
One A-10 aircraft crashed and burned at King Khalid Military City (KKMC) in Saudi Arabia. For combat missions, the internal GAU-8A cannon on this aircraft is uploaded with 1,174 30 mm mixed DU and HE (high-explosive) rounds in 4 : 1 ratio. Weight of DU penetrators in 940 DU rounds amounts to 280 kg (617 lb.). The crash could have exposed emergency response personnel (firefighters, security policemen, and rescue personnel) to smoke and DU oxides from burning DU rounds. In addition, cleanup crews might have been exposed to DU fragments and residual DU contamination.

6.4 Fire in DU Ammunition Dump
In July 1991, the ammunition storage area and motor pool of the US Army base at Doha, Kuwait, where 3,600 troops were based, caught fire. During 6 hours of severe explosions and 18 additional hours of residual fires, over 14,000 lb. (6,400 kg) of DU penetrators and 102 vehicles were damaged or destroyed, including 1 damaged and 3 completely burned M1A1 Abrams tanks with DU armor and fully loaded with DU ammunition [21], [72]. While the fire was raging, an Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) team explicitly warned commanders about the dangers posed by burning depleted uranium, but the commanders failed to pass the warning to their soldiers and no respiratory masks or protective clothing were used in cleanup operations for a full week, until the Radiation Control (RADCON) teams arrived [54],.[72].

As early as 1980, DU penetrators were subjected to controlled burns at temperatures 500 - 1,000ºC [5] in order to learn the effects of accidental fires. No self-sustained burning of the penetrators was observed at these temperatures. During the outdoor burns, 42 - 47% of the penetrators oxidized in 3 hours, with the highest oxidation rate between 700 - 800ºC. The oxidation rate in outdoor burns was substantially higher than under laboratory conditions, probably due to temperature fluctuations disrupting the oxide layers. Between 50 - 62% of the DU dust was respirable (particles less than 10 µm in diameter), with air concentration 5 - 780 mg/m3 (a-activity 2 - 300 nCi/m3), depending on the air flow. This DU aerosol was present early in the process, within 6 min at temperatures above 700ºC. This report also shows several pictures of technicians performing the experiments in protective clothing and wearing respiratory masks

++++

It should be noted that A10's were using DU ammo from the late 1970's.

[Deep Purple]

Interesting idea about DU rounds,
There was no sign of a crash , however could someone, say inspired by KGB, attempted to steal a quantity of DU ammo for an A10, and this went wrong and the items where abandoned in the forest and moved later on and this is what the UFO cover up was about.
Could it have been someone from ARRS trying to steal load , under slung in a Helo?
I'm not sure how much would have been known about DU rounds at the time, were these fairly secret then? I suspect they were. Certainly DU rounds going missing would have given the press and anti nuclear brigade a field day at the time and I am sure they would have tried to cover this up. Also if the Soviets were trying to find out what was in our tank buster rounds the embarassment of their involvement would be great.
What do people think

[puddlepirate]

Not an aircraft crash that's pretty certain. But if we focus on what we actually know - or at least is most likely to be true, i.e. SP in the forest, senior officers in the forest, report of 'mist', report of geiger counters (of the type associated with weapons grade radiation) being used, report of the prison being placed on evacuation alert, damage to tree tops, damage to landing lights at Woodbridge. High probability of bird strikes with low flying aircraft.....all that stuff, then compare that with what is most unlikely - UFO landings, aliens, lighthouses and so forth, then reality suggests an incident involving an aircraft. The only aircraft that was known to use DU ammunition was the A10. The A10 was slso fitted with a higly classified (in 1980) piece of kit, also slung underneath the fuselage. It has been stated that no aircraft were being flown from Woodbridge/Bentwaters during the Christmas/New Year period but it is known that Soviet tanks were massed on the Polish border. It is known NATO was very interested in what the Soviets were up to. It is known the A10 was/is a tankbuster. It is known DU ammuntion is used against tanks. It is known that Woodbridge was originally designated an emergency landing airfield. It is known DU ammunition, when detonated, gives off radiation and a radio active mist. The A10 also carried target marker flares. It is almost certain but not known that if the local / UK population became aware of some kind of accident involving ammunition that gave off a radioactive mist etc, happening in Rendlesham forest then almost certainly there would have been uproar. It is a fact that senior officers do not get promoted for charging around forests in the middle of the night, claiming to see 'odd lights' and aliens - they get retired, pdq. They do, however, get promoted for a job well done. DU rounds are relatively small, so was the classified kit. To find both in the forest without raising suspicion would require an intense search, a sustainable cover story and nightime activity lasting more than one night. To ensure the area was safe would require a sweep with gieger counters, soil samples and the like...and radiation fogs film - as anyone who put their camera through an airport x-ray machine in the late 70's and early 80's knows.

I understand but have not yet seen evidence of, that DU rounds burn with an intense flame and emit 'sparks' - like molten metal perhaps? I also understand that an A10 coming into land is quite quiet (plus the Doppler effect).

Perhaps the SP at Woodbridge were not those who advised Bentwaters of the 'odd lights' perhaps instead, they were tasked to get into the forest asap and secure the area....perhaps the 67th ARRS were tasked to get out there damn quick and find the stuff, retrieve it then check the area for levels of radiation....perhaps Col Halt was tasked to think up a story to cover the sudden activity....and of course MoD stated it 'was of no defence signifigance' simply because they had been informed and knew exactly what was going on.

Of course, all of the above is pure conjecture and not supported by hard evidence but I believe it to be more likely than UFO's coming down to earth. If that really had been the case, you would not have been able to move for scientists, press and gawd knows who else. It would have been the biggest event ever and there would have been no need for secrecy.

Over to the forum....