"US DoD have confirmed the UFO phenomenon is real"

a reply to: mirageman

True Mirage about the Yanks working out of there as a dual base and yet, I am told there was always a British presence to do with back up and installations on Woodbridge and guess who works out of there nowadays? It's been split into two, one part of it called the "Rock Barracks" are home to the newly formed 23 Engineer Regiment (Air Assault) of the Royal Engineers. Who does Richard D Hall claim his informant worked for during his time on "UFO retrieval"? Are we to believe that the designation 23 is just total coincidence as well or........ ?

a reply to: FireMoon

It would make sense that a British unit was stationed there even if just for liaison type purposes and also remind the Americans they were guests of ours!

But it certainly wouldn't have needed any Brits to be stationed there for an experiment to be taking place . I do consider the idea of some kind of tracking experiment gone haywire as feasible. UFO stories rarely last for 2 days, never mind 3 so maybe we were out there and to this day have kept schtum about it all so as not to upset our best friends?

But then again there was that lighthouse wasn't there?

originally posted by: mirageman
Aah things we were so much simpler back in October 1983.

Apart from having the chance to crunch my way through a packet Spangles again, I prefer the 'now'.

We got the Mail on Sunday (don't even get me started...) in our house. The Sun weekdays. My Mum and Step-Dad voted Thatcher in for her second term that year. I'd hold it against them if I hadn't voted for Blair twice. Bastard spin doctors and their tripping the light fantastic harnessing my youthful malcontent...anyhoo, I digress. In 1983 I was eleven, October of that year, a month into a new secondary school. Between raging hormones and formative experiences, it was a character building year that one. Suffice to say, I remember nothing about a UFO. Sorry.

This is all new to me.

I've been pondering this one since last night, since reading the interview with Bustinza.

Bustinza and Warren stood beside each other (or in close relative proximity to each other). They both saw a craft. They both saw Halt stood beside the craft talking. That is where they agree.

mirageman has posted the craft that Warren saw. Bustinza described though a flat pancake saucer with lots of lights. A craft similar to one he had seen on a previous occasion while stationed in California.

Warren describes Halt as stood talking to some beings or people. Bustinza sees Halt talking but doesn't see who he is talking to, or believes him to be talking to thin air.

Evidently, MAOIs are standardly administered as a preventative to those who regularly work around EMFs, against the oxidative effects. I don't know whether they are also used as a post-exposure treatment. It's the best explanation that I have got so far for Warren and Bustinza's accounts though. Doesn't explain the lights themselves, or the EMF/NIEMR that the base was exposed to, but it could explain the trippiness of night three.

a reply to: Anaana

Besides the nostalgia for Spangles and the days of Flock of Seagulls, Duran Duran, Spandau Ballet, New Order and the like I could read the headline of every newspaper for free. Yes - I was "in the newsprint business" during the 1980s . LOL!It was different times though and the flow of information was nothing like it is today.

So yes. Adrian Bustinza was definitely out in the forest that night. He can be heard on the Halt Tape calling in as Alpha Two (I think) . He has also confirmed Larry Warren was out there with him that night. Colonel Halt's version of events is a little different and claimed Bustinza was with him the whole time during a recent interview in an effort to discredit Larry Warren (yet again). Although it seems impossible as Bustinza is radioing in to Halt from elsewhere. So he couldn't have been with him the whole time.

Have you listened to the Halt Tape by they way?

Here is a transcript of the tape

With the audio below:



Only 18 mins of verbal notes were recorded from the approx 3-4 hours out in the forest. But it is the one piece of evidence available that was recorded as things were happening on 28th/29th Dec 1980.

a reply to: mirageman

The transcript was one of the first things that I read, I hadn't listened to the tape until you just posted it.

Halt's breathing is really laboured. I am trying to leave preconceptions aside, but he's under the influence of something. I'd swear to some slurring early on. From the written transcript I hadn't appreciated quite how off his face Halt sounds. The other guys seem to get more and more caught up in his laid back wonder. I'm gobsmacked. And even more intrigued.

At 10:03 ish there is a cut in over the recording, "He took this long to doc..." I thought that was kind of interesting too. Clearly someone made a report on the recording in some capacity, any sign of that anywhere, given that Bentwaters PR were saying there had been no official investigation? Someone seems to be making comment on how long Halt took to document the 'landing scene', was there a performance report for the 'exercise' or 'incident'? Or is that comment from some later edit and the comment is from a journalist or some such? Any pointers?

a reply to: Anaana

Well Halt had been at a "Combat Awards Dinner" during the evening so it is possible he had absorbed a little Xmas spirit!
The tape was also recorded on a micro-cassette and so may have been warped by time before we all went digital.

I had a listen to one of my old Flock of Seagulls tapes from the time and it hasn't aged too well either.



But the video is certainly interesting (see what I did there ). The song lyrics even mention "Computer says it's a binary code it's just a pity I can't understand it"). Perhaps Jim Penniston was a big Seagulls fan?

The "He took this long to doc..." is possibly one of his senior officers Gordon Williams or Ted Conrad. As to what the whole sentence was ???????????? But Halt did not write his famous memo up until mid January. So it could be related to that?

You can also hear part of his daughter's piano recital on the tape as well!

originally posted by: mirageman

But the video is certainly interesting (see what I did there

)

Good grief, that hurt my ribs. Uncanny. I looked it up, modelled on The Day the Earth Stood Still...with a contemporary feel. Love it. Thanks for that.

originally posted by: mirageman
The "He took this long to doc..." is possibly one of his senior officers Gordon Williams or Ted Conrad. As to what the whole sentence was ???????????? But Halt did not write his famous memo up until mid January. So it could be related to that?

You can also hear part of his daughter's piano recital on the tape as well!

Ahhh...that's what that was.

I suppose he could have been tiddly, but he seems to be short of breath too, and a little bit daydreamy, certain things seem to get him a little bit rapt and he has to shake himself loose. Like with the sap 'crystals' and later with the red light. He sounds 'stoned'.

Actually, you know what it makes me think of, altitude training, where you can almost see the thought struggle through a fog to speech. Could be an alcohol fog as opposed to a drug or NIEMR induced one I suppose. I don't think the alcohol would cover the shortness of breath though.

a reply to: Anaana

I don't know. I suspect that the Deputy Base Commander would need to be making speeches at an awards party so perhaps would have refrained from too many drinks beforehand. But I think it was fairly late by the time he and his posse went walkabout. So for all I know he could well have acquainted himself with Jack Daniels, Jim Beam, Glenn Morangie and possibly even Napoleon by then .

I am being a bit light hearted tonight. But it is possible Halt was intoxicated because he was not meant to be on duty that night. At one point he says something like "Is that all the bigger they are?" and stumbles through a few other phrases.

originally posted by: Anaana
a reply to: spacevisitor


Bustinza's account, painstakingly extracted from him by Fawcett, while structurally comparable to Warren's differs drastically in key areas. Fascinatingly so.

Hi Anaana, about which key areas do you speak of here?

a reply to: spacevisitor

Hi spacevisitor, I list them in a follow on post, here...

originally posted by: Anaana
I've been pondering this one since last night, since reading the interview with Bustinza.

Bustinza and Warren stood beside each other (or in close relative proximity to each other). They both saw a craft. They both saw Halt stood beside the craft talking. That is where they agree.

mirageman has posted the craft that Warren saw. Bustinza described though a flat pancake saucer with lots of lights. A craft similar to one he had seen on a previous occasion while stationed in California.

Warren describes Halt as stood talking to some beings or people. Bustinza sees Halt talking but doesn't see who he is talking to, or believes him to be talking to thin air.

Evidently, MAOIs are standardly administered as a preventative to those who regularly work around EMFs, against the oxidative effects. I don't know whether they are also used as a post-exposure treatment. It's the best explanation that I have got so far for Warren and Bustinza's accounts though. Doesn't explain the lights themselves, or the EMF/NIEMR that the base was exposed to, but it could explain the trippiness of night three.

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: Anaana

I don't know. I suspect that the Deputy Base Commander would need to be making speeches at an awards party so perhaps would have refrained from too many drinks beforehand. But I think it was fairly late by the time he and his posse went walkabout. So for all I know he could well have acquainted himself with Jack Daniels, Jim Beam, Glenn Morangie and possibly even Napoleon by then

.

Perhaps he was slipped a Mickey. Who was at this award ceremony?

originally posted by: mirageman
I am being a bit light hearted tonight. But it is possible Halt was intoxicated because he was not meant to be on duty that night. At one point he says something like "Is that all the bigger they are?" and stumbles through a few other phrases.

If he wasn't fit for duty it was his duty not to report for duty.

I don't think, if he was as drunk as he sounds to me to be, that he would have been out there, and his subordinates would have noticed that he was the worse for wear surely. I don't think he was drunk, unless they were all drunk, or all rationally impaired in some other way. He's definately short of breath though. Nothing to move me from there yet.

For those new to the Rendlesham case thne this is well worth a watch. It's long however, it is worth the effort, I don't necessarily agree with everything said or the conclusions then again, at least the guy does his work properly and thoroughly and speaks from personal experience of certain routines within the military.

a reply to: Anaana

I think we could say Colonel Halt had probably enjoyed his Christmas and probably a substantial meal at the awards dinner. It was also a little above freezing out in the forest. So it was probably a combination of all those things plus his nervous tension after everything going on over the previous nights causing his rather exasperated dialogue on the tape.

Peter Brookesmith wrote up a fairly damning assessment of Colonel Halt's expedition into Rendlesham Forest featuring in Tim Printy's excellent (and free!) Sunlite magazine.

Excerpt from Sunlite Magazine

Firstly he had no place being out there on UK land. Burroughs, Penniston and Cabansag, supposedly searching for a downed aircraft had 'just cause' on the first night. Halt was risking a diplomatic incident and being in breach of "trespassing" on British territory.

Here's a short excerpt:

Halt was fortunate in having his expedition viewed kindly by men of experience and insight. One says ‘fortunate’ because neither the officers nor the enlisted men around him seem to have formed an especially high opinion of Lt Col Charles Ignis Halt.

Col Sam Morgan called him “a kind of twit” in his 1984 conversation with Phil Klass.

Halt was a bit like the boy scout who never grew up and was out looking for some kind of attention or excitement.”

Halt’s now-famous habit of riding around at night with security 0police patrols would certainly suggest a certain Walter
Mittyish tendency. Regarding this, Col Morgan commented: “I was concerned that he would usurp Major [Mal] Zickler’s authority and often spoke with Major Zickler to ensure he was not irritated by Halt’s actions. As long as Maj. Zickler could tolerate Halt’s meddling and as long as Halt did not compromise his job performance, I did not interfere.”

.........

And Col Morgan’s take today on Halt’s story is this:

'Halt was meddling as usual and went to check things out. Halt was over reacting when on the scene and it was recorded on a pocket tape recorder. I got this tape and... [it] started a story which, for Halt,
shined a light on him. He could have addressed the facts or he could have inflated the story. He chose to inflate the story.

Soon the story was much bigger than he expected and he does not now have a graceful way out'......

I think we need to balance that up by saying that many of the airmen saw Colonel Halt as a 'hands on' Colonel and appreciated his ability to mix with the lower ranks and understand their roles. Sam Morgan (who took over as base commander AFTER the incident is also the guy who released the Halt tape into the wild. He and Halt (his deputy) did obviously not see eye to eye with each other.

I could write a book myself on this stuff!

a reply to: mirageman

Col Sam Morgan called him “a kind of twit” in his 1984 conversation with Phil Klass.

Anyone who had convivial conversations about the subject of UFOs with Klass has to be viewed with the utmost suspicion. Even his close friends have described Klass' hatred of the subject of UFOs as "bordering on the pathological" and the FBI questioned his mental state with regards to the subject after his constant bombardment of them with what amounted to demands. Klass undoubtedly "conspired and connived" to try and destroy people's lives and reputations and was happy to just outright BS about the subject ergo ,anything emanating from him or involving him is probably best taken with a mountain of salt.

originally posted by: mirageman
I think we need to balance that up by saying that many of the airmen saw Colonel Halt as a 'hands on' Colonel and appreciated his ability to mix with the lower ranks and understand their roles. Sam Morgan (who took over as base commander AFTER the incident is also the guy who released the Halt tape into the wild. He and Halt (his deputy) did obviously not see eye to eye with each other.

You're a mine of information, and I appreciate having your mind to pick at

That's really helpful.

So, it begs the question has anyone managed to get all the guys sat down in one place to hammer this out?

On another note, I've just been reading this paper.

It would seem that the belief in extraterrestrial life, and UFO-related beliefs to a lesser extent, are fairly common among young people. These data most likely reflect the fact that in recent years there has been much media attention on extraterrestriai beliefs (e.g. the Roswell ‘autopsy’, the release of the film Independence Day, claims relating to life on Mars) which may have increased the level of agreement on the various items (see Sparks, Sparks & Gray, 1995). These sources of influence, however, reflect a mix of possible fact (e.g. ‘life on Mars’), fiction (e.g. Independence Day) and possible fantasy (e.g. Roswell ‘autopsy’) and clearly some beliefs would seem to be more credible than others. For example, the reviewer drew our attention to the fact that the late Carl Sagan was heavily involved in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) project but was an avowed sceptic concerning UFO’s and abduction claims. Separate analysis of the belief in extraterrestrial life and UFO-related items showed that UFO-related beliefs were positively associated with scores on the schizotypy scales, but when UFO-related beliefs were partialled out, no significant associations remained between belief in extraterrestrial life and scores on the schizotypy scales. Although UFO-related beliefs were associated with magical ideation in both males and females, in males but not in females, UFO related beliefs were also associated with scores on perceptual aberration, cognitive disorganization, and paranoid ideation. Thalbourne (1994) also found that the association between paranormal beliefs and schizotypy was stronger in males than females. One explanation for these data is the suggestion that schizotypy is under greater genetic control in males than females (Claridge & Hewitt, 1987).

Belief in extraterrestrial life, UFO-related beliefs, and schizotypal personality
James Chequers, Stephen Joseph* and Debbie Diduca, Department of Psychology, University of Essex. 1997

Bearing in mind that this is from Essex, a place seldom hailed for it's intellectual outpourings, and that also, the inquiry was regarding beliefs not experiences, I still thought it worth posting.

Respondents were 276 (141 males and 135 females) young people (mean age= 17 yr, SD=0.26) attending a further education college in Essex, England.

96% of respondents disagreed that people who say they have been abducted by aliens are mentally ill; 85% agreed that there is good evidence that life exists on other planets; 64% disagreed that earth was the only planet to support life; 54% agreed that aliens are abducting human beings; 40% agreed that beings on other planets may be influencing what happens ’ on earth; 36% agreed that alien intelligence is probably responsible for UFO’s; 32% agreed that the government refuses to tell the truth about flying saucers; and 1% agreed that they had been taken on board a spaceship. The reviewer noted the fact that there seemed to be some contradiction between claiming that aliens were abducting human beings but denying that alien intelligence is probably responsible for UFOs. It was suggested that this pattern of results reflects the use of the no/yes forced choice format and that some respondents may have been trying to indicate that they thought that not all UFOs were of alien origin

I'm not entirely sure why it is all that interesting to me as yet, but it is.

"Forced choice format". Hmmm-sey?

ETA, I'm in the schizotypal zone myself, so not casting any aspersions, I personally find my ability to believe impossible things quite beneficial.

a reply to: FireMoon

Yes I felt the need to back up the Colonel there myself with a paragraph.

Klass was not a sceptic he was an outright debunker.

Whatever people may think about Colonel Halt's role in the Rendlesham incident he deserves our respect as a distinguished military officer who served his country and the NATO alliance for many years.

BTW Gary Heseltine's lecture is a good addition for people who have followed this thread and want to know more.

There is also this decade old production featuring almost every main player except for John Burroughs (the man who inspired this thread).

Even Ed Cabansag makes an appearance.

a reply to: Anaana

The word belief in itself is an incredibly loaded one. Belief is usually where one chooses to accept something despite any evidence to the contrary and as such one could argue, on a philosophical level not mere semantics that, any person who actually believes in anything is open to critique as, by dint of their belief, they are ipso facto, "closed minded". Belief as we accept the term in effect, excludes any other explanation no matter how rational or backed it might be by given current available evidence.

With regards to UFOs, is it far better to say something along the following lines. Given the current state of evidence and eye witness accounts, there is a model that one has to consider that involves a non human intelligence although, that is not the only model that has merit.

One might question why it is some people are only too happy to cast aspersions about people who believe in UFOs and yet, steer clear of the exactly same analysis of those who hold religious beliefs? That is, one has to question the very reason such research is compiled and published when there are other areas that have a far greater effect on people's lives world wide that could also fall under the exact same group of "symptoms"?

I don't believe that, the morning my mother died I sat up in bed said..... "Mum's gone" then promptly went back to sleep to receive a phone call some 2 hours later waking me, to inform me that, she had indeed died, I know it happened as it was personal to me. As such, I am perfectly willing to accept a model of our existence where this happens to others and I do not view it as "paranormal or supernatural", it is merely science, as yet unexplained and misunderstood.

a reply to: FireMoon

Sorry firemoon, I didn't get my clarification in sooner. I wasn't casting aspersions, quite the opposite. I actually consider it an advantage.

a reply to: Anaana

85% agreed that there is good evidence that life exists on other planets; 64% disagreed that earth was the only planet to support life; 54% agreed that aliens are abducting human beings; 40% agreed that beings on other planets may be influencing what happens ’ on earth; 36% agreed that alien intelligence is probably responsible for UFO’s; 32% agreed that the government refuses to tell the truth about flying saucers; and 1% agreed that they had been taken on board a spaceship.

I think that is more a survey of what people 'believe' rather than what they can actually conclude from evidence. We are odd creatures who tend to accept something in our minds and then reinforce our beliefs by sifting out everything that doesn't fit. Fighting that in oneself is often a hard thing to do.

Firemoon probably made the point better than me. I often have a more conservative opinion on the UFO subject than him. So we don't always agree. But he has my utmost respect for his ability to make me think differently and I love his theories.

I have work in the morning (not the paper round I had to pack that in during the mid-1980s!) so I bid you a good night.