1984 v09 - IUR - Jenny Randles

7/30/2019 1984 v09 - IUR - Jenny Randles

1/4

INTERNATIONAL

REPORTER

CLOSE ENCOONTER AT VARZJ

COn lENTSEDITORIAL;DID "DISCOVER" DiSCOVER')ITALIAN REPORTRoberto PlnottiCLOSE ENCOUNTER AT VARZJAntonio 0\lumlentoTHE CARGANO PENINSUlA OGARRoberto PlnottiMATTOON GASSER: A MODERN MYTriWilly SmithALASKA CLOSE ENCOUNTERRichard SiglsmondMYSTERY AT RENDLESHA/Y\Jenny RandlesBOOK REVIEWS:

~ E V I D E N C EMert< ChesneyINVEST1GAT10N OVNJWilly Smith

MORE "GASSERs..lei"'C'nf' Ciark

AnASSOCIATE Publicationof theCENTER FOR UFO STUDIES


2/4

Mystery at RendleshamI n early February. 1981, I go t e phonecall from Paul Begg, a serious writer on

peranorrMI subjects and author of IntoThrn A ~ r , e skeptical book which demystl-fles a number of classic "mysterious"disappearances.

At the time. Paul lived In East Anglianear the dty of Norwich. He told me thatwhen he and his wife were In a local publht!y heard the following story from a civilianworking as a radar operator in a smalld villan/mllltzny radar system. The man wasoff duty at the time of the events, whichapparentlywas why he was wiiUng to venturethis account by colleagues.

Radar ContactAs he told the story, early on the mom

ing of Dec. 30. 1980 (or within a day of twoof this date) their unit tracked an unidentifled target heading south Into the county cJSuffolk. It was lost near Woodbridge, wherethere are two Important military bases, runjointly by the Royal Ai r Force and the U.S.Ai r Force. The crew notified radar systemshigher up the ladder. They would haveforgotten the inddenl but for the fact thatsome CJSAFofficers came acoupleof dayslater to take away the radar tRice recordings of that Incident.The radar staffwas told that the objectthey tmd


3/4

duty in England. It appeared to be thesame event, although the servicemen'saccountwas somewhat vague. Supposedly,he had been discharged from the Ai r Forcefor talking about it

One day In the middle of February.1981 , 1caUed Bob on the o ther rmttersandmentioned the rumor of the radar trackingIn Norwich. Bob was able to amaze me withthe news he ha d.

Even though I lived far from the areaand could do little about it, I did try tocollect and weave together the strands ofInformation that were emerging and to Interes t experienced, reputable UF O lnvestigators to lend a hand to the two Indefatigablebut inexperienced women in Suffolk. It mustbe remembered that Brita n has no historyof lawsuits against Its government to obtainUFO files or of public mllitnry projects likeBlue Book. Although the Ministry ofDefense (MOD) has conducted UFO irwestigallons for rm ny years, It keeps tlghtllpped


4/4

Rendlesham- continuedFreedom of nformation Act, the report written by Col. 01arles Hall (dated Jan. 13.1981 : Halt was promoted to full colonel Inthe course of the saga) and sent 10 theBritish Defense MinistJy by the then d ~ p u t yAmerican base Commander at Bentwaters.

The reportdescribes a small triangularcraft which landed in Rendlesham forestand was pursued by USAF base sectJtltypatrolmen. In its wake the object left anl m ~ d i a t e d tree and triangular set of ImprintsIn the ground. The document verifles thattwo separate Incidents took p ~ e the primary one being on Dec. 27 and lhe l>t!CUndon the morning of Dec . 30. Except for thepresence of aliens. it confirms the Incrediblenawre of the events. Halt himselfprofesses10 have seen the craft on th e second nlghl

The contents of this document havesince been verified with Its writer and withthe British base commander, followingdirect confrontation between these menand Brenda, Dot and me. The details ofwhat emerged are extntordinary. They leavevirtually no doubt that a very strange doseencounter between military personnel andsome physical device occurred at the backdoor of one of Britain's strategic air bases.

The military authorities of both Britainand America seem ItO have had genuineand sincere reasons for withholding information on this case.At the very least It waspoliticallyexpedienL Bu t now that the information has leaked ou L It Is cruc:lal that thetruth be told to Stop the spread of wHdrumors. These euthorities are rightly conc:emed about the darmage unjustified speculation might cause. In partlC\Jiar. the allegatlon of a coveredup nuclear mishap (asuggestion I tentatively advanced at onepoint} seems to be regarded as more dangerous than public awareness that a genulne UFO event took place.The Implicationsof that should be pondered. (Ed Nore: Thatattitude is not surprising, gi!Jf!n the level ofpubfrc concPrn n>gnrdtng nudear weaponsand the sa/ely of nuclear power.)

But why were thoe stories about aliensand crashed saucers so widespread in th eearly days of the case? Why were theseleaked to UFO lnves'tigators? The witnesswho spoke to Larry Fawcett and BarryGreenwood alleged lihat these biles weredeliberately offered to ufologists bec::ause itwas known that, as a rule, they don't believein "crashed saucers." llt was a clever doublebluff to make sure that no one In ufology orin the ITI@(fia mounted a proper iJM!Stiga-

tJon If that Is the case, it was a remarl

Documents

1984 v09 - IUR - Jenny Randles