Redfern and Rendlesham: a kind of “review” of his new book

Copyright 2020, InterAmerica, Inc.

1980 Rendlesham incident(s), that our Brit UFO friends like to see as Britain’s “Roswell” – as Nick Redfern notes in his new book about the affair: The Rendle- sham Forest UFO Conspiracy: A Close Encounter Exposed as a Top Secret Government Experiment -- has been a muddied and baffling incident with more psychological ambiance than UFO-related material or data – as it evolved via mischievous or induced accounts by those who were allegedly involved.

Journalist and paranormal writer/hunter Nick tackles the current thinking: “Was the whole thing really a series of top-secret ex- periments of American intelligence, U.K. intelligence, scientists and military agencies?” [From the Introduction]

Nick scrutinizes the “encounter” and writes: “After reading The Rendlesham Forest UFO Conspiracy, your views on the truth behind the 1980 encounters may change – and change radically.” [ibid]

I couldn’t agree more.

Nick opens his researched story recounting the incident as it initially showed up among UFO enthusiasts, and he presents this:

“Deputy Base Commander at RAF Bentwaters [[Lieutenant Colonel  Charles] On January 13, 1981 … Halt prepared [a] report; [that] was sent to the U.K. Ministry of Defense (MoD.”

The Halt report appears intact on Page 13 ff. (Most of you are familiar with the Halt account but can Read it again in Nick’s book if you need a refresher.)

Nick writes that “There is far more to the encounters than the content of [the Halt] one-page piece of paper - way more, in fact. Much of it was left out of Halt’s three-paragraph memo” … and that extra content and reportage came from “Two of the most important and credible figures in this entire story are John Burroughs and Jim Penniston” [two U.S. Air Force military men].

(These are the fellows that, through the years, have made me question the Rendlesham account; their litany of events getting more elaborate upon each retelling.)

Nick writes this – which is one the things that came out much after the incident and made me question the Burroughs/Penninston accounts:

“Penniston actually touched the whatever-it-was; something that he now believes caused him to receive a binary code message that was, essentially, downloaded into his mind.”

Penniston’s computer-enhanced memory has made the rounds of conferences and TV shows.

And Nick, generously I think, writes on Page 17:

[As my] book deals with hallucinogens, drugs, and mind-changing substances (as you shall soon come to see), I see no reason at all why we should dismiss the words of Penniston. He was on-site and a dedicated member of the U.S. military. In fact, I think we should take Penniston’s words to be the gospel truth – as he saw it.”

(I’m more incredulous than Nick but he knows a lot more about the government’s foolishness with drugs and offbeat experimentation than I do, so I accept his judicious rendering of Penniston’s story.)

Nick then goes on to present materials he’s uncovered and seen in various accounts by researchers, such a noted British UFO researcher Jenny Randles, one being a tape of an interview that Britain’s Military of Defense (MoD) had with Halt that  is extant, and provided by Nick on Page 22 ff.

Nick tells of his contact with popular and knowing UFO researcher Nick Pope who worked for the MoD and reawakened the Rendle- sham incident for UFOers.

After offering the gist and some hidden details of the Rendlesham incident(s), Nick provides an enormous amount of information about other incidents that adhere to his observations (and hypotheses) about secret government involvement in UFO cases that we enthusiasts assume are free of conniving and outside intrusions.

These provide much UFO heft and garnish the Rendlesham incident with support for Nick’s intent: Rendlesham was a government or military ploy, not an ET invasion or fictive hoax.

I’d get the book if you are interested in Rendlesham. But, if you’re like me, get the book for the surfeit of information about UFO events that we’ve all taken as complete as provided by lesser researchers than Nick Redfern. Nick, as usual, helps us separate truth from sensationalism or sheer nonsense.

I’ll have more to write on Nick’s book, but suggest, seriously and with gratefulness for Nick’s insights and work, that you get a copy.

The book does full honor to “ufology” and UFO researchers, as it’s compiled by one of the best in our UFO world, Journalist Nick Redfern.

RR