The landing site [later general discussion]

[puddlepirate]

I'm free to meet up next weekend - Satuday or Sunday, either is OK.

[John Burroughs]

Andy i had been posted at east gate or down at east gate on patrol at night more times than I can remember over the year and half I had been stationed there. I had never seen anything like that before. Also one more thing Ian please explain the blue light that sent a beame down at Halt's feet and the blue light that flew over my head and shoot past us and went through a pickup truck plus made the lightallls come on. It was not the lighthouse. Give up on that please I to this day can't say if it was man made ie military testing or from somewhere else but it was not the lighthouse or stars or stationary objects. These objects flew at us beamed lights at us lit up a large area and moved up into the sky. It seems everytime somthing moves forword the same people come out and state the same crap with no backup ie what we the people who were out there saw. look at what the military could have been doing to cause this and you will find part of the answer and you can still say it was not ailiens......

[Observer]

Hi redsocks/John Burroughs
RS first.
I hope you/we can all get together for a chat and pint, but all my weekends are tied up for the near future, but please don't let this stop you. There is a slim possibility that i might make it there and back in a day but it would have to be this Sunday.
JB.
As for theories, i'm pretty confident that one of our many theories put foward on this forum, may be a long time ago or even more recently has been damn close to what happened and we have just left it as a non runner and moved on to new ideas. This i am sure of.
I fully understand the frustration John Burrough's is having and i will continue to look on his behalf for an explanation to this mystery, so John keep the faith as we are not all in the light house camp.
Observer

[IanR]

Ian please explain the blue light that sent a beame down at Halt's feet and the blue light that flew over my head and shoot past us and went through a pickup truck plus made the lightallls come on. It was not the lighthouse.

No it was not the lighthouse and I have never suggested it was.

The “beam down to at their feet” is a subsequent elaboration by Halt. If you listen to the tape the reality is more prosaic:
“03:15.  Now we’ve got an object about 10 degrees directly south, 10 degrees off the horizon.  And the ones to the north are moving.  One’s moving away from us.
“Now we’re observing what appears to be a beam coming down to the ground.
“03:30 and the objects are still in the sky, although the one to the south looks like it’s losing a little bit of altitude. We’re turning around and heading back toward the base.
“The object to the south is still beaming down lights to the ground.
“04:00 hours.  One object still hovering over Woodbridge base at about five to ten degrees off the horizon, still moving erratic and similar lights and beaming down as earlier.”

Now, if there had been beams coming down to their feet I would expect such a remarkable event to have been recorded on the tape, but it isn’t.

It is sometimes suggested that the objects in the sky were scanning the Weapons Storage Area. However, we know that there was no WSA at Woodbridge, although there was one at Bentwaters, which was to the north. So this object to the south “beaming down lights” wasn't even in the right direction to be over the WSA.

Those familiar with the way in which celestial objects are misperceived have no difficulty concluding that these bright starlike objects which hovered in the sky for hours, fading out with the dawn, were indeed stars. The one to the south (actually the southwest), as I have repeatedly explained, matches the position of Sirius, the brightest star in the sky, which twinkles colourfully when close to the horizon.

I don’t know what your blue light was as I have no independent confirmation of what you saw.

Ian

[John Burroughs]

I was with Halt when the beams were shining into the storage area. Also I beleive he could he not turn the tape on and off and if I am not mistaken he stated a one pointe this is unreal. Plus I also note the fact you like to add things that you feel people are thinking or saying to fit your therory. There was allot more that happened than was on Halts tape that released to the general public and I find it strange that you wont look at anything else but your lighthouse and star therory. I have nothing to gain from being on here but opening up myself to take crap and sometimes it just makes me want to puck when people like James Mageha Easton and others hide behind there computer screens and the TV camera playing arm chair quaterback telling people what they saw. Easton droped out of this after I asked him certain military questions and was slowley destroying his theroy. Mageha has no Idea what he is talking about I had the pleasure of going one on one on a radio show with him and he is clueless he even claims he knows what our security procedures were not even close The guys who were out there know what they saw and it was not what you our laying out plain and simple. I have said what I have to say. By no means does that mean I feel you should not be saying what you are saying or stateing your case its just plain and simple your wrong and before I am finished I will prove it. That is why I am here because there are people who want to look at every possible angle not just one and our like me searching for the truth damm those stars and that lighthouse.....

[Observer]

Both RAF Woodbridge and Bentwaters had WSA = Weapons Storage Area.
Only Bentwaters had nuclear weapons in their WSA.

John, as i said to you before, not all of us are are in the 'moon beam' camp so don't get too disheartened, we are on your side.
Obs

[ghaynes]

Both RAF Woodbridge and Bentwaters had WSA = Weapons Storage Area.
Only Bentwaters had nuclear weapons in their WSA.
Obs

Hi Obs,
Just to clarify a bit of [confusing] terminology:
Both Bentwaters and Woodbridge had a CAS - Conventional Ammunition Store
Only Bentwaters had a WSA - Weapon Storage Area (term used to indicate 'nuclear' storage facilities).

Re. the meet-up. If you all make it this Sunday, the museum at Bentwaters will be open as well. You could kill two birds with one stone.....so to speak
Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

Thanks Graham
Yes i remembered after my post, hence it was confusing in a previous post where the term WSA was used when talking about RAF Woodbridge.
The bottom line is, there were no nukes at Woodbridge.
Perhaps puddle can get every body to meet this Sunday, i'm now up for it but only this Sunday.
Your BWCWM would be a good place to meet but i'm hoping that we can all meet at lunch time at a local pub for a bite to eat first. The Cherry Tree being quite near to Bentwaters.
I'm not sure i would have the time to wonder round the forest as well, plus the old hip is playing up.
Obs

[IanR]

I also note the fact you like to add things that you feel people are thinking or saying to fit your therory. There was allot more that happened than was on Halts tape

On the contrary. I have always made a point of sticking as far as possible to the documentary evidence at the time, which is to say the witness statements by yourself, JimP and EdC, the local police file and the tape by Halt. Where people have added detail afterwards, such as yourself, JimP and Halt, I have tried to make this clear, and to point out contradictions with the original versions.

I am sure you are an honest witness. Where we differ is over the interpretation of what you saw and experienced.

A recording of the security comms traffic on Halt’s night in the forest would indeed help fill in some of the gaps and might help resolve the different points of view. If Halt does indeed have this tape I am sure we are all agreed that he should be encouraged to release it as soon as possible, particularly now that he has got himself involved in “disclosure” campaigns such as at the one held recently at the National Press Club. Would it not be ironic if he were the one to be holding back on the most significant information?

Ian

"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data.
Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories,
instead of theories to suit facts."

Sherlock Holmes, via Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

[ghaynes]

Thanks Graham
Yes i remembered after my post, hence it was confusing in a previous post where the term WSA was used when talking about RAF Woodbridge.
The bottom line is, there were no nukes at Woodbridge.
Perhaps puddle can get every body to meet this Sunday, i'm now up for it but only this Sunday.
Your BWCWM would be a good place to meet but i'm hoping that we can all meet at lunch time at a local pub for a bite to eat first. The Cherry Tree being quite near to Bentwaters.
I'm not sure i would have the time to wonder round the forest as well, plus the old hip is playing up.
Obs

Hi Obs,
I was suggesting a visit to the museum after the pub etc. if there is time.

Graham

[Dave100]

I would like to thank John for his comments first of all,after all he was actually there so like all the other witnesses their testimony is priceless in such a complex set of events.Of course witnesses will add things later as they recall further details and feel less constraint to do so when given the heavy handed approach by certain individuals to keep this clamped down and covered up,the threats to some of the security policeman and being forced to change their statements under considerable pressure.Being young men in general they were probably greatly intimidated at the time.As time goes by they become more comfortable about talking about it and therefore more witnesses come forward over time with additional important details so you can't just go on what was said at the time,be it sanatised written statements or heavily edited audio tapes.
Colonel Halt told Georgina Bruni he had several more hours of audio from the events and said they would never be released for public consumption,we can only presume they are extremely sensative in content and may bring other people into the events who have denied involvement previously,the tapes probably contain some dramatic infomation.
As regards the WSA,woodbridge certainly has one and can be seen from the main road but better still from the small track(great fun on a bike!) which runs right along the side of the WSA until it means the official cycle trail.
The WSA looks very similar to the Bentwaters one but that is more central to the base and would make sense that the nukes were kept there I suppose well away from any roads unlike Woodbridge,its also seems more sheltered to me,I never knew that Woodbridge didn't store weapons only ammo though until now.
I must be unlucky but I've never seen the lighthouse from the forest in over ten years of visiting apart from going out to Orfordness,I thought that theory had been put to bed by now,ah well obviously not,bloody strange lighthouse that Jim Penniston walked around!
As regards stars etc etc you would have thought highly trained individuals such as Colonel Halt and his men would have recognised them as such after several hours,as regards the beams coming down to the ground in front of them,you have to accept thats what happened as they said,they were there,we were not.I think some witnesses must be pretty peeved to be told what they saw after all this time,yes there are interesting natural things in the sky but that doesn't explain the profound affect it had on these men over three nights and many hours.Also there is the new witness from the WSA at Woodbridge who saw the"ufo's" and the beams of light as stated in the ufo hunters documentary.

[puddlepirate]

I'm happy to meet up this Sunday. I'll have to bring my partner, my neice and my sister in law along because my neice and sister in law have just informed me they are arriving on Saturday for a short visit so I can hardly suddenly disappear for the day, plus if they come then my partner will want to come (women are as suspicious as anything and will convince themselves I'm seeing another woman or something if I don't bring them along.....). That said I'm sure they would like to see the BCWM because my bro is mad about aircraft and they can take some phots home to him....if not, they quite like pubs anyway.

If we are going to meet for lunch then go on to the museum we'd need to meet around 1130/1200 ish....

[Observer]

Dave
I have to agree with some of your comments, If i witnessed an unusual event only to be told by some 'armchair' expert who i had never met that i was wrong, i would be pretty pissed off. You see
the feelings of our frustrated witnesses such as John Burroughs never seem to be taken into account when certain people slag off his honest FIRST HAND account.
Also, have you noticed that some of these so called experts seem to be expert in everything, from star gazing, Psychology, geology, Horticulture, weather, proof reading, radiation, the life cycle of the Douglas Pine tree, the general working structure of the USAF, writing articles on just about anything and all things that emit light.
I wish i had all those skills.
Obs

[puddlepirate]

Just a thought regarding beams - some obviously came down, e.g. the one JB refers to - but those more distant, could they have been beams going up? Somebody looking for something overflying the base? There is a photograph of a famous incident over LA circa 1942....several floodlights are pointed towards something in the sky and ack-ack is let loose to try an shoot down whatever it was. I think they might have named it the Battle of LA. The point is, that if the photo had been retitled 'alien craft illuminates LA with beams of light' it could easily have been mistaken for that because in the photo the beams appear to be coming down from a central point....just a thought.

One other query; If Halt was in the forest or in the field beyond, he could only guesstimate that the beam(s) were coming down on to the base - he couldn't pinpoint what they were shining down onto with any accuracy because he wouldn't have been able to see the base through the trees, surely? Also, the beam must have started somewhere and if the beam was coming down, then the origin of the beam must have been in the sky so the point from which the beam originated could be seen, could it not? The nightsight he had with him (why did he take a nightsight with him? He had some pretty odd kit in his desk for an admin officer...night sight, geiger counter, tape recorder? What on earth did he administer that would require all that?) would have revealed more......odd he didn't use it, after all he used it in the forest on the red light.

PS....I'm not absolutely sure but I've been told that if you balance on one leg, then stand on tiptoe, on a chair placed at the extreme edge of the south western corner of the farmer's field, with the wind coming in from the east at about a force three, you can just see the lights of the helter skelter on the end Brighton's East Pier. It's just visible through a gap in the trees but only from an area within two degrees of arc. Move outside that and it's gone from view . There must be a phot somewhere.....

[Observer]

Puddle
I think i'm up for it plus wife, name the pub, say 11.30 for 12 noon. The Cherry Tree is good and quite near to BW but if others prefer another, i will go with the flow.
Obs

[Observer]

Puddle
I think apart from Halt's personel tape recoder which he admits to carrying on duty all other items were just drawn out of stores by the incident team on Halt's orders.
I take issue with you on the Brighton pier. I was told you had to walk 30 degrees East from the nearest tree to the farm house. When you reached the Oak tree in the field, climb it for about 10m and you will see at 42 degrees due South West a large telescope sticking out of a house roof in Brentford. Adjacent to the telescope and chimny's on the roof you will see on a clear night a perfect scale model of Orfordness light house, complete with flashing beacon but i have it on good authority that Heathrow are none too pleased.
Obs

[Robert McLean]

Now, if there had been beams coming down to their feet I would expect such a remarkable event to have been recorded on the tape, but it isn’t

Ian, to be fair, the transcript reads:

HALT: Yeah, they're both headin’ north. Well,(with alarm) Hey! Here he comes from the south. He's coming toward us now!
VOICE 2: Shit.
<BREAK>
HALT: Now we're observing what appears to be a beam a coming down to the ground!
SHOUT IN BACKGROUND: Colors! [?]
HALT: (clearly shaken) This is unreal.

Halt was clearly shaken by whatever it was he had seen and it is reasonable to assume that this was because the beam he refers to was close by, rather than 3 or 4 miles away in the weapons storage areas of Woodbridge or Bentwaters.

I was with Halt when the beams were shining into the storage area.

John, I thought that you were not with Halt on the expedition he taped, and that you had asked to come out to join him but that permission was denied. The transcript of the tape at about 6 minutes 40 seconds reads:

BACKGROUND RADIO COMMUNICATION:...[unclear] We have Burroughs and two other personnel requesting a ride up on a jeep at, uh, the location.
BALL: Tell them negative at this time. We'll tell them when they can come out here. We don't want ‘em out here right now.

Halt has gone on record saying that lights came down in the weapons storage area but I do not know that he has ever claimed he was there when this happened. Perhaps I am wrong - does anyone else know more about this?

John, which night did you see the beams shine into the WSA, and how sure are you that Halt was there?

[IanR]

Ian, to be fair, the transcript reads:
HALT: Now we're observing what appears to be a beam a coming down to the ground!
SHOUT IN BACKGROUND: Colors! [?]
HALT: (clearly shaken) This is unreal.

That was at 3.15, according to the timing on Halt's tape. But the sightings went on, as he describes:
>>
HALT: 03:30 and the objects are still in the sky, although the one to the south looks like it’s losing a little bit of altitude. We’re turning around and heading back toward the base.

HALT: The object to the south is still beaming down lights to the ground.

HALT: 04:00 hours. One object still hovering over Woodbridge base at about five to ten degrees off the horizon, still moving erratic and similar lights and beaming down as earlier.
>>
So the "beaming down" continued for at least 45 minutes. No mention of any beams coming down to their feet, though.

Let's also look at what he says in his memo:
"three star-like objects were noticed in the sky, two objects to the north and one to the south, all of which were about 10 degrees off the horizon. The objects moved rapidly in sharp, angular movements and displayed red, green and blue lights. The objects to the north appeared to be elliptical through an 8-12 power lens. They then turned to full circles. The objects to the north remained in the sky for an hour or more. The object to the south was visible for two or three hours and beamed down a stream of light from time to time."

Now, what appears starlike, twinkles colours, remains in the sky for hours on end, and gradually loses altitude (or "sets", as we say)? It really isn't difficult...

Ian
PS: Stuck? See here for clues:
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham3.htm

[puddlepirate]

IanR quoted what Halt said:

"three star-like objects were noticed in the sky, two objects to the north and one to the south, all of which were about 10 degrees off the horizon. The objects moved rapidly in sharp, angular movements and displayed red, green and blue lights. The objects to the north appeared to be elliptical through an 8-12 power lens. They then turned to full circles.

Ian, I am not an astronomer but I see stars in the night sky as most people do. I've had a look outside tonight and it's clear so there a quite a few. I've watched for a while and none of them, not one, moves rapidly in sharp, angular movements nor do they display red, green and blue lights nor do any of them appear elliptical or turn full circles. The inference of your statement

Now, what appears starlike, twinkles colours, remains in the sky for hours on end, and gradually loses altitude (or "sets", as we say)? It really isn't difficult...

is that these are stars...could you enlighten us and define exactly which stars these might be and in what part of the sky they can be seen so that we can see these for ourselves?

Thanks

[IanR]

could you enlighten us and define exactly which stars these might be and in what part of the sky they can be seen so that we can see these for ourselves?

I gave the reference in my last post:
Stuck? See here for clues:
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham3.htm

Ian