Larry Warrens Response to Linda M.Howe earthfiles part one.

[Sacha Christie]

Larry asked me to post his response to the transcript of the tape Linda has published on earthfiles.

http://www.earthfiles.com/index.php?cat ... dline+News

I have asked my friend Sacha, to forward this response to Linda Houlton Howe’s earthfiles reports. There are no politics in this, only I would like this response to be posted on more than one web site and do not know how to do it myself.

First let me thank Linda for finding the tape, as it will give me the opportunity to correct some long standing falsehoods about myself. Please forgive the fact that I am not very good with computers and am better suited to speaking to people than typing to them.

The tape was recorded in New Haven Connecticut, in 1986, and as I’ve discussed with Linda, I remember the day in rather good detail considering its over 25 years ago.

I will respond in the best order I can but again, the reader will have to read Linda’s write up to see what I’m referring to. Again, this forum is not one of my strengths.
By the time of this recording, I’d been public with Rendlesham for over 3 years, and had been interviewed by numerous UFO researchers. The halt memo, and tape were long in the public arena and CNN’s special assignment, UFO THE BENTWATERS INCIDENT {recorded in fall 1984, 1st aired feb 1985} was over a year old. 1986 was a transition year for me, my account, or another author’s version of it!

1986 was the year that Whitley Strieber told me to write my own book, to set the record straight and also to stop the intentional or unintentional misrepresentation of my experience {not story!} at Bentwaters. That year I named that unwritten book, and started working on early drafts, the next year Peter Robbins joined me on a 9 plus year quest to set the record right with regard to my role in the events, that quest became the book Left at East Gate, and that’s the title I came up with in 1986. Peter Robbins and I are both very proud of that book, though we would never claim it’s a definitive account by any means!

I have known Linda for many years and we have been featured speakers together at many UFO conferences in the USA in the late 80s and 90s. The last time we met, my ex wife Linda and I had the honour of having dinner with Dr Edgar Mitchell, an honour indeed! My point on this bit of background is simple, I want to establish that Linda and I go back a long way, also to show that my memory is still intact.

I’d like to make a few points.
1) Malcolm Zigler, a major at the time, was chief of the SPS, he was not my shift commander, that was Bob Ball. This I would know in 1986 or 1980 for that matter. Further more, Carl Drury was the assistant chief of SPS."

2)Lt Tamplin is not the person I saw upset in the forest, she was an LE , she was black and a woman. She stood out in the SPS for those reasons, I never saw a woman in the woods, the person upset was a male, and Bob Ball talked to him. I never said a medic attended to anyone, that is English speak, and invented by the British TABLOID News of the world, the quote is not an actual statement I made. I only spoke to the reporter for 5 minutes on the phone in 1983. The events in the woods as I saw them, in my own words can be found in the book.
3) I’ve never said that lightalls powered cameras, nor would they be used for that purpose. The lightalls did not function on site, see LAEG.

4) The October 1983 newspaper reference in the report is in fact the British tabloid, News of the World, and not a New York paper.

5) The ground fog, referred to in the report was not a craft! I’ve never said it was.
It was a defined mist that was on the ground, and not above it! See other descriptions of this in LAEG.
6) One Night or Three? As I’ve always stated, I was involved in this after xmas but before new years.
1980, Lt Englund and Sgt Bustinza picked me up in a pickup truck, this would be halts night, I never saw Tamplin, further I would have known for years by 86, that the events were on more than one night just by reading the Halt memo, I was only involved on one night! What was the context of your question? Also I don’t recall Pennistion out there as well, as he was not, john was, and off duty, I saw him and this has been covered by me with both halt and john.P6 ART “effing” Wallace, created by Barry Greenwood, cause I didn’t want my real name used until others came forward. I never introduced myself to anyone as Art Wallace, it was used in the UK to sell papers, and even in Japan the TV people got mad because I wouldn’t let them call me that name. They said the Japanese people liked mystery! I said tough shit!! see LAEG.P7 Adrian Bustinza has indeed spoken on the record! He was first interviewed by Larry Fawcett, via phone on April 20 1984. The transcript was published for the first time in Left at east gate (see p139). He was later interviewed by Ray Boeche and Scott Colbern. (see LAEG.P8 on page 217 of our book). Col Halt backs up how I got to the forest, my description of that nights weather, etc. He only questions my reason for discharge. (P9) Bill Moore and the dissinfo etc. On the tape you say that the atc on Woodbridge describes the creatures, aliens, beings whatever, as having tails like a devil. I say twice that is not what I saw. It is correct that no one asked or told
me to disinfo the case, that came later and is covered in the book, by the way, I declined! As for Moore, I was around the scene when he was in D.C. He pulled me aside and said he saw my file and that he knew I worked for the feds etc. He said it was ok as he did too! Show me the file I said, and he never did. Is it not true that later he said he was feeding ufo info to the spooks? man that guy got a lot of airtime in the ufo world. Personally I thought the guy was full of it. You know, I once met a guy at a conference that told me that star trek (the original series) was real and he was an officer on the enterprise as well, just like Moore, full of it. However, the latter might have been crazy as a shithouse rat on top of it.P10

I never mixed Adrian’s experience with mine, to protect him, when he put that underground thing on me alone, to Fawcett back in 84 I felt a little let down, so until I did the book I withdrew from that and put it back on him. Also, all we agreed to do that night in 81 was to get the thing out to the public, that ended up being me.

The book was designed to get responses from others and in it, I had to lay it all on the table, for better or worse. Further to the spook stuff I can say that the Russians, and MOSSAD have had an interest in this affair. Unnerving.(P11) The stuff about my family is dead right!(P12)Jimmy Carter was not on the base at all although I was told the pres, knew about Bentwaters, more like incoming vp Bush sr, the carter thing comes from my problem of starting a sentence and then skipping to another subject. This is due to a head injury I sustained in 1984 and its weird to see that happen in a transcript, I saw Carter that year ‘86 at central Connecticut state university, and that was what I was going to say. All that know me know I have that issue, so sorry folks, no Jimmy Carter in the underground base! Well Linda I’m sure I’ve missed something or other, my book is my statement, there are errors in it but it’s the best I can do. Please remember that the tabloid News of the world is a rag, the quotes attributed to me, Halt and Williams were invented to sell papers, that is one of my biggest regrets with this thing is when CAUSE sent the halt memo to the UK to help certain researchers out, it was sold on to that paper for 25000 pounds by a lawyer, cause and myself had nothing to do with it and it put the case on shit street right out of the gate, those quotes ARE NOT MINE, and use words only English people use! I know as I live in England, don’t believe any of that coverage from 83 its crap and sensationalized an event that didn’t need it. I hope they spent the money well? One last thing, Linda as you know, I know that you have no ill will towards me, and now we go back to intentional misrepresentation of me and un intentional misrepresentation, lets take a look at science writer Ian Ridpath’s website, where he uses a letter I wrote home to my mother trying to fill in the phone conversation with her about the ufo that I got cut off on. I try to be a bit James Bond and identify myself as a guy I know on D flight. Also I end the letter with this, “Ma, I will tell you the whole thing on the ufo , I cant in the mail cause they read it!” Ian uses another sighting of lights earlier that night to match his lighthouse, stars, satellites theory and omits key points in my letter, intentional? I think so, with Malice? I think not. That letter predates Col Halts by a week by the way, so if I’m lying, my mom was my first mark , think about it people. Now for state sponsored this, and this wont win me some buddies but I got plenty thanks, this is part of an email that was sent to Peter Robbins in late 1999, Peter sent it on to me and this is it;

“Peter, great news, signed off on the book deal, nice advance too, please let Larry know that my research has completely backed up his story! Love Georgina.”

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM SEE A PROBLEM?
As that person sadly passed away not long ago and cant defend the above book, although in life she declined my wishes to defend my points in her book, I will end with a very good quote she often used,
Is it what you know or what you’ve been told?
Thanks Linda, bring on part 2
All the best!
Larry Warren, Liverpool , UK


N.B I must concur that the British ‘News Paper’ The News of the World is well known for completely fabricating the ‘facts’. It’s on a par with The National Enquirer, only a little less accurate.

Sacha.

[zardos]

hello I am new.

why does MR Halt say that larry warren wasn't in the forest. Was it becasue larry warren released the memo? I have seen on some documentaries that many of the soldiers said he wasn't there and he had hurt the case.

[IanR]

hello I am new.
why does Halt say that larry warren wasn't in the forest. Was it because larry warren released the memo?

It wasn't because Larry released the memo. In fact, the memo was released officially in response to an inquiry under the Freedom of Information Act - you can see the covering letter here
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/memoUSAF.jpg
Halt didn't want Peter Bent to release the memo but was told it had to be done under law. Halt also tried to keep himself out of the papers as far as possible, which is why Gordon Williams' picture appeared in the News of the World rather than his. Halt's attitude has changed since, as you'll be aware.

See more comments on Halt's memo here
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/appendix.htm

Ian

[Sacha Christie]

Hello Zardos! Nice to 'meet you'!

Be careful what you believe. Forget the gossip, he was there, he wasn't, he siad this that the other, changed his story etc... Most of the witnesses have inconsistencies in their recollections and have spent thirty years arguing over who was where said what and to whom etc... That tactic hasn't got them very far. It's also led to more and more web pages of inaccurate information. This forum has lots of valuable info on the home page. Ian's (Ridpath) has also a lot of very valuable information too whether you agree with his findings or not. You will also see on his site what he actually said about the lighthouse, not the popular myth that he said that was the explanation for the whole event. Vince Thurkettle was the person who put that forward, Ian mentions it as a possible part of one localized incident. My advice is to read only information from the horses mouths or the closest representative to them and make up your own mind.

larry made a call to his mom just after the event, then sent her a letter. To say he had to make his story up from all other statements released after it became public is ridiculous. He knew way to much before that.. It became public knowledge in 2003 after jenny randles, Dot street and Brenda Butler got a copy of the files from the DoD using FOI and then sold it to the News of the World which is how the story broke... Three years after the event.. Larry sure knew a hell of a lot before ppl started blabbing after that... No wonder he's fit to bust in anger.. all the changes of everyone else and he still gets called Larry 'I changed my story' Warren!! I'm only using witness statements as a guide to the event whilst researching the tech available that might case these things to have happened. Who said what stood where really is inconsequential when trying to figure out what actually occurred... Not to belittle what they went through you understand... The arguments are a distraction.

Gary Heseltine and Charles Halt wrote a script based on Halts (NEW) testimony of events... they worked out a specific timeline according to Halts recollections. I have a copy of the script. Larry is in it.... So... what does that tell ya? Lol...

The fact that Halt has swerved the truth, blatantly told porkies and now has changed his story yet again, picked a good honest cop to act as his representative to tell the world it was ET smells like a sh*t house rat.

Ian.. what's your take on Halts new stance? After thirty years of protecting his pension, this loyal military career man suddenly throws it into the wind and tells the world it was aliens.... Makes me believe it can't have been, after all if he wants us to know then the military must do too. Looks like a diversion tactic to me. Someone must be getting too close to the truth in my opinion... Esp with the recent moves to put weapons in space... 2030 Epoch 4.

I'd be very interested to hear your views Ian. thanks.

[Daniel]

It will be interesting to know what Col Halts new testimony is. It would be very odd if he did start admitting it was ET. It would feel like a diversion if that was the case, especially when on the night of the incident, he was trying to be investigative, and not jumping around screaming Aliens.

Maybe so many see him as a very credible witness, thus he plans to remove his credibility with an exotic explanation, since many would find something fishy going on if he had admitted a skeptics explanation. Maybe he's doing this, so that he can retire in peace.

[John Burroughs]

Col Halts testimony has changed very little over the years. He did have the dates wrong in his memo and for the longest time it was stated the incident happened on one night only! I was the first one who stated it happened the night of the 25th into the 26th. I also was the first one to say somthing happened over a 3 night period. Col Halt also has tried to control who was out there and when. He has had to change his story somewhat on that also. But as far as what he saw and what it did he has not! He stated very early on that he would not give up everthing he had unless he was called before Congress and ask to testify which could be what he is trying to force. He has now stated whatever he saw was under some kind of control which appeared to be ET in nature because of the things it was able to do. Gary asked him to go on the record saying what he Halt felt it could be. As far as Larry goes just because you have details about what happened does not clarify how much involvement you had in the incident! It also does not mean your were not involved because you don't have the facts straight! It is important to look at what everybody has said from the beggining tell now and try and understand why there stories have changed and to try and figure out what is factual and what is not.

[zardos]

hello to Sacha and hello to john borrows. I have a cat called sache! Has anybody read the 'larry warren story' I have and it is very interesting. larry warren was also in the woods on the first night when john burroughs saw the triangle machine. I will try and woprk out how to post the story becasue it is interesting that both larry warren and john burrows were in the woods both times(nights). Thanks. Zardos !!

[John Burroughs]

Zardos
Larry was not in the woods with the 3 of us on the 25th into the 26th. He did say in a interview that the incident took place on 1 night with 3 of us going out into the woods first and then Halt came out afterwords. Also in Georgina Bruni's book in the chapter she talked about Larry she stated Larry stated yes Georgina I was there on the first night standing behind a tree taking pictures of JP and JB observing the craft is that what you are talking about?

[zardos]

hello John. Yes that is what it says i have posted that on the main forum. What was it like being so close to a ufo? do you think you will ever see one agian.? zardos

[John Burroughs]

Zardos
That is one take on what Larry had to say about the incident! He also gave a interview to Linda and Ben which is being posted on Earth Files. He may have been programed to change his story who knows for sure! All I'm trying to do is figure out as best I can who said what and when and then try and figure out what is factual and what is not...

[IanR]

Ian.. what's your take on Halts new stance? After thirty years of protecting his pension, this loyal military career man suddenly throws it into the wind and tells the world it was aliens....

Well, since you ask, I can offer an opinion, for what it's worth... Anyone who knows the history of this case will be aware that Halt has changed his attitude entirely from not wanting to say anything publicly when the story first came out in 1983 to now basking in publicity and claiming it was ET. I think we can all agree that nothing Halt has said publicly about this case can be a military secret, or he would be in very serious trouble. Everyone will have to decide for themselves whether what he now says is with official sanction or whether he's just telling the UFO believers what they want to hear for his own reasons.

Aside from Halt's latest ET claims, I'm struck by a rather more subtle change in his story which has gone largely unnoticed. Halt always used to assert that it could not have been the lighthouse that he saw flashing in line with the farmhouse because the lighthouse lay some 35 degrees off to the right. I skewered him for years on this, because of course from where he was standing the lighthouse isn't off to the right but is in fact in line with the farmhouse, in the very direction he saw the flashing UFO (which famously flashed at the same rate as the lighthouse, as his own tape revealed). After a film crew took him to the site a couple of years ago and showed him that the lighthouse does indeed lie in line with the farmhouse, he stopped making the claim about seeing it off to the right. Instead, he has now belatedly "remembered" that the UFO was between him and the farmhouse and that its light reflected off the farmhouse windows, something that he apparently failed to mention for the previous 25+ years. Look out for this new revelation next time he tells the story.

Ian

[John Burroughs]

Ian
How is Halt basking in publicity! As far as I know Halt has been the one approached to speak at the conferances he has appeared at plus Gary approached him about the movie. As far as him saying it was ET he has only said it was ET in nature by the way it moved around and what it was able to do. I guess the lighthouse was programed to move that way right Ian??

[Daniel]

It probably would have been better if Halt used a softer term, such as Intelligent instead of ET. Then again maybe that's his conclusion, since he would have surely been notified, before or after, of a black project experiment involved in the incident; unless it was Soviet.

[SteveR]

Ian Ridpath you are full of baloney. I presume you are refering to that UFO hunters crap that was on a couple of years ago. This was written by Easton in '97. If they saw a reflection of what ever was burning up over the field reflected in the farm house windows, it can't have been the beacon !

Halt confirmed to Rayl that they thought the farmers house had caught fire and the interior seemed to be engulfed by flames. "I didn't know what to think. I was quite concerned. In fact, we were all quite concerned".

It was at this point that, having followed the object, it silently 'exploded' into separate pieces and simply disappeared. They then realised that the flames were illusory and had presumably been some kind of reflection from the light.

Checking that there was indeed no fire, Halt satisfied himself that it wasn't necessary to disturb the occupants. "We were foreigners there, and I thought it prudent to keep our presence low and under the circumstances unknown, since all seemed to be okay".

Here are your links:
http://www.hyper.net/ufo/vs/m30-034.html
http://www.hyper.net/ufo/vs/m30-035.html
http://www.hyper.net/ufo/vs/m30-036.html

[IanR]

Ian Ridpath you are full of baloney. I presume you are refering to that UFO hunters crap that was on a couple of years ago. This was written by Easton in '97. "They then realised that the flames were illusory and had presumably been some kind of reflection from the light."

I think you are right that Halt's realization that he had misplaced the lighthouse started when the UFO Hunters took him to the site a couple of years ago. They inadvertently made the point for me.

The line you quote in bold was, as you say, written by James Easton and is not a quote from Halt. I have looked through the transcript of the 1997 interview that Easton was summarizing and Halt does not mention any reflection in the windows, although he does talk about thinking that the farmhouse was on fire. Halt admitted in a talk last October that he hadn't thought about the reflection until a couple of years ago - see this clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdRKLaPZe4c
It seems that the occasion he is referring to in this talk is his visit to the site with the UFO Hunters. Where the UFO Hunters got the reflection idea from I don't know - maybe the same mistaken Easton sentence you have quoted. It would be interesting to know if Halt had mentioned this supposed reflection of the light in the farmhouse window in any statements before the UFO Hunters programme. If not, then we must conclude that the UFO Hunters programme was instrumental in getting Halt to change his ground.

If they saw a reflection of what ever was burning up over the field reflected in the farm house windows, it can't have been the beacon !

That is of course why Halt has now adopted this story.

Ian

[Admin]

From Halt's interview with Salley Rayl (1997 - and that's MSN's Project Watchfire if anyone remembers):

"We saw a glowing red object, best I can describe it. It was, it
looked almost like a red eye with a black pupil and it was sort
of winking and dripping what appeared to be the equivalent of
molten metal. And we just stood there in awe and watched for
several minutes probably, and decided to try and approach it. At
that time, it started moving through the forest. We could see it
moving between the trees. It was moving in a horizontal plane and
moved probably 25, 30 maybe 40 degrees in between the trees and
back around. It was obviously moving and sort of approached us a
bit at one time and then it receded out into the farmer's field.
And, as we approached the fenceline to the field, it literally
exploded, only silently, and it broke into multi-white objects.

Just prior to that, we had also noticed that the farmer's house
appeared to be glowing, as though there were a fire inside. All
the windows were bright red and sort of flickering and I was
quite concerned for the occupants of the house. And we stood
there and watched for quite awhile and the object, as it exploded
and broke into the multi-objects, disappeared".

Halt was able to see the farmhouse's windows glowing "bright red" while observing the "object" which implies the two are related, but does not conclusively tie them together.
Unfortunately, Halt does not explicitly state: '...the object's light was reflecting off of the farmhouse's windows.'

[IanR]

Unfortunately, Halt does not explicitly state: '...the object's light was reflecting off of the farmhouse's windows.'

Quite right, Admin, and thank you for that support. I was grateful to SteveR for having solved this puzzle for me by pointing out the sentence from Easton. I wondered where the UFO Hunters got the idea from that Halt saw the light reflecting in the farmhouse windows. I had assumed they made it up themselves. What a delicious irony if they had in fact based it on the mistaken assumption of an arch skeptic.

It’s a further example of how Halt’s testimony has been reshaped by the media over the intervening years. It re-emphasizes the need to go back to what he said and did at the time rather than embrace his afterthoughts many years after the event.

Ian

[John Burroughs]

Allot of people's statements have been reshaped by Media and others over the years! Early on several people talked about a engery source that was flying around which was called blue lights! MSgt ball went as far as saying there could have been somthing inside the blue light that could have been some kind of life form. Several people told Robert Hasting that there was a large object hovering over the woods. And that a blue light buzzed the WSA tower.

[John Burroughs]

If you go back and look at the entire piece which is the first time Halt had been on TV he all but says it was somthing from somewhere else...

[John Burroughs]

If you go back and look at the entire piece which is the first time Halt had been on TV he all but says it was somthing from somewhere else...