2006 04 - UFO Magazine (USA) - Peter Robbins

7/30/2019 2006 04 - UFO Magazine (USA) - Peter Robbins

1/5

1.

LllnY theIGvvdown onPhi._e ,_ obblna .......the . . . . . . zlngBentwltmCIIeAlfredWebre putsaxopolltlcs In front of theUNG1111111lAssembly

$5.99 US $7.99 CANril-l I 0 4

I0 74470 0713 .1 .

Vel.21 No.Z


2/5

2.

A Response to The History Channel's Recent Documentary,Britain's Roswellby Peter Robbins

As an investigative writer specializing in the subject ofUFOs, I've appeared in or consulted on numerous UFOrelated documentariesover the past 25 years, both hereand abroad. Repeated involvement in such projects hastaught me to expect almost anything in terms of a finished product-from a serious, studied treatment to asilly, inaccurate, and superficial send-up.I've trained myself to go into any such interviews knowing that most if not all the footage you shoot may endup on the cutting room floor and to not take it personally. Given the wildly varying quality of information putforward as evidence and the subjective nature of manyUFO reports, I appreciate that such programs rarely i fever leave all parties satisfied with the outcome.I think it's fair to say that producers of such showsshould be given the latitude to examine independently and investigate fully any conflicting accounts andpoints of view and that they be allowed to come to theirown conclusions, no matter how we the viewers andparticipants feel about their results. More often thannot, complaints after the fact arc counterprOductiveand ego-driven and usually reflect more poorly on thecomplainant than the accused.With this understood, I must register my disappointment \vith The History Channel's otherwise even-handed series, The UFO Files. I am disappointed \ \ ~ t h theprogram's numerous inaccuracies, and I feel somethingconsiderably more than disappoinrment \vith the treatment given my coauthor, LarryWarren.Since first v i e \ \ ~ n g this documentary December 31 inLondon on a video supplied by the producers to NickPope of the Ministry of Defence, I have thought long

52 FC APRIL 2006

and hard about whether to even bother registering sucha complaint. Doing so will doubtless have no effect onThe History Channel's keeping it in their programmingrotation, so why bother?The reason is simple. When a producer has beenpresented with highly credible, multiple evidences,yet knowingly makes the decision to undermine anddiscredit a selected witness for his or her own purposes. such inaccuracies should not be allowed to standunchallenged.May I add that doing so brings me no enjoyment? Solet me be as specific as possible in relating this accountandallow readers andviewers to come to their own conclusions. But first some relevant background.In 1987, with more than a decade of investigative experience under my belt, I began work on a book aboutthe events in question. My coauthor Larry Warren wasa member of the USAF as a security police officer assigned to RAP Bentwaters in Suffolk U.K. at the time ofthe incident.He arrived at thebase in early December 1980 with specialty training in antiterrorism and in working aroundnuclear ordinance. Late that month Lan)' was an eyewitness to the final event of the 3-night UFO incident.The next day he was debriefed \ \ ~ t h other involvedpersonnel. Following his honorable discharge from theservice, Warren was the first and only one of the witnesses to come forward with a public account. I canmake this statement with some authority. l spent thelion's share of 9 years challenging the credibility of hisaccount, then in documenting it with physical \ ~ d e n c eand the accounts of other men who had been involYed.


3/5

3.

In 1997 our book, Left At East Gate: A First-HandAccountof he Rendlesham Forest UFO lncident, Its Cov-er-up and Investigation was published here and in theUnited Kingdom where it went on to become a best-seller. And while there are numerous researchers and investigative writers who have addressed this case in Britain,I remain the only American investigator to have undertaken an in-depth investigation into these events.Britain's Roswell was made by Towers Productions, aChicago-based documentary company under contractto The History Channel. The show's executive producer, David DiGangi, first contacted my coauthor in Julyabout appearing in this documentary. Larry then referred David to me and we had our initial conversationshortly thereafter.At this time I was also invited to appear on the program. I made only two simple requests of DiGangi inagreeing to appear in and assist v.ith the preparationof this documentary. First, that the title of our book bementioned or shown sometime during the program,and that the book jacket for the newly updated editionofLeft At EastGate appear on camera briefly.The producer had no problem with these terms just aslong as Towers Productions received the am .ork withintheir production deadline, which they did. I then senthim a copy of Left At East Gate. DiGangi agreed to readas much of it as his schedule would allow in preparationfor my interviewwith him. He was also curious to knowifl could supply them a copy ofThe Sci Fi Channel's 2003documentaryin which Larryand I had both appeared. aswell as acted as consultants. With the blesl>ings ofSci Fi'sdirector of special projects, !lent them my studio copy.Larryand I werepleased to learn that the broadcastwasscheduled for December 2005, the event's twenty-fifthanniversary and the publication month for the updatededition of our book. As such, we both agreed to assistin any way we were able and to supply the productionteam with original research materials which they wouldbe free to usc in the preparation of the program.DiGangi told me they intended to interview otherAmerican witnesses to parts of the incident but wantedto interview Larry Warren back on location in Suffolk.This was understandable, since he had been a residentof the United Kingdom for the preceding 5years.And since David and his associate producer wouldneed a place to stay in Suffolk, I arranged an introduction for them with Jan and Tony Warnock, a local couplewho have run a bed and breakfast near the RendleshamForest for the past 24 years.The Warnocks had known Larry for almost 18 yearsand had been indirectly involved in the event as well.As a result, they were also interviewed on camera byDiGangi for several hours. He and Associate ProducerKristen Simoney did stay with the Warnocks during theshooting, as did Larry.These interviews,aswell as those conducted with threeof the other witnesses: Charles Halt, Jim Penniston, andJohn Burroughs had been completed by the time I met

with the producer and his cameraman in New York Cityon August 5. It should be noted that none of these otherwitnesses were involved on that third night or at thesame location as Larry.DIGangi recorded about 3 hours of tape with me andsomewhat to my surprise, he confined almost all of hisquestions to Larry's mental state, personality, manifestations, and specifics of the post-traumatic stress hesuffered and how it was that l came to believe his account. Such questions are certainly relevant, but m 18yearl> of being invol\'ed with this case no one had everasked me so many, and in so many varied ways, aroundthis particular aspect of the Rcndlesham story.After several hours of same l began to feel I was notgiving him the answer or answers he wanted to hear;otherwise he would have gone on to other pertinentquestions. My final statement was that if anyone couldestablish for me that I had been misled by Warren, orthat my research was somehow faulty, I would leave thisfield for good.I meant it then and mean it nm\.After the taping, David and I re,iewed the matcnalsI had brought with me which he would be free to dra\\upon, refer to, or include in the program should he \vish.They included much of my coauthor's original servicerecord, peninent photos and letters, Freedom of Information Act actions, maps, case-related documents, soilanalysis and original soil samples from the third night'slanding site, a recorded inter\iew with \ ' v i t n e ~ s CharlesHalt. and a Left At East Gate press kit which ran ' 'ell inexcess of one hundred pages.More significantly, I also loaned him a ht as one would expect from anyHistol) Channel feature. Clips from The Sci fi Chan

nel's fine UFO Invasion At Rendlesham and a 1995 British documentarywere well-integrated and added to theinformation value of the program. The comments ofU.K. ~ t i n i s t r y of Defence official ~ 1 d . Pope and author Georgina Bruni also contributed to the program,as did some of the remarks from witnesses Penniswn,Burroughs, and Halt. Among my specific problems withthe show were the following.There were three consecutive nights of UFO activity bet\veen Christmas and r\ew Year's Day, 1980. Thesecond night's events were never acknowledged by theproducers and were entirely ignored.APRIL2006 S3


4/5

4.

Jim Penn ston made plaster casts of the impr ints leftin the sotl at one of the landing sites, which the narrato1characterizedas "roughly I 0 feet apart." This was immediately followed O} Penniston's YOiceover saying "The)measured exactly the same distance apart."We are told that "The fo llowing is the (audjotape) recording Halt made that night." This is incorrect. It ismerely a 15-minutc segment from a several-hour-longrecording which the deputy base commander madethat night.Not a single one of my responses to the producer'squestions about Larry Warren's state of mind, believability, or confinnations of his involvemem make theirway to the final cut. Nor do any responses to similarquestions tha t were asked of the Warnocks. tl:or do anyrelated answers w the questions posed to Nick Pope.Save a single map and several photographs, none of theitems I supplied found their way into the program.Four out of the five times that author Georgina Bruniappears on camera, the words Georgina Bruni, awhor.You Can'r Tell the Peopleappropriately appear below hername. On the two occasions when I am shown on camera, the words UFO researcher appear below my name.I am never identified as coauthor of a book on the incident, nor is there any reference to the fact I workedwith t h i ~ cyevvitness for nearly a decade prior to publication. Why else would thjs particular UFO researcherhave been asked to appear in this program if not for mylongstanding involvementwith this case, eyewitness, orexpertise in the matter?Larry Warren is never identified as a coauthor of thisbook either, thl' only book ever written or cowrillcn byany of the many militaryor civilian witnesses. Nor ic; I .eftAt Easr Gate ever identified or even referred to, despiteassurances I'd been given to the contrary.\"v'h) exclude any reference to this five-hundrrd-pagcbook in such a documentary? You Can't Tell The People

author Georgina Bruni, whose book is noted throughout the program, cites LeftAt EastGateas an inspirationfor her initial investigation and resulting book. ln 1997she wJote in Sigh ti ngs Magazine that "'Since reading LeftAt East Gate, the controversial book authored by Larry\\'arren and Peter Robbins, I decided to do some homework and try to find witnesses who could confirm Larry'sstoryand hopefully help solve more of the mystery."The segment prior to the one focusing on ~ r c n ' s involvement and veracity ends with the narrator saying."For 3 years the public is kept in the dark about whathappened at the air bases. Then in 1983 a new witnesssurfaced V\ith a startling claim about the UFO encounter." This particularly offensive and misleading bit ofdoublespeak has the audacity to suggest that witnessesPenniston, Burroughs, and Halt had already gone publicwhen Larry\\ 'arren "surfaces" in 1983.This statement is simply untrue and I am at a loss tounderstnnd why it is included in the program. Warrenwas the first alld the only eyewitness with the couragl'and comiction to make his account public at that time.

S4 APRIL 2006

a fact tha t is in no content ion whatsoe\'er, even by theseother witnesses.The narrator informs us that "Warren, like CharlesHalt and Jim Penniston, recalls seeing a glowing craftin the clearing of th e Rend.lesham woods shortly af terChristmas 1980, but Larry Warren is the only airmanwho cla1ms he saw alien life forms."Quoting investigative writer Georgina Brunj from YouCan't Tell ThePeople, a book the producer had in his possession for months prior to the documentary's production deadline: "In January 2001 J talked to a witness whountil then had been reluctant to discuss the entities hehad seen at the landing site. Only if I promised to mention his name in connection with d1is,would he oblige."These beings had moved out from the landed objectand appeared to be surrounded by a surge of electricalenergy. Although he could not describe them accuratelybecause they were almost translucent in form, he wasable to conclude that they were human-looking, like us,he said. According to the witness. nobody was preparedto talk about this aspect of he incident. Another personwho mentioned enti ties was Sergeant Bobby Ball."Although his face was blacked out and he was referedto only as Sergeant B. J have been able to identify Ballas the man who told Chuck DeCaro on the CNN Spe-cial Assignment program that "we saw flying objectscontaining maybe other people or another life form."No one else claims to have seen life forms? These twowitnesses did. I am aware of the identity of this first witness as well; he confirmed this account to my coauthoryears ago. Are d1ere others? Without question. Then whyhaven't they come forward?The unnamed eye" itness told Georgina that "nobod)was prepared to talk about this aspect of the incident."Why? The 20-years plus of attacks leveled agaimt Lar-1) Warren arc a good example of why. Jim Pennistonanswers this question in his own words relative to hisexperience on the first night: "It was not a good careermove to report exactly what we'd seen. I went into theshlft commander's office with Burroughs and we gavea sanitized briefing of what happened that night." Andwho can b lame him for modifying his story?Ms. Bruni goes on to say, "One must recall that Sergeant Ball was with Halt's patrol during the encounter.I can only conclude that Halt was im olved in this closeencounter and is either suppressing the informationfor fear of ridicule or because he was instructed not to

discuss it or is unaware through himself having been'messed' with. This is a term Halt has used when describing what he belie\eS were drug-induced interrogations performed on some of the witnesses."We are told that "Warren then watches as a seniorofficer begins communicating with the beings." Thisstatement is entirely untrue. Larl)never made it duringhis interview with DiGangi, nor has he ever made it inany anecdotal, written, or recorded statement prior tothis interview. I would very much like to know what thesource of this clajm is.


5/5

Documents

2006 04 - UFO Magazine (USA) - Peter Robbins