The Great UFO Cover Up? : Berwyn Mountains, Wales, Jan 1974

a reply to: scryfa

It sounds like Nick Pope was asked to carry out a favour by his agent and reading between the lines it sounds like he hadn't read the book. If so then it wasn't the first time and certainly won't be the last time that this sort of blind (or at least partially sighted) endorsement has been carried out. But fair play to him for replying to the questions.

Nick Pope did a lot to soften media attitudes to Ufology in the UK during his time at the MoD. However now he has chosen to move to the USA and make a full time living out of "media" work it will be interesting to see how his career unfolds. This makes sense financially for him . There is a much larger audience to address, on the topics he has 'expertise' in stateside, so good luck to Nick.

But he's not really offered anything new to the Berwyn case with his rather generic endorsement of the book.



And so onto the book itself.

Now I've read it I find a number of other interesting claims/rumored stories (not all these are attributed to Mr. Kellet in fairness):

i) Russ Kellet claims he has 'other' letters from the Coastguard regarding this incident.

ii) There is a documented briefing and other information that was given to Brynmor John (Under Secretary of State) regarding the incident that have been refused any public release.

iii) The work to produce Electric Mountain in Snowdonia (Dinorwig hydro electric power station) was really cover for engineering a deep underground alien base.

iv) Workers on the above uncovered a huge cavern with British military, lizard like creatures and triangular craft inside it.

v) The people of North Wales and Liverpool have a 15 times higher than average rate of leukemia than the UK national average.

vi) A UFO was shot down over Wrexham on Feb 7th 1974.

vii) In the 1950s a group of soldiers encountered a stationery UFO and were trapped in "a strange time zone" until it left a few days later.

vii) A low-yield nuclear weapon was tested on/under British soil in Jan 1974 (which could be linked to point ''v'")


It's often notable throughout this book that sightings of strange lights are often attributed to named witnesses whilst the more controversial stories are always from anonymous people.


Mr. Pope's endorsement in the book claims :

This fascinating book shines a light on one of the world's most intriguing UFO incidents - a case that may in time come to be known as Britain's Roswell

Well maybe? But are they for the right reasons?

Russ Kellet has appeared on a number of shows to discuss the Berwyn UFO case.

Topic UFO


Skywatcher Radio

Pt1.


Pt2.

As to the other points the book raises I haven't looked into all these points as yet. But here's an update so far.

i) Russ Kellet claims he has 'other' letters from the Coastguard regarding this incident.

Unless he wishes to release them into the public domain then no further investigation can be taken.

ii) There is a documented briefing and other information that was given to Brynmor John (Under Secretary of State) regarding the incident that have been refused any public release.

As above - Should the content of any such document (should it exist) be made available at a later date then it may change things.

iii) The work to produce Electric Mountain in Snowdonia (Dinorwig hydro electric power station) was really cover for engineering a deep underground alien base.

Well I once visited "Electric Mountain" back in the late 1980s or early 1990s and other than sighting some strange lizard like creatures deep underground (sorry I'm lying about the lizard like creatures) I find it hard to believe that this was anything more than a power station. It's less than 10 miles from Caernarfon and Bangor is not much further away. Would our military (never mind aliens) want to build a secret underground base so close to dense population centres?

iv) Workers on the above uncovered a huge cavern with British military, lizard like creatures and triangular craft inside it.

See above

v) The people of North Wales and Liverpool have a 15 times higher than average rate of leukaemia than the UK national average.

The stats by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) do not seem to agree with this statement. Liverpool (which comes under the North West of England) has lower than normal incidences of leukaemia. Wales is higher but not anywhere near 15 times higher.

Source : ONS Document

vi) A UFO was shot down over Wrexham on Feb 7th 1974.

A quick search brings up some results. However those results all seem to lead back to Mr. Kellet.

vii) In the 1950s a group of soldiers encountered a stationery UFO and were trapped in "a strange time zone" until it left a few days later.

I have to say I've never heard of this story and have no idea where it's origin lies.

vii) A low-yield nuclear weapon was tested on/under British soil in Jan 1974

I know nothing about any nuclear weapons testing in the UK. What would be the motivations for any such test in 1974?



Although this book has brought some renewed interest to the Berwyn case I think anyone who has done even a small amount of homework on the case realizes it's full of erroneous details and spurious claims.

So we are back to the core mystery of the case. What did Pat Evans witness on the mountain that night?

originally posted by: mirageman
Here is a 2008 Channel 5 (UK) Documentary on the Berwyn case.

It fails to mention the more speculative theories but gives a good general idea of the area with some archive footage as well.

Here is another shorter video from 1996 featuring nurse Pat Evans and her two daughters.

This one has got it wrong from the first minute when it says a nurse, Mrs Evans rushed to the red phone box in Llandrillo. Pat Evans lived in Llandderfel . However the scenery is nice and the presenter pauses between words long enough for you to concentrate on it.

Another Berwyn resident discusses UFOs.

a reply to: draknoir2

Yeh he makes more sense than some

For those interested in this case; researcher Scott Felton has produced what may be just the first of a series of videos on the Berwyn Case.

Because of circumstances revolving around a UFO hoax, created seemingly by the British State in the early 1990s, to confuse research & investigation into the Berwyn Mountains UFO case of 23rd January 1974, I have had no option but to attempt to expose this outrage against the UFO community and the wider Public.

Quite a few UFO enthusiasts contacted me after a book was published by author Steven Lumley purporting to show investigation into the Berwyn Mountains UFO incident. It transpired that it was nothing but an account of a scenario which first appeared in 1997 and which I had known for many years, was a hoax. I had to respond as such a huge and complex hoax had to be countered as the book appeared to be nothing more than an attempt to get this disinformation out into the Public domain.

This is Pt 1 of possibly a multi part series. This video covers the event as an over view. Pt 2 will follow in a few weeks time pending the outcome of a review request following the response to a Freedom of Information Request (FOI) to the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, which then allowed one of the suspects in the collusion and conspiracy to handle the request! As one might expect, the response was nothing short of a disgrace and ranks in my top three worst FOI responses ever.

Further Information @ : XPOSE UFO Truth

Now I need to watch it

Small Update:

The "The Berwyn Mountains Incident: Revealed" book discussed previously in this thread when many factual errors were pointed out seems to have been withdrawn from sale on Amazon US/UK/Australia /Canada (even in Kindle form) and other vendors less than 2 years after it's release.

Second hand copies of the paperback appear to be on sale for sums in excess of £100 (one even going for over £1000) at present.

Meanwhile Scott Felton has carried on with his pursuit of the source of the seemingly spurious MCA letter also discussed earlier in the thread.

a reply to: mirageman

Why does this case attract so many odd variations? From Andy Roberts misleading 'case closed' investigation, to John / Williams and Ross Kellett it seems there is a constant flow of diversions.

Personally, I found operation Photoflash ludicrous before watching Scott's video. Afterwards, I now wonder:

- Was the alleged MCA fraud part of a commercial / financial hoax?
- Or, was it part of an establishment disinformation campaign?

It seems quite obviously a hoax but how come it was done so badly? The next question must be, why was it needed?

I guess what I'm saying is, that the case had gone on for decades without any significant progress. Andy Roberts had provided a misleading but fairly effective end to the case.

Operation Photoflash is also unusual in that it provides a distinct military angle to a case that has a best a weak military component. It also seems essential to justify the idea of UFOs being flushed out of the Irish Sea.

Wouldn't it have been easier to claim that a UFO was shot down in a mid air interception? This really puzzles me.

Why bother with the whole sea flushing story? I wonder if it was necessary to explain multiple crashes or just the easiest way to "generate evidence"?

a reply to: ctj83

Why does this case attract so many odd variations? From Andy Roberts misleading 'case closed' investigation, to John / Williams and Ross Kellett it seems there is a constant flow of diversions.

Very much so. Although back in 1974 there was very little linking the story to UFO activity. It was more a mystery about what had caused the loud bang and earth tremors.

Personally, I found operation Photoflash ludicrous before watching Scott's video. Afterwards, I now wonder: - Was the alleged MCA fraud part of a commercial / financial hoax? - Or, was it part of an establishment disinformation campaign?

It's a tough one to answer. The Berwyn 'UFO' story may have actually been part of a concerted effort to conceal something else that was going on by the establishment. Or perhaps it was actually inflated by certain UFO researchers in the 1990s to give it some excitement. When in fact the core mystery of the story remains around what Pat Evans saw on the mountainside that night.

If you want to hear Russ Kellett's version of events then here is an interview with him. I'd skip to the 1:00 hr mark to avoid being bored off your box. It also grated on my nerves a bit "right yeah?" about how many times, "right yeah?", that Russ uses the phrase "right yeah?". Right Yeah!

Russ Kellet interview

It seems quite obviously a hoax but how come it was done so badly? The next question must be, why was it needed?

There are so many holes in the Kellett story of the military engaging UFOs in the skles over the North Western seaboard of England & Wales that it may be the reason his book has now been withdrawn from sale.

This site provides more details into the investigation of the spurious MCA letter and other details : fierycelt.tripod.com...

I guess what I'm saying is, that the case had gone on for decades without any significant progress. Andy Roberts had provided a misleading but fairly effective end to the case.

It is some of those erroneous details from Roberts that I guess were eventually seized upon and led UFO researchers to look at the case again.


I haven't watched this as yet but one of Andy Roberts' presentations on the case is on YT at present.

Operation Photoflash is also unusual in that it provides a distinct military angle to a case that has a best a weak military component. It also seems essential to justify the idea of UFOs being flushed out of the Irish Sea. Wouldn't it have been easier to claim that a UFO was shot down in a mid air interception? This really puzzles me. Why bother with the whole sea flushing story? I wonder if it was necessary to explain multiple crashes or just the easiest way to "generate evidence"?

I admit that I was first intrigued by the Photoflash details as they were mentioned in a contemporary source (i.e the Jan 1974 Liverpool Daily Post & Echo). But then when I read Kellet's book I realized that it's probably a total fabrication that UFOs were flushed out of the Irish Sea. Not only that his research was poor as has been discussed earlier in the thread. Did he even do any real research? He could have checked some simple things on the internet like RAF Sealand was not home to anything more than a glider school (and was never called RAF Chester). So how could fighters have been scrambled from there?

If you go to his website his introduction is pretty amateurish and littered with mistakes [italicized comments are mine]: www.britishufohunters.com... it states

Please allow me to introduce myself , [there should be a full stop here]my name is Russ Kellett. I have been a UFO investigator for the past [why do we suddenly have a capital letter coming up....] Twenty years. I have appeared in a number of television documentary’s [errr that's documentaries Russ], as well as appearing on numerous television talk shows. I have worked closely with local and national radio stations as well local and national and international newspapers and have always had good publicity, sharing information on a local and international sightings while sticking to my strict code of witness confidentiality policy [not the cleanest choice of grammatically correct sentences].

I have striven to maintain a rigorous standard of scientific detachment to the investigation of UFOs [eh?]and related phenomena and can call on the services of several experts in a number of different fields :photographic experts in image enhancement, soil and plant analysis and forensic analysis etc.

They work alongside the group, as expertise is beyond our competence.

"Yeah right" you can say that again.

When people write things on forums like this as long as their point is clear then spelling and grammatical errors are less important. But you'd think he'd be a bit more diligent with his own website wouldn't you.

If Kellett stumbles on this post then will he even tidy up his website? Let's wait and see.

It all leaves me with the impression that he isn't too diligent in his work and so I dismiss it as virtually worthless.

a reply to: mirageman

Perhaps Russ has been heavily guided on the key points but the actual presentation is all his. I've tried to watch that video before but I really struggle with it.

If it wasn't for Pat Evans and an interview done by Richard D Hall, with a man who saw the sphere I'd probably dismiss the whole event.

Having said that, watching Scott Felton's dealings with the MCA have intrigued me. It seems as if someone, in an official capacity, produced a document that seems both misleading and incredibly poorly presented...

Doing so would have taken both effort and involved risk. It seems unlikely that this concept originated in the office. Too risky and why defend it, keep providing it for new requests?

I can see only two options: an establishment event to build Kellet's narrative, or a non establishment hoax for either financial reasons or to destabilise other investigations?

I find that both options lead me to an interesting thought. Was Russ' receipt of the Photoflash document what solidified his theory? In other words, was the evidence waiting for someone to find?

Or did Russ have a preconceived theory and was looking for evidence to fit his narrative? Was the hoax more opportunistic and designed to take advantage of Russ' own theory and fuel it at the expense of other theories.

a reply to: mirageman

I almost forgot, the Leukaemia cluster was a rumour mentioned by Jenny Randles. She suspected some sort of nuclear missle was involved...

a reply to: mirageman

I've now watched Andy Roberts, presentation. I'll try and be as fair as I can, considering I found him rather rude at some points.

He essentially recounts his version, which we've seen Scott debunk. He doesn't address Mike Saville, which is fairly convenient for someone who is so thorough in other ways

- He brings up the mystery helicopters and dismisses them as being lights not helicopters. As lights they could be misidentifications apparently. This allows him to "categorically" state they have no connection to Berwyn.

- He references APEN, and says that whilst they obviously knew something of ufology, they started the whole overblown Berwyn crash scenario. He then shows and leaves on screen for a long time, an APEN official report! He could only have got this from Jenny Randles as if was sent to her!

- He barely touches on APEN / yet leaves the document on screen for so long, I find this odd. Debunking APEN Coukd easily be done - yet for some reason, even though he identifies it as one of the roots of the problem he does nothing to tackle it

Why wouldn't Roberts talk about the right wing connection of APEN?

- No discussion of Operation photo flash that I heard or Lumley / Williams / Kellet scenarios in any direct way. In complete contrast to his treatment of Max Burns.

I do agree with the debunking of the alien bodies.

I'll digress slightly because I keep finding connections between Randles, Clarke, Roberts that I think illustrate something. I don't know enough about the Max Burns episode to make a clear statement beyond the folllowing:

- Andy Roberts admitted being, with Dr David Clarke behind the 'Blue Hare' hoax to demonstrate the poor quality of Max's research.

Max didn't talk about Blue Hare's revelations, but assume the scenario was that he would, and ultimately the rug could be pulled out from both him and the scenario he proposed.

Roberts spends far too much time talking about him and David being accused of being MI5. Disregarding his research skills, I'm forced to focus his manner, willingness to hoax and preponderance on childish MI5 fantasies and his selective focus.

He also quite clearly holds Jenny Randles in some state of contempt, without always saying to straight out.

I'll be quite clear about this:
- He co authored with Jenny Randles but repeatedly critices her (boring talks by her)
- He makes little comment about APEN, yet leaves their report on screen for far too long. These must have come from Randles yet he does not acknowledge this
- Does not touch on the right wing aspect or ridiculous aspects of APEN.

I suspect he left APEN on the screen as a knowing nod to Clarke and others in the audience. An 'in joke', that he's far more aware of. Instead he talks about Randles Berywn Memes:

- The radioactive stone circle
- The Involvement of a nuclear missle
- The introduction of APEN

It's clear that Randles reported and transmitted a lot of spurious rumours. Yet Roberts glosses over the heart of the crash story, APEN - introduced by Randles.

I wonder if Blue Hare and APEN represent the same strategy to establish a counter narrative, and at a later date overturn it.

I'm coming to the conclusion that both Berwyn and RFI may have been subject to more intentional disinformation from investigators than any state disinformation.

a reply to: ctj83

I think you probably know more about APEN than I do. I've not studied it in detail. Perhaps their dealings are worth a whole thread?

I'm coming to the conclusion that both Berwyn and RFI may have been subject to more intentional disinformation from investigators than any state disinformation.

I think I know exactly what you mean.


Max Burns was involved in the 1997 Sheffield UFO incident. I actually did a thread on that way back in the day Did a RAF Tornado crash during a UFO intercept mission in 1997?. Some of the comments there may be of interest to you.

But I'd recommend reading The Usual Suspects: Anatomy of a Disinformation Campaign in Ufology for a background in some of the accusations being made. Welcome to the murky world of ufology.

a reply to: mirageman

There is a very strong history in UKUFOlgy of misinformation and hoaxing, by third parties who are not the establishment and are often involved in some investigations.

APEN / "APEN" essentially hoaxed the crash and recovery of saucer @ Berwyn
Andy Roberts admits (and includes Dr David Clarke) to creating the Genius Loki / Blue Hare Dark Peak hoax
MCA coast guard letter and operation photoflash involvement

Can we also include Andy Roberts 2010 talk and casebook on Berwyn that makes so many basic errors, in this list?

Why do some feel that UK ufologists require controlled experiments to identify dishonest or incompetent investigators, as opposed to doing a more thorough job themselves?

Why the focus on Berwyn? Where would Berwyn be without APEN? Why did they bring attention to it?

a reply to: mirageman

Does anyone have OS coordinates for the approximate location that Pat Evans saw the sphere?

I suspect I've posted this video elsewhere on another thread pertaining to this incident however, worthy repeating here. I contacted Richard D Hall and spoke to him about my sighting that night. I have also checked those records I have found available and can find no "official report" of the fireball I saw that night. One reason I remember it being tied to the Berwyn incident was that, it was reported on "John Craven's Newround" the kid's TV news show the day after. To Richard's credit, until there is an independent witness bar myself, he is loathe to add that to the canon of lore surrounding the case. That I believe, does show that Richard is not merely interested in "sensation seeking" and looking for any evidence from any person to back whatever his view on the incident might be. One thing I would add that might go someway to explaining why so few saw the fireball is this. In the 1970s very few people had double glazing and most houses would draw the curtains to whatever room they were using, simply to keep the heat in. Furthermore, the weather conditions were cloudy ergo, those with an interest in astronomy would have probably given up on any chance of useful observations for the night concerned.

One thing Richard's documentary does do, is allow one to pinpoint almost exactly where the the object was seen. Seems as if there's a problem likning the video... try this...
www.youtube.com...

a reply to: FireMoon

Thanks for the share, it's an excellent documentary.

This, in my opinion, is some of Richard's best work. In fact, so good, I rather wonder what happened to him not long after his NATO and Mutilation update. At that point, almost all UFO work ceased and his output became a lot more main stream conspiracy. I'm not saying that quality isn't there, but there was a notable change of direction.

Yet I get the feeling he's investigating in the background. TBh I worry he encountered some sort of intimation after finding a "military witness".

Here are my questions for Richard - I don't know how to contact him

- Was the UFO researcher you believe was paid 25,000 a year to change their opinion involved in researching Berwyn?
- Have you seen Andy Robert's presentation on Berwyn, and what are your thoughts on his what I consider rude comments re: Jenny Randles?
- Has he considered that some of the evidence of PhotoFlash may have VERY bad providence?
- Did he investigate APEN as it was supposedly them that identified the true nature of the Berwyn crash?
- Why did Jenny investigate the stone circle and who lead her to do that?

Some other aspects:

- This documentary relocates the epicentre of the quake to above the mountain. It was the equivalent of 600 Kt of TNT, any thoughts what could do that and still leave the sphere?

Who created the following spurious stories and why:
- That there was a Lukemia cluster in the area
- That the event was a Sidewinder missile that impacted the mountain during a training exercise in the Irish Sea
- That Pat Evans story changed (or was initially misreported)

For my own research I've also been looking at the following angles:

- Any involvement of Hans Holzer
- The input of known colleagues (unwitting) on this case of APEN members

Thread bumped for further discussion...

I have bookmarked as need to read through everything before contributing.

Warmest

Lags

Bumped to generate more interest in a great old thread of a not so well known series of fascinating events...

a reply to: Lagomorphe