Burroughs' and Penniston's joint statement & December 2010

[Admin]

From "Justice for Bentwaters..." Facebook group:

It has too be posted in four parts:

Part one:

When you have thought you have seen it all with debunkers over the last thirty years, it looks like we have not! Thirty years of debunking has not shaken our accounts of what actually happen in Rendlesham Forest. The thing both of us really find interesting is, that these debunkers are trying to debunk an incident with it arms around the extraterrestrial involvement. At no time has either of us said; It was E.T. in nature. Nor will we! We believe in the most obvious, based on the facts of the case of knowing what we believe it was will be in full disclosure by us in December 2010 in London.

Part Two:

We feel the British citizens have earned that right to know what happened. So we have decided to give full release of what we know, their in England.Again, I will reiterate this was not E.T., related. We would like to say that the recent unauthorized publishing of a letter from Colonel Conrad to a debunker, although unfortunate for Colonel Conrad letter being released without his permission, is yet another case of debunkers not living up to the same state of integrity and honor, that we have embraced. We agree with all that Colonel Conrad has said. Colonel Conrad is telling the truth as to his involvement with Rendlesham, as far as we know.

It is so unfortunate that the Air Force departmentalize everything, apparently, including the investigation at Rendlesham. It is apparent that critical information was kept from the command element. So the count of simultaneous investigations going on, is staggering It to the best of our estimate, is hovering at six separate investigations, without the other agencies and/or departments knowing of the other independent investigations. They are as follows: Colonel Conrad’s Investigation, Colonels Halts Investigation, AFOSI’s Investigation, Chief of Security Police Major Zickler’s investigation, an unidentified US Investigation outside of AFOSI, and the MOD and other British elements Investigation

The facts are this, in thirty years, the statements from the Command element say this;
1. Something happened they could not explain.
2. A metallic craft of some sort was observed in Rendlesham by Penniston.
3. Burroughs and Penniston, were not treated fairly with the reporting of this incident.
4. A craft of some sort was observed to land and take off.All command people have supported us with our statements. It also appears to us that the officer’s involved were all trying to watch out for their careers as well.

The Air Force simply calls this; Covering-Your-A@# (CYA). It is known to us that the full brunt of the investigation from the base itself, was handled by then Chief, Security Police, Major Malcolm Zickler and another unknown (to date) agency. Even though we have our suspicions, we are not going to name them at this point in time. However, be sure we will release the information. It will answer a lot of questions and even some discrepancies.

We also understand that this information will not be in the best interest of the United States Government, nor the British Government, this release will require them to do a lot of explaining. It will be interesting when they also try to justify the lies through-out the years. Most likely they will say it was done, in the interest of national security.

Written by: John Burroughs and Jim Penniston

Jim adds: "Got it all on did not need four parts."

[puddlepirate]

Here we go again.....(remember the promise of a full, joint disclosure by JB and P in their posts from ealier in the year? The promise that was never fulfilled....)

We believe in the most obvious, based on the facts of the case of knowing what we believe it was will be in full disclosure by us in December 2010 in London.

It's always 'stick with us - there will be a full disclosure tomorrow'... it's like the promise of free beer. It is always tomorrow but tomorrow never comes. For persons claiming to want to know what happened to them they sure like to withold allegedly key information from the very group of people who really do want to help them find out. Deep Purple, Silvertop, Observer and others have long been attempting to solve the mystery that is the RFI but for what? Almost every sensible theory put forward was immediately rubbished, instead we've been led down the path of downed Soviet satellites. British Telecom and secret microwave weapons technolgy, experimental radars, electronic warfare, EM, time travel, ET...you name it but of course, as soon as any likely satellite, weapon, radar, EM technology was found, that particular theory was immediately abandoned in favour of something else and usually something even more exteme and fanciful. In fact, virtually anything that would perpetuate the myth.

So what is it with December? Why can't you tell us now? Today. Is it because all will be revealed in the next History Channel or Discovery Channel documentary, Strange but True episode, film or book and you are under contract so cannot speak out? Or is it a case of thinking that those of us in Europe are as gullible as many in the USA?

Whereas previously I was quite prepared to give the witnesses credit for having to deal with a traumatic event, my position has changed. I now believe we - those of us interested in sensible, reasoned research from an ubiased professional perspective - are being strung along, fed a yarn, told any old tosh just as long as the invites to tv and radio interviews keep rolling in for those who were there and have taken it upon themselves to speak out. Good luck to Ian R and his lighthouse, Dave C and his folklore. Quite frankly they make far more sense than some of the stuff we are being fed now, In fact, I am much more inclined to believe (with the caveat of artistic licence combined with LW's inexperience at the time) that LW's LAEG is an accurate account of something seen by a young USAF airman, fresh out of training and on his first foreign draft.

One thing is for sure, the losers won't be those of us who have devoted time and effort to resolving the RFI. We weren't there so it matters not to us because we have nothing to gain either way. No financial incentives, no reputations to lose... nothing.

[AgentAppleseed]

Depending on the importance of this information, Im hoping that come December, there will be plenty of media attention drawn to this announcement. Ian Ridpath and David Clarke have had no shortage of spotlight when they announce what they have to say, so its only right the guys get their airtime too. Its been thirty years, personally speaking, another three months wont hurt! I just hope the guys have evaluated the information correctly, and I hope that they have come to a well thought out decision, on when to reveal it, and how!

[John Burroughs]

Who said anything about air time! Last time I checked when they film these shows everybody slips in does there work and moves on! Books are written behind the scenes and published! Jim and I are working on a time line of events as I type which we did promise and we will produce in December! We are planing on siting down with Admin while were there and answering any question that are given to us and give her a copy of our timeline to post! Were also willing to lead anybody who shows up on the 28th of December out into the woods where we had our encounter and talk about it! So we are going to do a full joint disclosure in December in England in the forrest where this all started! Last time I checked I stated it would not happen over night but we would do it! Sorry if its not good enough and I'm sorry if your theories have not solved what happened to us with your professional and unbiased help! Who has abandoned those theories that you talk about last time I checked what happened to us has not been solved!I guess the fact that what happened has been showen on different shows over the years must mean there is interest by the citizens of the world in what happened! And last time I checked the people who for the most part we have put in charge to lead these different countries will not tell us the truth on what is happening to all of us not just what happened to us at Woodbridge!If what were doing in Decemeber is not good enough so be it but we will be there and we will be issuing a full joint disclosure on what we know with a timeline! I'm sorry if your frustrated in awayway and that we have been unable to solve what happened to us 30 years ago!

[Frank]

Will you come up with a solution to the fact that Jim remembers a full 45 min investigation, taking notes, pictures, and touching the craft while you just remember a brief encounter with something that takes off after a couple of minutes? Both of you claim you were together when this happened. And will you explain when and where Jim's investigation of the craft took place? And what Ed and you were doing during this time? And how it all fits with the timeline of the original witness statements? And why both Jim's notebook and Halt's memo are dated December 27 while the witness statements and police log are dated December 26?

These are the only parts of the timeline that need to be resolved. The rest is old news. Without solving these inconsitensies this case will remain in its present state: It will only be accepted by a gullible audience in the fringes of society. This would be maddening if Jim really stood eye to eye with a "craft of unknown origin". It would be justice if this case is just a bag of embellished witness statements.

[John Burroughs]

Will give it our best shot and maybe there is a little more than that to add at the risk of us seeking fortune and fame. I'm glad your able to decide that what were talking about is based only towards the audience that is gullible and on the fringes of society! That sounds alot like what Ian said about he could not meet us out there because the people who would be there could not be trusted would turn it into a circus

[Admin]

The rest of Jim and John's statement has been added to the first post.

We are planing on siting down with Admin while were there and answering any question that are given to us and give her a copy of our timeline to post!

Thanks, John. Please let me know where and when the event(s) will be held, when you have it all worked out. Also, I'm a him.

[John Burroughs]

Admin
Sorry I had been told that the person running the forum was a female! For now we could meet with you on the 28th in the early afternoon if your available and go over everthing will let you know when we have a site to meet at! As the statement you just posted say's we will do our best to clear up as much as we can on the 28th for everybody not just the audience that is must gullable and on the fringes of society and we trully hope the people there will not turn this into a circus as some have stated will happen! Jim and I would like to thank you for having this forum available for us to come on and talk about what happened to us. Hope to see you in December! John and Jim

[JamesLA]

Both John and Jim, you have my full support at whatever conclusion you mutually agree upon. I think I speak for most when I say all we want is the truth no matter where that might take us. It is important for everyone to approach this with a critical yet open mind. For anyone upset that it isn't revealed until the December event, you have to understand that is the most logical time when they will all be together to work out a disclosure and compare notes. -James

[larry warren]

Free Beer ! Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[ncf1]

I think the detractors need to look at certain things before sulking that 100% clear cut evidence isn't handed to them on a silver platter :

Firstly, these guys are still avidly and openly debating, with obvious frustration and annoyances of their own, about an event that happened to them over 30 years ago. Their frustration is palbable; moreso even that the debunkers, doubters and detractors, and it hardly looks like any kind of conspiracy formed by them for their own "benefits".
Secondly, the very fact that the evidences and facts *are* so varied speaks more for truth than anything else - if it was something they'd planned and devised prior you'd think that at least they'd get a few very simple facts straight, like how long they'd been with the craft. The fact that there were distortions in time/space/memories a la T. Walton, Allagash, the Hills ad infinitum only lends credence in my opinion to the fact that something well and truly unknown to the involved parties did actually happen to them.
Thirdly, these guys don't ever look like they are doing this for fun, not ever. Penniston, Halt, Warren and Burroughs whom appear most often in doco's and also radio broadcasts look and sound as if they'd rather be a million miles away, doing something - anything else. Furthermore, these men are obvioulsy reliable, trained, clearly spoken men who appear rattled, just as confused as anyone else, and they say it as it is - regardless as to whether evidence is corroborated or not. It's difficult to remember the exact spot I parked my car yesterday in the lot, let alone a woods, in the dark, 30+ years ago. But these guys are still trying, trying to figure out what's going on.
You'll get your nutjobs who want a bit of fame claiming they saw a saucer. But I dont think you will see them fiercely contesting it decades on amongst themselves for no gain whatsoever - surely it would get tiresome after even a couple of months. Who would want to brand themselves as UFO nutters? Well maybe some sorts, but these guys look and sound the complete and utter opposite.

Just some thoughts anyway. Who doesn't want to get to the bottom of this, just hopefully every piece of evidence eventually gets out and some kind of bigger picture can be made out of it, before its too late. Roswell became a shambles and now there's just about no-one left to discuss it, thankfully the guys involved in the RFI are being very active and are also wanting to resolve what is without question on of the very biggest mysteries of our time.

[Ignis Fatuus]

I think the people that you call 'detractors' are those that have looked at the evidence more closely than you might think. In many cases I bet the 'detractors' started off along the RFI trail with a genuine fascination. It almost takes more of an open mind to reach the end of the trail as a 'detractor' than as a believer. Yet all it takes is a close scroot of the original evidence... rather than the ever evolving sci-fi mash-up that it has become
One man and his driver see a 'very bright falling star'...another man yells out over the radio “There’s a UFO out here!”. Why do we hear more from the easily exitable, over reacting UFO guy than the level headed falling star guy?...oh yeah...that's entertainment.

How many hollow centered winking eyes were seen by Halt? Shouldn't he have seen two? Why didn't he see the other hollow centered winking eye, that the Gold Panner stood in front of during his piece to camera?

How unique was the 'landing site' and depressions? Would a craft with helicopterish skids, as depicted by Penniston's drawing, leave such depressions.

How could such highly trained uniforms make such a mistake? Umm everybody makes mistakes and I doubt they were trained in objectively investigating fireballs and lighthouses at night. Is approaching Brenda Butler in the manual? How could such a highly trained professional let himself be trailed by Chuckles Jnr...and what was Chuckles Jnr up to anyway?

[ncf1]

yes.. you effectively managed to ignore absolutely everything I put forward.

These guys are still vehemently arguing something of a profound, unsettling, and deeply disturbing nature that happened to them and afflicted them psychologically and more. Over 30 years ago. If it didn't afflict to such a degree, you'd most likely tend to give up after a few months. It is unfathomable that these guys would still passionately debate what happened to them freely and openly decades later, its just completely ludicrous. To suggest that these guys are all romantic sci-fi fantasists with nothing better to do is completely absurd.

[Frank]

Yet all it takes is a close scroot of the original evidence... rather than the ever evolving sci-fi mash-up that it has become

If you talk about ‘evidence’ in this case, you also need to answer the question: ‘evidence for what - what is the claim?’

Let’s look at the statements by John and Jim at the top of this thread:

The facts are this, in thirty years, the statements from the Command element say this;
1. Something happened they could not explain.
2. A metallic craft of some sort was observed in Rendlesham by Penniston.
3. Burroughs and Penniston, were not treated fairly with the reporting of this incident.
4. A craft of some sort was observed to land and take off.

So this is the ‘claim’ that needs to be backed up by evidence.

Now let’s search the original witness statements for this evidence:

Halt’s memo (which is a summary of the reports he got from the primary witnesses):
The individuals reported seeing a strange glowing object in the forest. The object was described as being metallic in appearance and triangular in shape, approximately two to three meters across the base and approximately two meters high. It illuminated the entire forest with a white light. The object itself had a pulsing red light on top and a bank(s) of blue lights underneath. The object was hovering or on legs. As the patrolmen approached the object, it maneuvered through the trees and disappeared. (…) The next day, three depressions 1.5 inches deep and 7 inches in diameter were found where the object had been sighted on the ground.

Penniston’s statement:
When we got within a 50 m distance, the object was producing red and blue light. (…) At this point of positive identification I relayed to CSC, SSgt Coffey. Positive sighting of object…1…color of lights and that it was definitely mechanical in nature. (…) It moved in a zig-zagging manner back through the wood then lost sight of it.

Burrough’s statement:
All three of us hit the ground and whatever it was started moving back towards the open field and after a minute or two we got up and moved into the trees and the lights moved out into the open field. We got up to a fence that separated the trees from the open field and you could see the lights down by a farmer’s house. We climbed over the fence and started heading towards the red and blue lights and they just disappeared.

Cabansag’s statement:
We were about 100 meters from the edge of the forest when I saw a quick movement, it look visible for a moment. It look like it spun left a quarter of a turn, then it was gone.

Buran’s statement:
I monitored their progress as they entered the wooded area. They appeared to get very close to the lights and at one point SSgt Penniston stated that it was a definite mechanical object. (…) I am convinced that he saw something out of the realm of explanation for him at that time. I would like to state at this time that SSgt Penniston is a totally reliable and mature individual.

Chandler’s statement:
On one occasion Penniston relayed that he was close enough to determine that it was definitely a mechanical object. He stated that he was approximately within 50 meters.

So there is ample evidence in the original documents (and the original drawings by Jim and John) that some mechanical object was seen that exhibited red and blue lights and that was able to fly and maneuver itself away from the witnesses. On top of that, this object could not be identified by the witnesses. This is precisely what Jim and John have stated above.

A meteor, space debris or a lighthouse in the distance simply do not fit these observations. Yes, the lighthouse is mentioned in the witness statements, too. This was bound to happen on such a night, but it was already identified from a distance as a beacon light (not a mechanical object) and definitely identified as the lighthouse when they got closer. Moreover, it was identified as such already on the first night so why send out a whole patrol on the third night then?

Some people think that the three men tried to cover up the embarrassing misidentification of a lighthouse with a UFO story. To me that sounds like trying to prevent a speeding ticket by telling the police officer you just murdered someone – it works, but does it help? A much simpler story like poachers that were scared off would be much more effective to cover up a misidentified light house. A UFO story in such a case would only make things worse.

So, there is a solid case that some unidentified mechanical object was seen that exhibited red and blue lights and that was able to fly and maneuver itself away from the witnesses. There is also no doubt that this event had a big impact on the witnesses.


The problems with ‘evidence’ only start with later interviews, TV shows, and books, containing additional revelations by the witnesses. It is simply a matter of opinion how one interprets these additional revelations. Some see them as embellishments to achieve fame and glory, some see them as indications that a lot more happened but the witnesses kept it to themselves until their retirement for fear of their career and of being ridiculed, some as memories that may have been clouded over the years, distorted by hypnotic regression or even by interrogation techniques. Even the witnesses themselves sometimes seem confused at this point.

Everybody has to make up their own mind on how to interpret the additional information that has been added to this case over the years. To me, Jim’s notebook and his recollections of a close encounter and the take-off are the most important elements of the first night. The possibility that a human being is able to give a detailed description of a non-human craft, the way it took off, and even took notes of the symbols engraved on it has much potential value to our understanding of the UFO phenomenon. The fact that John has different memories and that John’s memories better fit the original witness statements makes me (and a lot of other people) have doubts on how factual Jim’s story really is. However, I do not doubt Jim’s sincerity and do not think for a moment he is deliberately embellishing. There are many other possible reasons why his story differs from that of John. Maybe he is not allowed to reveal certain information, maybe something happened to John, maybe time or consciousness was distorted by the UFO in a way we cannot conceive, maybe memories have been suppressed, maybe the men are holding back the most bizarre facts because they think these might hurt their credibility, maybe …

Hopefully they will resolve this issue once and for all in the near future.

[JamesLA]

Those are great points you raise Frank. I often read the skeptic's views on this case, and I'm often left shaking my head. They have the attitude
that they can explain it all by being stars, a light house, or meteor. First of all, these skeptics were never even there to witness what happened
first-hand, and yet they feel they have all the answers. I'm convinced something extraordinary happened on those nights in December 1980. I
would give far more credence to the explanation given by those first-hand eyewitnesses than the 'so called experts' who do 'Monday morning quarterbacking', and
who didn't remotely experience that night what eighty military personnel experienced.