Part 4 Eaters of Children, The Pedocracy Exposed ...Preyed Upon

Eaters of Children

The Pedocracy Exposed

by Giovanni Augustino “Johnny” Cirucci

Chapter 5 

Preyed Upon 

1950: “Reverend Father” Lawrence C. Murphy begins a 25 year reign of predation and terror in Milwaukee. 

Being a sexual predator requires the perpetrator bury or destroy their human capability for empathy or compassion. 

It is a conscious process that includes many predetermined and premeditated steps. It is not, nor can it be, a simple “crime of passion”. 

As the keepers of the Devil’s Simulation, Roman Catholic clergy are trained, cultivated and enabled into this monstrous, inhuman state in order to maintain and propagate it. [This is not something passed, it is ongoing d.c]

The result of such satanic training means that Catholic clergy are in unique positions to engender the trust of children and their families. Once achieved they mercilessly abuse them all; like a wolf-spider, luring its prey in to capture it and slowly drain the life from them. 

Unaware of the Devil’s Simulation, victims mistakenly think of their Roman gatekeepers as men or women “of God”. Often, the predators cement the satanic inversion by abusing them during a religious act like prayer or “confession”. 

They often rob their prey of their bodies, their lives and even their souls; vampires in every sense. 

This may seem like an extreme exaggeration or even a baseless slander, but the endless cases of atrocity say different. [italics suspended] 

Steven Geier was taken to [Roman Catholic] St. John’s [School for the Deaf in Saint Francis, Wisconsin] at the age of eight, after a high fever made him deaf. He was crying as his parents left, and it was Fr. Murphy who offered comfort then, only to abuse him later. Mr. Geier also witnessed about a dozen other boys being abused. ... 

Father Murphy was a predatory paedophile whose crimes were all the more revolting for the helplessness of his victims. The pupils at St. John’s School, St. Francis city, Wisconsin, were deaf. This was a boarding school, so there was no escape at nights from the vile priest who had power over them. ... 

he was the only adult many of them could communicate with. They were given no sex education, so they had no way of understanding what he was doing. Some may have thought they deserved this treatment. ... 

He was the mentor and spiritual guide to hundreds of vulnerable boys – and one thing they learnt from him is that there are some disgusting individuals in the adult world who gratify their sleazy appetites without a thought for others. 

“Murphy was so powerful and it was so hard,” he said in an interview four decades later. “You couldn’t get out. It was like a prison. I felt so confused. Here I had Fr. Murphy touching me. I would be like, ‘God, what’s right?’” 

“It was an awful thing,” another of his former victims, Joe Daniels said. “I felt anger and shame.” Little Arthur Budzinski would hide under his bed, crying, when it was time to go back to boarding school. His parents did not know what was wrong... 

There is an old photograph of Arthur Budzinski taken in 1962, when he was 13, with 10 other deaf boys who made up the St. John’s School basketball team. Father Murphy is standing alongside them in a long clerical gown. Five of the 11 boys were sexually assaulted. 

Budzinski witnessed a boy of his age, Pat Cave, being abused in the dormitory. They met again, 42 years later. Until that meeting in 2004, Pat Cave thought he was the only boy to have suffered the priest’s attentions. In fact, he was probably not even the only victim in his family. He had an older brother who also went to St. John’s, who was frequently called into Murphy’s office at night for long periods. The brothers never discussed why. His brother died in a motorcycle accident at the age of 21. 

No one knows exactly how many boys suffered at Murphy’s hands in the 24 years he was running the school. It could have been as many as 200. Most said nothing about it for decades, if at all. James Smith had bottled it up for so long that when he began talking about it, at the age of 62, he started to shake and cry. He said: “I would be playing baseball, and the boys would come and say: ‘Fr. Murphy wants you to come and see him.’ I would refuse to go, and pretty soon I was dragged into his office and molested again. I never told anyone. I thought I was alone.” ... 

“[I was abused] During my confession with Fr. Murphy [several] times he played with my penis in the bedroom, in the bathroom, in Fr. Murphy’s office... During the summer times Fr. Murphy took some boys and me to his cottage and on the way I was a passenger and sat near Fr. Murphy driving while he touched my penis in front of other boys... For my six years, I suffered bad from Fr. Murphy.” ~ The Independent [206] 

When victims and their families finally forced Murphy’s abominations to come to light, he was simply removed from St. John’s. 

No criminal investigation. 

No trial. 

No punishment. 

The predator was relocated to prey again. The reactions by Murphy’s superiors were as criminal as the abuse. Rather than be turned over to authorities for incarceration and trial, Murphy was sent to therapy and given “restrictions” that he, himself, was responsible for maintaining. 

Julie Wolf, communications director for the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, said that Father Murphy was placed on certain restrictions upon leaving Milwaukee that included not having any contact with children and that “he ignored the restrictions.” Ms. Wolf added, 

“Over time, they tried to deal with him, but over time they weren’t successful.” ~ NY Times [207] 

Coming from wealth, Murphy’s family owned a beautiful lakefront cottage in Northwoods, Wisconsin. Having been pulled from St. John’s, Murphy no longer had a captured, handicapped pool of victims to choose from. The predator priest used the cottage as a honey trap to lure his new round of little boys. 

Kathy Lyn Walter, a social worker and an expert on sexual disorders who was hired by the archdiocese to interview Father Murphy in 1993 ... said he offered them what seemed like a beachfront reprieve from their lives in the dormitories, with canoe trips, picnics and barbecues. [208] 

Unfortunately for these new victims, the therapy sessions and “self-policing” imposed upon Murphy by his superiors had as much effect as requiring a tiger to lose his stripes — which was exactly what the gatekeepers of the Devil’s Simulation intended. 

In fact, around Boulder Junction, in high school religious classes and preparation for the sacrament of confirmation, in sleepovers at his cottage and fishing excursions, Father Murphy interacted freely with children until his death in 1998, never having been punished by the church or local criminal authorities in Milwaukee, according to documents and interviews with people in the area. 

Donald Marshall, who is 45 and lives in West Allis, Wis., said in an interview last week that he was molested by Father Murphy in 1977 or 1978, when he was 13 or 14, a few years after Father Murphy was sent to live in Boulder Junction. 

Mr. Marshall had been sent to the juvenile detention center, the Lincoln Hills School for Boys, for burglaries he said he committed. He said Father Murphy sometimes served at the school as a chaplain, and he met the priest at a dining room table one night. When he got in a fight with some other inmates, Mr. Marshall said, he was sent to a “security cottage” and put in a cell alone, behind a solid steel door with a high window. 

Mr. Marshall said that Father Murphy visited him there, that they sat on the bed talking, and that the priest tried to put his hand down the boy’s pants. Mr. Marshall said he resisted, and as soon as Father Murphy left the cell, the teenager told a security officer, who called the superintendent of the center. The superintendent interviewed him twice to make sure he did not change his story. [209] 

Murphy’s insatiable predations left a trail of broken bodies, minds and spirits. ... 

Mr. [Donald] Marshall said that years later, after problems with alcoholism and anger, and after serving eight years in prison for drunken driving, he contacted the Archdiocese of Milwaukee asking for help in the form of therapy, which he said he never received. [210] 

Again, proving that he was part of a systematic, premeditated criminal enterprise, Murphy co-opted older boys into luring, grooming and training the younger boys. [211] 

They are tactics well-known to both victims and “law enforcement”. 

Further proof that a pedophile network runs the Devil’s Simulation (and not the propaganda that mere individuals arise by random chance to commit the heinous acts) is found in the selection of victims.

Who suffers at the hands of the powerful is dictated by a formula; children without guardians are the primary source pool and children with handicaps like being unable to hear or speak are preferred. 

In June of 1960, Father Neil Gallanagh was arrested after he sexually assaulted a nine-year-old boy during a day-trip to the Isle of Man. 

Once his British superiors realized they had a monster who preyed upon children, they used their agents in law enforcement to insure he stayed out of prison, then they moved him to more fertile hunting grounds; as chaplain at a home for handicapped children. [despicable d.c]

It was brought to light well after the rapist had had his fill, when he was retired and over 75 years old. 

The Roman Catholic Church covered up the criminal past of a paedophile priest and gave him a job in a school for deaf children where he went on to sexually assault vulnerable young boys, an Observer investigation can reveal. 

The church is now facing a massive compensation claim from the victims of the priest, Father Neil Gallanagh, who accuse the authorities of “willful neglect”. Child abuse campaigners are calling for a public inquiry into the case, which they claim led to a “reign of sexual terror” for some boys at the school. ... 

The attacks took place while Gallanagh was a resident chaplain at St. John’s during the Seventies. Many of the pupils at this residential school were deaf and dumb. The victims are mainly now in their forties and the assaults came to light only recently after one alleged victim spoke to his doctor and another attended a reunion party and spoke with other pupils. 

The Observer has obtained evidence showing that Gallanagh was given the job by the Catholic church at St. John’s despite having been caught abusing children as a priest more than a decade earlier while working at Craigbane church in Derry, Northern Ireland. It has emerged that, while he was on a day-trip to the Isle of Man in June 1960, he sexually assaulted a nine-year-old boy. A report from the Isle of Man Daily Times on 27 June 1960 described how Gallanagh sat with “bowed head clasped to his hands” in the dock at Douglas Court House after he was arrested. ... 

Gallanagh was not jailed but fined £30 after he promised to seek medical treatment. A short report of his arrest appeared in the Belfast Telegraph. 

It appears that rather than throw Gallanagh — who was related to the then Bishop of Derry, Neil Farren — out of the church, he was moved to Leeds and allowed to continue preaching. The then Bishop of Leeds, William Wheeler, made him resident chaplain at St. John’s School for the Deaf in 1974. Gallanagh’s previous conviction was not made known to the court in the 2005 case and his victims at St. John’s were unaware of his history until The Observer uncovered the earlier press reports from newspaper archives. ~ The Observer [212] 

Even after Gallanagh’s ... “preaching” subsided, as victims were allowed to come forward, they were mitigated and he continued to be protected. 

Last year Gallanagh, 75, pleaded guilty to indecently assaulting two pupils of St. John’s Roman Catholic School for the Deaf in Wetherby, West Yorkshire. The school was under the control of the diocese of Leeds, which employed Gallanagh. A further 11 charges against him of indecently assaulting five other boys aged under 16, including an 11-year-old, were left on file. [213] 

The obvious truth finally dawned upon one of the men who was violated by Gallanagh as a boy. 

At least for Rome, the cover of being “Christian” had the desired negative effect (with the help of her agents in the media)

One of his victims at St. John’s expressed his outrage at the latest disclosures. “I am more than livid and feel totally let down by a so-called Christian organisation. How could the church have allowed this to happen? How could they have put a paedophile into a school for deaf children who were unable to speak out? This man ruined many people’s lives, including mine. At the very least the Church is guilty of willful neglect; at the worst it is something unimaginable,” he said. [214] 

“Unimaginable” indeed. 

If he only knew the full extent of the network, that it includes the very “secular” government officials sworn to protect him from such abominations. 

...abuse campaign group ... Phoenix Survivors ... was outraged that, even after his latest crimes, Gallanagh received only a six-month suspended sentence and a £1,500 fine. Judge Norman Jones said that Gallanagh’s age, recent poor health and good character for the last 30 years meant jail was inappropriate. [215] 

To add insult to the injuries of the victims, when forced to publicly address the pedophile predations of priest Neil Gallanagh, the Vatican refused to “laicize” the child rapist and kept him on the roles of consecrated clergy. 

The “scandal” hit in 2010 during the Papacy of one-time Nazi Youth cadet [216] Joseph Ratzinger, a.k.a. “Pope Benedict XVI”. During his tenure as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Superior-General of the Inquisition), it was revealed that his office had a “lenient approach” [217] to dealing with pedophile clergy like Gallanagh and Oakland, California parish priest Father Stephen Kiesle. 

Kiesle’s “reign of terror” mirrors that of Gallanagh (and of hundreds perhaps thousands of other pedophile clergy). 

Even in his seminary days in the early 1970s, there were questions about California priest Stephen Kiesle: Colleagues said he had trouble relating to adults, lacked spirituality and didn’t seem committed to anything but youth ministry. 

Those colleagues, who helped make the case to the Vatican in 1981 seeking to let him leave the priesthood, said they were concerned before Kiesle was ordained, and more so after revelations Kiesle had molested children in his parish. 

“He was not grown up. He spent more time with kids than with people his own age. You get suspicious of that. There’s something wrong there,” said John Cummins, former bishop in the Diocese of Oakland, now retired. 

Still, future Pope Benedict XVI resisted pleas from the diocese to act on the case, according to a 1985 letter in Latin obtained by The Associated Press that bore his signature as then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. ~ CBS News [218] 

The letter that neither CBS nor the AP didn’t feel the need to share with its audience, carefully written in Latin to minimize the number of those who might be privy to it, stated that, when considering the “laicizing” of monsters like Gallanagh and Kiesle, the “good of the universal Church” needed to be considered. [219] 

One can only assume that the “good of the universal Church” being considered by the most Reverend Excellency [220] Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Superior-General of the Inquisition, was to insure that child-raping monsters be kept in circulation as much as was in his power to accomplish. 

Fortunately for “the Church” there are many agents of the Devil’s Simulation that don’t wear black cassocks — judges and cops, for instance — who can help Inquisitors like Joseph Ratzinger in his agenda to keep serial child rapists amongst their prey (your children). 

Kiesle was sentenced in 1978 to three years’ probation after making a plea of no contest to charges of lewd conduct related to tying up and molesting two young boys in a San Francisco Bay area church rectory. ~ Telegraph [221] 

Understanding that handicapped children make the easiest victims, the Catholic Church has special schools to lure the prey into position. 

That statement may appear to be inflammatory hyperbole yet the fact that the entire scenario repeatedly plays itself out renders it shockingly accurate. 

The most recent example occurred at the Father Antonio Provolo Institute for the Deaf in Verona, Italy. 

...a notorious school for the deaf where hundreds of children are believed to have been sexually assaulted over the years by two dozen priests and religious brothers. ~ Catholic Herald [222] 

When one monster rose above the rest — Father Nicola Corradi — he was relocated to the sister Provolo Institute in Lujan de Cuyo, Argentina (the home country of Pope Francis). There he continued to rape children who were unable to interact with the outside world: prisoners in a never-ending nightmare. They weren’t even able to hear their abusers enter the room. 

Like voracious animals, the priests and nuns attacked the children in bathrooms, in confessionals, in their dorm rooms, even in the chapel (perhaps, purposefully so in ritual for the Devil’s Simulation). In fact, the “Virgin Mary” (Semiramis / Isis / Cybele / Columbia) stood watch over the abuse. 

The school has “a little chapel with an image of the Virgin and some chairs where the kids would get confession and receive the communion. That’s where some of the acts were happening,” Fabrizio Sidoti, the prosecutor who has been leading the investigation since the scandal broke, told the AP. [223] 

The children said the ... Roman Catholic priests continuously raped them, beside the image of the Virgin Mary. ~ Daily Mail [224] 

Finally, after getting his fill of destroying the innocence of the vulnerable and defenseless, the decrepit beast was arrested ... at 82 years of age, wheelchair bound and barely aware of his surroundings [225] — almost like his victims. 

In “humble, elderly priest” Nicola Corradi’s quarters police found evidence of an organized sex-trafficking network; pornographic magazines and videos along with $34,000 in cash. [226],[xviii] 

In fact, the handicapped children were used like adult film sex workers. 

Children from other regions of Argentina who lived at the dorms were especially vulnerable and often targeted by the abusers. The tales are harrowing: One of the victims told the AP she witnessed how a girl was raped by one priest while the other one forced her to give him oral sex. ~ Fox News [227] 

Proving again that the victims had nowhere to hide; one of their chief tormentors was a nun from Japan — Sister Kosaka Kumiko. Her nationality likely made it easier for her to enable the abuse and exploitation of Argentinian children. 

But to truly punish a people, you need a puppet with few connections to them. 

Herod, who would think nothing of slaughtering all the boys in Bethlehem from 2 years old to newborn, wasn’t a Jew, he was an Edomite. 956 

Napoleon Bonaparte wasn’t French, he was from Corsica. 957 

Adolf Hitler wasn’t Teutonic, he was Austrian. 958 

With good reason has Barack Hussein Obama failed to produce a valid birth certificate. ~ Illuminati Unmasked [228] 

Sister Kumiko easily slides in to the above list. 

Kosaka Kumiko, 42, was charged with helping the priests with anal and vaginal rapes, fondling and oral sex, which were allegedly committed in the bathrooms, dormitories, garden and a basement at the school in Lujan de Cuyo, a city about 620 miles northwest of Buenos Aires. 

The case against Kumiko began after a former student accused her of making her wear a diaper to cover up a hemorrhage after she was allegedly raped by priest Horacio Corbacho. 

... The nun, who has Argentine citizenship, has also been charged with physically abusing the students — whose torments could only be heard by those abusing them since the other children were deaf — at the Antonio Provolo Institute for children with hearing impairment in northwestern Mendoza province. ~ AP [229] 

Argentina is fertile ground for Roman atrocities. 

Before he was “elected” Pope, Jesuit priest Jorge Mario Bergoglio was one of the most powerful men in Argentina: 

• Jesuit Provincial Superior of Argentina (1973–1979) 

• Auxiliary Bishop of Buenos Aires (1992–1997) 

• Titular Bishop of Auca (1992–1997) 

• Archbishop of Buenos Aires (1998–2013) 

• Cardinal-Priest of San Roberto Bellarmino (2001–2013) 

• Ordinary of the Ordinariate for the Faithful of the Eastern Rites in Argentina (1998–2013) 

• President of the Argentine Episcopal Conference (2005–2011) 

Jorge Bergoglio may claim to have been unaware of the heinous crimes of his clergy but victims know different. 

The victims’ families contend that the Vatican knew about [abuse at the Provolo Institute, in general, and the outrages of Nicola Corradi, in specific] since at least 2009, when he was publicly accused of abusing students at the Provolo Institute in Verona, Italy, where he then worked. 

They allege nothing was done then nor later in 2014, when they told Pope Francis in a letter that Corradi was living in his native Argentina. ~ Fox News [230] 

There was no reason for Bergoglio to react; he had ultimate authority over Corradi’s “relocation”. 

Members of the Provolo association met with the Pope last year and asked for an independent commission to investigate. The Provolo group provided the AP with the letter from the Vatican dated February 5, 2016, in which the Vatican said it had forwarded the request to the Italian bishops’ conference, saying it was up to them to investigate. 

“As of now, nothing has happened,” the group said in an email. “We have to ask ourselves: the Pope, who was for many years the primate of the Argentine church, did he know nothing about clerical abuse in his country?” ~ Herald [231] 

There are a great many agents of disinformation in employ by the Vatican who first bait their audience by attacking their masters only to mislead them in the end. 

There are also some honest Catholics who are simply disgusted by what they’ve seen. 

“And peace to the children, on this special day on which God became a child, above all those deprived of the joys of childhood because of hunger, wars or the selfishness of adults.” — Pope Francis’ Christmas Urbi et Orbi [City and the World] Message 2016 

Indeed, Pope Francis. The joys of childhood are deprived to the victims of clergy sexual abuse by the selfishness of adults. Despite his global popularity, the reality is that Francis is all talk, and no action when dealing with clerical child sex abuse. Not surprisingly, as the novelist, V.S. Naipaul observed about Argentines, “it is the Argentine attitude to suppress and ignore.” 

Notwithstanding his incessant chatter about mercy and human trafficking, this Argentine Pope continues to suppress and ignore the ongoing clerical child sexual abuse. The latest case of papal inertia and deafness is especially heinous since it involves the sexual abuse of hundreds of disabled deaf and mute children in Italy and Argentina by several priests, giving tragic magnification to the oft used term, voiceless victims. This cover-up lies squarely on Bergoglio’s watch. 

During the 3 1/2 years of the Francis Papacy, the self-appointed Merciful One is not so merciful when it comes to the victims of clergy sex abuse. As Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Bergoglio left a record of abysmal apathy and inaction to root out clergy sex abuse. This pattern lives on behind the Vatican walls. 

Who could forget the now familiar Francis fury raging at the faithful Catholics of Osorno Chile who pleaded with the Pope not to elevate a bishop who had allegedly protected a serial child predator? Francis ignored and suppressed their concerns as “stupid.” Who could forget the Pope’s personal appointment to the Synod on the Family of Cardinal Danneels, the renowned Belgian prelate who protected predator clerics? Don’t forget child abuse victim Peter Saunders, who served on the papal child protection commission and was forced to take a leave of absence for criticizing the Pope’s decisions on clerical sex abusers. [[232]] 

Wake up, Francis fawners, his mercy meme rings as hollow and empty, as hope and change. ~ The [Catholic] Remnant [233] 

Back in Milwaukee, after decades of raping little boys, as he approached death from old age, Father Lawrence C. Murphy’s American superiors finally attempted some form of impotent action and even that was thwarted by the Vatican. 

In the two years before Father Murphy died, the bishops in Milwaukee and Superior tried to have him defrocked but were dissuaded by Vatican officials who had received a letter from Father Murphy asking for leniency. The Vatican said Father Murphy had shown “apparent good conduct” in the 24 years since he had been removed from St. John’s and sent to Boulder Junction. ~ The New York Times [234] 

Again, it is the collaboration of secular, government authority that shocks the sensibilities most. They, too, are secret members of the Devil’s Simulation, unbeknownst to the citizenry they are paid and sworn to protect. 

Victims back in Milwaukee and St. Francis say the police ignored their reports of the priest’s sexual contacts. They also went to the district attorney’s office in Milwaukee. E. Michael McCann, then the district attorney, said last week that his office had not pursued the allegations because they were beyond the state’s statute of limitations. 

The victims and their advocates recall it differently, saying that one victim was then a student at the school and was being abused — which would have been well within the statute. Mr. McCann said his office was under such scrutiny in the Murphy case that it would have been impossible for them not to pursue an active case of abuse. But once Father Murphy moved to Boulder Junction, local authorities said they were not made aware of any complaints. 

“Our department never conducted any criminal investigations,” said Chief Deputy Joe Fath of the Vilas County Sheriff’s Department. “There were never any allegations of anything occurring in Vilas County at his place of work or residence.” 

Father Murphy always lived freely. ~ The New York Times [235] 

Those who enable the Devil’s Simulation — the repeated and even ritualized defiling and victimizing of the innocent, and the vulnerable — advance in power and prestige. 

The outrages at the Provolo Institute harken to Murphy’s crimes and just who it was that kept him unpunished and even unaddressed until his ignoble death in 1998. [italics suspended] 

...the Vatican halted the investigation of a Wisconsin priest accused of molesting some 200 deaf boys have eerie echoes in Italy, where 67 deaf men and women accused two dozen priests of raping and molesting children for years. 

Only now — a year after the Italian case became public — is the Vatican directing the diocese to interview the victims to hear their testimony about the accusations, The Associated Press learned Thursday. 

The two cases are the latest in a burgeoning abuse scandal on both sides of the Atlantic ... The office charged with disciplining clergy was long led by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, and a church prosecution in the Wisconsin case was stopped after an appeal to Ratzinger. 

The Vatican strongly defended Benedict on Thursday and denounced what it said was a concerted campaign to smear him and his aides for a problem that Rome insists is not unique to the Catholic Church. [ The Roman Catholic Church is the biggest piece of s*#t on the planet, and has lost its way and forfeited any authority it once had if ever at all, come out of her people, she is the one in bed with the States. It ought not to be this way. dc ]

Benedict’s actions have been marked by “transparency, firmness and severity in shedding light on the various cases of sexual abuse committed by priests and clergymen,” the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano said in a front-page article. ... 

In a signed statement last year, the 67 former pupils at a school for the deaf in Verona described sexual abuse, pedophilia and corporal punishment from the 1950s to the 1980s. They named 24 priests, brothers and lay religious men at the Antonio Provolo Institute for the Deaf. 

While not all acknowledged being victims, 14 of the 67 wrote sworn statements and made videotapes, detailing abuse, some for years, at the hands of priests and brothers of the Congregation for the Company of Mary. 

One victim, Alessandro Vantini, told the AP last year that priests sodomized him so relentlessly he came to feel “as if I were dead.” 

“How could I tell my papa that a priest had sex with me?” Vantini, 59, said through a sign-language interpreter. “You couldn’t tell your parents  because the priests would beat you.” ~ Associated Press [236] 

At the time, Cardinal Ratzinger (who co-authored Vatican II along with Jesuit Karl Rahner) maintained a very special position. 

The bishop of Verona, Monsignor Giuseppe Zenti, initially accused the former students of lying. However, after one of the accused lay religious men admitted to sexual relations with students, the bishop ordered an internal investigation. It found some abuse occurred, albeit a fraction of what had been alleged. 

Advocates for the victims, however, said the diocese investigation was fatally flawed because no one interviewed the former students. 

Last summer, the diocese forwarded its files to the Vatican office that prosecutes sex crimes by clergy, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. It was headed for years by Ratzinger, who issued a 2001 directive that requires bishops to report suspected clerical abuse cases to the Vatican, but makes no mention of calling police. ~ The Boston Globe [237] 

What the AP neglects to tell its readers is that the “Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith” is the kindler, gentler name for the Inquisition. [italics suspended except in the original] 

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Latin: Congregatio pro Doctrina Fidei, CDF) is the oldest among the nine congregations of the Roman Curia. It was founded to defend the church from heresy; today, it is the body responsible for promulgating and defending Catholic doctrine. [1] Formerly known as the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition, [a] it is informally known in many Catholic countries as the Holy Office, and between 1908 and 1965 was officially known as the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office. ~ Wikipedia [238] 

Few know and understand that the Inquisition never ended, it just changed its methodology. 

Ratzinger had risen through the ranks, proving himself to be a reliable gatekeeper for the Devil’s Simulation. In fact, this is the key to promotion and the foundation of Ratzinger’s Papacy. 

Benedict also has come under pressure over a case dating back to his time as archbishop of Munich, in his native Germany, three decades ago. 

The Munich archdiocese has said that Ratzinger was involved in a 1980 decision to allow a priest who had been accused of abusing boys, the Rev. Peter Hullermann, to be transferred there for therapy. ~ The Boston Globe [239] 

Being in command of the Archdiocese of Munich was no small honor. It has had a powerful Jesuit presence for several hundred years and was the location where Adam Weishaupt taught Canon Law at Jesuit Ingolstadt University. Weishaupt would go on to define Communism and found the Jacobinism that fueled the bloody French Revolution as well as the Illuminati secret society. 

But Ratzinger’s pedophile credentials don’t end there, he comes from a family of sadistic predators. 

The priests at the Regensburg, Bavaria, boarding school for boys liked to make the students take off their clothes and bend over for either a violent whipping or forcible anal sex. Sometimes the priests made them drink red wine. Sometimes the priests masturbated in front of the children. Other times they made the children masturbate for them, perform oral sex or fondle each other. 

The complaint is not about just one or two isolated cases. At least 231 and more likely as many as 700 boys who attended the school between 1953 and 1992 were subjected to what has been described by the victims as “ritual abuse,” according to Ulrich Weber, a German lawyer commissioned by the choir who represents the alleged victims. “I have here 231 reports of physical abuse,” Weber told reporters at a press conference in Regensburg on Friday when he presented a report based on an eight-month investigation into the alleged abuse. “The abuse ranges from sexual assault and rape to food deprivation to the boys who were less cooperative.” 

— The fact that the words “ritual abuse” have been mentioned by victims is extremely important. — 

The bulk of the abuse, which also included canings, forced gluttony and anal penetration with foreign objects, happened in the mid-1970s to boys being groomed for the world-famous Domspatzen boys choir of Regensberg’s St. Peter’s Cathedral when a certain Father Georg Ratzinger was the choir leader. Ratzinger, who will turn 92 next month, is the elder brother of Josef Ratzinger, better known as Pope Benedict XVI. He conducted the choir from 1964 to 1994. When asked if Ratzinger knew what was going on, Weber said, “After my research, I must assume so.” ~ Newsweek [240] 

Investigators have put the number of complaints at over two thousand. 

It is the magnitude of a war crime yet no Catholic or secular authority has even so much as addressed it. 

The prestigious choir dates back to the year 975 and grew to become one of the most famous musical training schools for boys, producing a number of successful composers and directors including Franz Wittenbrink, who came forward when the allegations of abuse first surfaced. In 2010, he told investigators that priests at the Regensburg boarding school engaged in what he described as “an elaborate system of sadistic punishments combined with sexual lust.” 

He said that he and several other boys were often “chosen” to be invited by the headmaster at the time to his personal apartment where they were plied with red wine and made to perform sex acts on the headmaster and on each other. “Everyone knew about it at the time,” he said in 2010. 

Whether the elder Ratzinger told his younger brother about the abuse remains dubious, especially given that the younger Ratzinger served as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the church’s former Inquisition office that now sees to the interpretation and enforcement of church doctrine, before being tapped as pontiff. If he had been informed, he would have been in a prime position to expose it. The recent revelations of the extent of abuse will seal Benedict’s record on the greatest scandal to rock the Catholic Church as weak, at best. [241] 

When the decades-old secrets began to surface in 2010, an anemic victim’s advocacy group conducted a little-noticed protest. 

Even that was attacked by police. 

...a group of clerical abuse victims staged a press conference outside St. Peter’s Square in Rome to denounce Benedict’s handling of the case and gave reporters church and Vatican documents on the case. 

Afterward, Italian police detained four American abuse victims for 2 ½ hours because they didn’t have a permit for the news conference and suggested they get a lawyer in case a judge decided to press charges, the victims said. 

“We’ve spent more time in the police station than Father Murphy did in his life,” Peter Isely, the Milwaukee-based director of SNAP, the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, said after his release. ~ Associated Press [242] 

A change has since occurred. 

The sudden increase in arrests (2016/2017) may be the result of secular partners in Vatican crime feeling the heat of increased focus on their abominations by angry citizens. 

Or it may be something even more sinister; a Satanic game of chess. As priest abuse victim lawyer Mitch Garabedian (played by Stanley Tucci) stated to Boston Globe reporter Mike Rezendes (played by Mark Ruffalo) in the 2015 movie Spotlight, “The Church thinks in centuries, Mr. Rezendes.” 

Rome was founded in the 6th century, B.C. and had grown into an Empire by the 1 st century, B.C. She maintained her power and wealth and transformed into an all-encompassing religious authority by the 6th century A.D. She has co-opted the most powerful organizations in the world from banking to organized crime to the militaries and intelligence agencies of nation-states. She specializes in the most lucrative black markets; weapons, narcotics, people. The wealth horded and hidden by the Vatican can only be guessed at but it must surely stagger the imagination. 

You might find a couple of quid tucked down the back of the sofa cushion if you’re lucky. More likely it’s just coppers and crumbs. 

But such is the vastness of the Vatican’s wealth that it can find hundreds of millions of euros just “tucked away” off of its central balance sheet, according to the cardinal responsible for the Holy See’s finances. 

“It is important to point out that the Vatican is not broke,” Cardinal George Pell, the Vatican’s prefect of the secretariat for the economy, wrote in the Catholic Herald. ~ International Business Times [243] 

Pell would know. He was the top Roman Catholic cleric in Australia before his activities protecting pedophile priests earned him a substantial promotion in Rome. After a “job well done” the promotion has afforded Pell a lavish lifestyle. [244] 

More on George Pell in Chapter 23. 

For years, controlled media has been slowly leaking out stories that powerful computers can use specialized programs to collate patterns and effectively predict the future. [245],[246] 

Such stories claim that the capability is rudimentary and blunt; only able to “predict” very large, general events like wars. It is guaranteed to be much more precise and trends such as citizen awareness of the Devil’s Simulation have almost certainly been predicted. This allows the criminals, themselves, forewarning to expertly release information and to initiate “investigations” to feign action while getting in front of the trend and steering it clear of the areas that are the most vulnerable — what you’re reading of in these pages. 

That “steering” includes insuring that citizens don’t understand the full scope of Luciferian activities or who is at the top, organizing them all. 

Agents of espionage in secular offices are critical to these efforts and they provide a range of subterfuge to keep the enemies of mankind protected. 

• Communicating crimes to law enforcement falls short of arrests. 

• Arrests end with failure to prosecute. 

• Prosecutions end with failures to convict. 

• Convictions end with heinously light sentences. 

While thoughts of near-limitless wealth and super-computers that predict the future may make the Jesuit-run Vatican seem like an unbeatable foe filled with malice and power, it’s important to remember that all of these resources are expended for one purpose: to keep the sleeping giant of humanity unaware of Rome’s crimes. 

More than anything else, she is an enemy that desperately fears an awakened populace. [xix]

next Lolita 163s

source and notes

https://projectcognition.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Eaters-of-Children-The-Pedocracy-Exposed-How-Access-to-Power-is-Granted-Through-the-Rape-Torture-and-Ritualistic-Slaughter-of-the-Innocent-by-Giovanni-Cirucci.pdf

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. As a journalist, I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of artistic, cultural, historic, religious and political issues. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Copyrighted material can be removed on the request of the owner.  

Part 3 You Can't Tell the People The Cover Up of Britain's Roswell ... The Story makes Headlines ... The Larry Warren Story

You Can't Tell the People 

The Cover Up of Britain's Roswell 

by Georgina Bruni 

THE STORY MAKES HEADLINES 

Other than a brief article in the science journal OMNI and odd pieces in UFO literature, the media in general shied away from the incident until late 1983. The story first made headlines when Manchester-based News of the World journalist Keith Beabey was tipped off about Lieutenant Colonel Halt’s memorandum and immediately followed up the lead. Since then, apart from the famous Roswell incident, no similar case has attracted the attention of the world’s media quite as much as the Rendlesham Forest case. 

In the early 1980s journalists were not so keen to be assigned to UFO reporting because it was considered bottom-of-the-barrel journalism. But the Rendlesham Forest story was different. Reluctantly, the British broadsheets, such as The Times and the The Guardian, were forced to follow the story due to public interest after it appeared on the front page of Britain’s most popular Sunday tabloid, The News of the World. The newspaper must have thought it was a good story because the headline alone took up almost half of the front page, followed by an equally impressive section on page three. The actual headline ‘UFO LANDS IN SUFFOLK AND THAT’S OFFICIAL’ became almost as well known as the case itself. 

It was not long before Fleet Street discovered that The News of the World were on to something big. On 2 October 1983, the same day the story made front-page headlines, two other Sunday newspapers featured it. The Sunday Express crept in with a small article exposing details of Lieutenant Colonel Halt’s memorandum, along with a couple of quotes from British notables. Minister of Defence Sir John Nott remarked of the incident: ‘I know nothing about it. Certainly I never saw any report about a UFO landing. I don’t believe in UFOs anyway.’ Sir Ian Gilmore offered a more aggressive response. ‘I should think this is absolute rubbish,’ he said. Not having much of a lead, The Sunday Mirror dressed up their story by describing a fringed flying saucer with portholes and blue flashing lights, landing on the Woodbridge runway. 

On Monday 3 October Britain’s most respected broadsheet, The Times, trashed the Rendlesham Forest case to pieces. Local Suffolk forester Vince Thurkettle was highly amused when interviewed by journalist Alan Hamilton, who seemed rather more interested in making sure he had the correct name of the forest trees (Corsican pines) and their correct height (75 feet) than whether or not a UFO encounter had actually taken place. Thurkettle, albeit innocently, had set the cement for several ‘down to earth’ theories and, sadly, by trying to be overly witty, the journalist had made a complete nonsense of the case. 

The Daily Express took a different angle (Monday 3 October) and opted for ‘UFOs? They’re Our Boys Really!’ The late Lord Clancarty told reporter John Rydon that he was convinced the UFOs were British and American secret projects. ‘I know for sure that such man-powered machines are being used by both the Americans and the British,’ said Clancarty. As head of the House of Lords All Party UFO Study Group, Clancarty believed the British and their allies had managed to locate some type of electromagnetic energy in outer space which powered these crafts. On the same day The Daily Star reported ‘Spaceship Riddle Deepens’, quoting a Ministry of Defence spokesperson as saying they had no record of Halt’s memorandum. The Guardian claimed ‘MOD Quiet on UFO’, but the journalist obviously knew how to ask the right questions because the Ministry of Defence spokesman confirmed they had been sent details of an alleged UFO incident, but added that he could not reveal any information. Considering the contents of the memorandum had already been splashed all over the British press, I find it somewhat strange that the Ministry of Defence were still trying to ignore public requests for information. After all, if the incident was of no concern to them, why be covert about it? 

On 5 October 1983 the US armed forces publication Stars and Stripes bannered the story on their front page. ‘Fleet Street whoops it up. British paper reports UFO landing near RAF base,’ ran the headlines. When UK bureau chief J. King Cruger questioned Lieutenant Colonel Doug Kennet, director of the Office of Public Affairs at RAF Mildenhall, the officer denied that US Air Force officials had been involved in a cover-up. He explained that they had responded to several Freedom of Information requests and had even tracked down Halt’s memorandum and supplied it to CAUS. Captain Kathleen McCollom, chief of public affairs for RAF Bentwaters, confirmed there were sightings of strange lights, but stressed that only a small number of base personnel were involved and they were off duty at the time. Furthermore, she told Cruger that the incident occurred off the base and the sightings had been exaggerated to a comical degree. 

Hours before the ink was due to set on The News of the World front-page story, Rendlesham Forester Vince Thurkettle received a call from David Jack, a Sunday People journalist, who enquired about something unusual that had occurred in the forest. Apparently, one of their spies at The News of the World had tipped them off about a UFO incident but having no leads to go on Jack thought the forester would know something. It was too late for The Sunday People to run the story and, being a weekly newspaper, they would have to wait until the following Sunday (9 October). By then most of the dailies had picked up on the news, but Jack saw fit to write a small piece entitled ‘That UFO was a Lighthouse – and that’s official!’ The article was based on the forester’s theory that the UFO was probably the local lighthouse beacon. It was obviously a sad attempt to debunk their competitors’ scoop. 

The News of the World must have realized there was still some mileage left in the story because on 9 October they ran a half-page featuring more revelations. This time they interviewed Admiral of the Fleet Lord Hill Norton, who was the former chief of defence staff (1971–73). ‘I must speak out,’ he told the journalist, ‘the Ministry of Defence know far more than they are prepared to say. But now they have an obligation to tell the nation what occurred that night in a British wood.’ 

The one broadsheet that seemed totally uninterested in the Rendlesham affair was The Daily Telegraph. When it did feature an article on 17 October, journalist Adrian Berry was so critical of The News of the World story that the newspaper’s editor, Derek Jameson, wrote a letter of protest. On 25 October The Daily Telegraph printed the letter without comment, which only added to Jameson’s frustrations. He wrote: ‘Sir – Mr Adrian Berry (article, Oct 17) is less than fair in his report of UFO sightings when he accuses my newspaper of shameless impudence in reporting that a mysterious object had landed in Suffolk.’ Jameson’s letter went on to explain the facts of the case based on Halt’s memorandum and pointed out the reasons why the UFO could not have been a lighthouse. Berry’s article also infuriated seasoned researcher Timothy Good, who wrote to the journalist pointing out that it was ‘a disgraceful misrepresentation’, but Timothy received no reply from either Berry or the newspaper. 

When news of the incident reached Japan, television crews wasted no time in visiting Woodbridge. In fact, the Japanese media were so fascinated by the case that they invited Larry Warren to Tokyo. Warren’s visit on 10 October 1983 was heavily publicized inasmuch as he received almost celebrity status. As he was driven from the airport he was surprised to see himself featured on a huge billboard at the top of the television building. Warren had not only made front-page news but had also been interviewed for several television shows, including Japan’s version of America’s The Tonight Show. 

In the summer of 1984 American defence and technology journalist Chuck de Caro began making enquiries about the case for CNN’s Special Assignment. The television show first aired in February 1985 and was dedicated exclusively to the case. Prior to the programme airing, the studio received a memorandum from the National Security Council, apparently they wanted to review the documentary before it was shown to the public. De Caro related what happened: 

What surprised me was the National Security Council’s interest in the programme. A former anchorwoman came in and told me she had received a memo from them. They wanted to send someone over to see me. They sent over a full Air Force colonel. I got the impression they were concerned about the nuclear weapons aspect. 

Considering the programme involved one of America’s top defence journalists and the report revolved around a NATO airbase that deployed nuclear weapons, it is understandable that the security agencies would be concerned. The programme featured interviews with witnesses and players alike, all of whom except Larry Warren demanded their identity be kept secret and their faces blacked out. Since they are retired from the service it is now safe to name those who appeared on the programme: Ray Gulyas, Bobby Ball, Greg Battram and Larry Warren. It was the first time Chuck de Caro had taken an interest in a UFO case but, as he explained, his investigation was purely from a defence angle. Nevertheless, the programme would make him a household name among ufologists and he would go on to investigate other UFO incidents involving the US military. 

I asked de Caro for his opinion of the case: 

I think something went on that they tried to cover up, but you have to eliminate everything else before you can claim it’s a real unknown. I tried to do that but I had limited time because we had a programme to make. You have got to get at the paperwork. You need answers from the AFOSI. Why? What did they learn? Why were they so intense? These guys were security police patrolmen. They go off base into a forest carrying weapons and that is a violation. They then turn around and run away. You need to find out how the Air Force does business. If they have something they don’t want you to know, sure they’ll cover it up. 

De Caro had tried to interview the witnesses but most were too afraid to talk to him. He explained the difficulty: 

When I talked to them they were still curious. Larry [Warren] was very much emotionally affected by all of this, but he was too far down the ladder [rank]. I spoke to Lieutenant Englund and he was absolutely terrified. He was stupefied. Stuttering, he said, ‘I don’t want to talk about it.’ I went to see Adrian Bustinza, who had recently married, and his wife told me he still woke up screaming in the middle of the night. He was terrified to talk about it too. I can understand that, you know, if they are threatening you with prison sentences. I spoke to Colonel Halt and saw his plaster cast of the landing marks, others said theirs disappeared. I couldn’t get to [General Gordon] Williams. The Air Force protected him from me. 

De Caro’s interest was causing some concern for the USAF, especially Captain Victor L. Warzinski, the public affairs officer at RAF Bentwaters, who had to respond to de Caro’s demanding requests for information. Although he went to the top, by contacting the Pentagon, de Caro’s queries were referred back to the head public affairs office at RAF Mildenhall, who in turn contacted RAF Bentwaters. In one of many cables on the subject (August 1984) Warzinski sent the following message to RAF Mildenhall and the Headquarters of USAFE, Ramstein AFB Germany: 

Colonel Halt is currently assigned with AFLC at Tinker AFB, OK. Suggest OSAF/PA discuss his desire to go on record and grant interviews to credible press. He had indicated a desire to do so while assigned here. We discouraged this at the time, feeling it would only fan the fire. Interview now could be advantageous. He would basically say he saw lights he could not explain. Does not mean he’s drawn a conclusion in favour of UFOs. 

I asked de Caro for his opinion of the UFOs: 

I don’t know. Was it an experimental weapon? Electromagnetic pulse maybe? I’ve looked into radio-frequency weapons. The British were experimenting with a death ray during the war, then Over the Horizon, they tend to pulse. It could be something left over from that. Was it an infrasound weapons experiment? No one ever followed that up. You need a lot of money for that kind of research. I didn’t necessarily believe in UFOs, I was looking at it from a defence angle. A few years ago I stumbled across a security guard who talked about an incident on a base in Alaska. He described seeing some sort of wave in the snow heading towards him. He panicked, vomited, ran off – that sounds like a weapon experiment to me. 

What about a hologram? I asked. 

The problem with holograms is that it wouldn’t explain the static charge. They complained about the hair on their necks standing up, and they said, ‘this thing moved and we followed it’. That doesn’t sound like a hologram to me. 

Whatever his thoughts, de Caro does not believe it had anything to do with a lighthouse. It was science writer Ian Ridpath’s public claims that the UFOs were nothing more than the beam from the Orfordness lighthouse that was the most damaging argument against the case. Over the years, both his contribution to BBC TV’s Breakfast Time and his article in The Guardian (5 January 1985), promoting the lighthouse theory, have been used by sceptics and debunkers in an attempt to discredit this already complex case. Referring to The News of the World feature in his Guardian article, Ian Ridpath points out that the informant was former US airman Art Wallace (Larry Warren). I was convinced this was inaccurate so I checked with the journalist who actually got the tip, Keith Beabey. 

G. BRUNI: Keith, can you tell me how you first became interested in the Rendlesham Forest case? 

K. BEABEY: I received some information concerning a document, which turned out to be a memorandum written by the base commander. 

G. BRUNI: I understand it was Harry Harris who tipped you off. 

K. BEABEY: That is correct. 

Whilst investigating the story for The News of the World, Beabey became frustrated after trying for several days to get an audience with Lieutenant Colonel Halt. The Bentwaters public affairs office had suggested he talk to the British liaison officer, Squadron Leader Moreland, which he did, but it was as if Halt was trying to avoid him at every turn. When Beabey finally managed to talk to him, he realized he was not willing to discuss the case. ‘This is a very delicate situation. I have been told very clearly that I could jeopardize my career if I talk to you about it,’ Halt told the journalist. However, he did not deny the report was his, and Beabey managed to secure a copy of the memorandum which was the proof of the pudding he needed. I asked his opinion of the case: 

I had no doubt at all that something occurred, but I only had the report to go on. Apart from Halt, all the witnesses had gone back to the United States because it was now almost three years after the incident . . . The story became more complex after we published it. The waters became muddied by people offering all kinds of explanations. Unfortunately, some were only interested in putting themselves in the limelight . . . My argument was that these were experienced airmen, and surely they ought to know the difference between a lighthouse and whatever it was they couldn’t conceive . . . I didn’t believe that a man of Halt’s integrity, a senior officer and the base commander would have written something untrue. 

I asked Beabey if he would have followed up the story without the official memorandum to work with. ‘Yes, without that we would have still made our enquiries, but that gave us the basis to work with.’ I discovered that Beabey is as fascinated as ever with the Rendlesham Forest incident and has not changed his opinion that something very strange occurred during Christmas week 1980.

THE LARRY WARREN STORY 

Larry Warren has been connected with the incident since early 1983. Being the first person to go public with the story (using the pseudonym Art Wallace) was not an easy task for this young man, but he was so traumatized by the course of events, he told witness Adrian Bustinza, that he was going to make sure the world knew about it. He lived up to his promise. 

In 1997 Larry Warren co-authored Left at East Gate with American researcher Peter Robbins. It is an intriguing story of his early life and his misgivings at being caught up in the Rendlesham Forest incident. As gentle and professional as Peter is, there were moments of intense frustration as he tried to make sense of his co-author’s case, and equally so for Larry as he desperately tried to prove his story was genuine. This was a difficult task because the years of stress and nightmares had taken their toll, and more than once Larry had contemplated suicide. It was as a result of his story that I became more interested in this case. Indeed, some of his claims were far more exotic than those of other witnesses, and I felt compelled to investigate if only to discover what it was that had or had not intruded on this young man’s life. 

Over the years Larry has had to suffer the indignity and criticism of sceptics and ufologists, many of whom insist he could not have been involved because his statements did not match those of other witnesses, coupled with the fact that his story has changed over the years. Like others before me, I discovered that there were several grey areas to his testimony, but then it seemed to me that one does not spend so many years trying to prove one’s case if it is nothing but a lie in the first place. I figured that if Larry Warren was intentionally lying he would have dropped out of the story long ago, especially as new evidence surfaced. He certainly has not stayed with it for financial gain, on the contrary, it has cost him a small fortune. It also cost him his marriage and very nearly cost him his life. 

Lawrence P. Warren was only eighteen years old when he joined the USAF on 22 July 1980. On 1 December he arrived at RAF Bentwaters, having received basic training at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas. When questioned about his Air Force status, Colonel Halt claimed Larry was not on duty at the time of the incident and, furthermore, he was not on the installation. Halt also insisted that he had played no part in the events, and even after Larry produced certain Air Force documents, Halt still had difficulty accepting that he was involved, pointing out that he was not trained for security police duties. Brenda Butler was another person who was sceptical of Larry’s involvement. She was inclined to think he might have picked up the story from other witnesses. With this in mind, she once offered him false information about a witness who did not exist. Larry told her that he knew the man and they had discussed the incident in passing. This episode resulted in a damaging stigma to his credibility. I asked him if he would care to comment on the matter: 

I admit it was wrong. I was not altogether sure of everything that had taken place the night of the incident, or who some of the others were. I was still grasping for the truth myself. Looking back, I think I was trying to get her attention. She wanted to believe it happened and I wanted to get the story out because it really did happen. I suppose I wanted her to believe me, so I agreed with everything she said. 

Witness Jim Penniston also questioned Larry’s involvement, agreeing with Colonel Halt that Larry was not trained to be on duty at the time. However, Penniston admits that soon after the incident he had to caution Larry for discussing it with his fellow airmen. I told Penniston that I had a copy of Larry’s certificate of training, which certifies that he successfully completed the Security Specialist Course. The course was conducted at USAF Lackland, Texas, and Edward D. Young, Colonel USAF, Commander of the 3250th Technical Training Wing, signed the document. I gave him the date (28 October 1980) and also pointed out that I had an original document entitled ‘Report on Individual Personnel’, prepared at 21.16 hrs on 11 December 1980. This document was addressed to the 81st Security Police Squadron, Bentwaters, and was signed by Thomas A. Mosely, TSGT USAF, at Bentwaters Classification and Training School. It proves that Lawrence P. Warren had completed further training (including ground defence) at RAF Bentwaters and was assigned to official duties on 11 December 1980. Having explained the details of Larry’s military training to Jim Penniston he had to agree that if the documents were genuine, then there is no doubt that Larry was trained to be on duty at the time of the incident. I also pointed out that Colonel Halt gives credence to witness Edward Cabansag, but Cabansag had only been on official duty for one or two days prior to his involvement in the incident. Surely if Cabansag can be officially assigned to duty and carry an M-16 rifle within two days of completing his training, then why not Larry Warren? 

Larry has never been certain of the exact date of his involvement, believing it might have been the first night of his midnight shift with D Flight. This would normally have been 26/27 December, but I have since learnt that the Flights were mixed up due to the Christmas holidays. Based on his testimony, Larry is presumably referring to a later incident. The following is based on his own account of the events with my added comments in parentheses. 

It was just after 23.00 hrs when Larry arrived at his posting, which was perimeter post 18, at the furthest end of the flightline on the Bentwaters installation and closest to the Woodbridge base. (This may be an oversight on Larry’s part, or it could have changed, but on checking an official Bentwaters map, I noticed that post 18 was not at the perimeter, but was situated in a central position at the mid-way flightline. From what I understand, this was the area where the aircraft were stored, and as such it required special security at all times. Therefore, the guard on duty should not have been removed from his post.) 

Soon after midnight Larry began hearing radio transmissions coming from the Bentwaters tower and other transmissions between personnel stationed at RAF Woodbridge. The Woodbridge patrol were observing funny lights bobbing up and down over the forest and Airman Warren was becoming nervous at being so alone in the dead of night. Suddenly a truck arrived with three or four personnel, which included Lieutenant Bruce Englund and Sergeant Adrian Bustinza. Airman Warren was instructed to call Central Security Control and announce he was being relieved of duty at his post. Sergeant Bustinza then instructed him to climb into the back of the truck and the patrol headed off to the Bentwaters motor pool to fill some light-alls (generator-mounted light systems). (Adrian Bustinza recalls collecting personnel and having them fill the lightalls but, apart from his superiors, he cannot recall the identities of any of the men he picked up that evening.) After refuelling the lightalls, the patrol then drove to Rendlesham Forest, passing the Woodbridge base by the east gate and taking the next turning left into the logging road. 

Brenda Butler, who is familiar with the area, has pointed out that Larry’s directions to the landing site are incorrect. But having taken the route myself I can see where the confusion arises. If one were to leave the Woodbridge base, taking the road from the east gate (see map) to the area in question, then one would turn right not left. But Larry’s patrol went directly from Bentwaters (Adrian Bustinza has confirmed the patrols took this route) and did not use the short cut through the Woodbridge base. By using the normal route they would have passed the east-gate entrance to the Woodbridge base on their right, they then took the next turning immediately on their left. Therefore Larry’s directions are correct when he says, ‘We turned left at east gate.’ 

Larry recalls being at the site with Bustinza when the big UFO landed (Bustinza insists he was not there when the landing took place but arrived soon afterwards. He also refers to an entirely different landing site than Larry) and describes the landing as a red ball of light exploding in a blinding flash, with shards of light and particles falling on to a yellow fog. Larry remembers going numb during the encounter, as if in a state of shock. Right in front of him appeared a huge machine, which at first seemed to be triangular in shape but was constantly distorting. It reminded him of a huge soluble aspirin (Bustinza also mentions that it looked like a soluble aspirin). The object was covered in weird pipes and what looked like little boxes and there was a bank of cobalt blue lights at its base and a glowing reddish light at the top. Larry was of the opinion that it was old and yet advanced at the same time. Numerous personnel were busy surrounding it on all sides, making a broken circle around it. He was now about twenty-five feet in front of the object and could see landing gear that appeared to be three legs protruding from its main body. At this stage Larry was feeling a sense of nausea and the hairs on his neck and body were standing on end. An officer instructed him and another airman to move closer to the object whilst a disaster preparedness officer led the way with a Geiger counter. Larry could see their shadows on its surface, which appeared to be unusually distorted. It was at this moment he claims to have seen three aeronaut entities communicating telepathically with Wing Commander Gordon Williams. The entities, floating in bluish gold balls of light, seemed disturbed by a noise that sounded like a loud bang. Larry and the others backed away from the object as they heard an officer calling to some men who tried to run off over the fence. The commotion appeared to disturb the entities and, as if in fear, they floated back towards the object before moving forward again and continuing their silent communication with the commander. Larry claims that people were filming the UFO and taking photographs during the entire event. 

One of the major problems with Larry’s story is that he is the only witness to go public claiming Wing Commander Gordon Williams was involved in the incident. In Left at East Gate he refers to the CNN documentary, stating that although the faces of the witnesses were blacked out he recognized Captain Mike Verrano, and claims Verrano had verified that Wing Commander Williams had taken a film canister of the incident to a waiting aircraft. Former Senior Master Sergeant Ray Gulyas, who worked alongside Captain Verrano in 1980, pointed out that it was Verrano who had taken the film to the aircraft, not Williams. He was sure that Williams was never mentioned in any of the briefings by Bobby Ball (also a witness), only Halt, and he did not doubt Ball’s word. In the same context Larry implied that Gulyas had said he had seen flying objects containing maybe people or different life forms. Gulyas positively denies he saw anything of the kind. ‘I was not a witness to the incident and I never heard of there being any aliens or beings out there,’ he told me. I asked Larry to comment on Gulyas’s statement. He checked the original manuscript and suggested it was a publishing error – that it should have read Bobby Ball and not Ray Gulyas. 

Nevertheless, Larry is still convinced that Wing Commander Gordon Williams was out in the forest communicating with the crew of an alien spaceship. But as I explained to him, I needed more evidence because there was no other witness who put Gordon Williams in the picture. It was then he suggested I speak to Lee Speigel. I had been trying to contact Speigel for several months, without success, and was pleased when Larry asked Peter Robbins to put me in touch with him, promising he would confirm that Williams was involved. Lee Speigel was a producer and talk show host who had caught up with Colonel Halt at his home in 1985. According to Larry, Halt had become defensive when Speigel asked him about Gordon Williams and the Colonel had asked him and his crew to step outside. It was then that Halt allegedly admitted that ‘Williams and beings’ were involved in the incident. This is what Speigel related to me: 

Yes, I did interview Halt at home and he was candid, to a point, but was obviously not telling all the facts. Whether it had more to do with keeping quiet because of national security reasons or perhaps personal reasons, I don’t know for sure. When I asked Halt whether or not it was true that Base Commander Williams [sic] had some sort of very close encounter with alien beings, with a possible communication, Halt didn’t get defensive and didn’t ask me to have my crew step outside . . . My camera crew never came into Halt’s home, just myself and an NBC producer, no one else. So re. Williams, all that Halt said was that he couldn’t comment on what happened, not denying it, not confirming it. You can read anything you want into that, but that’s what he said, and I’ve never embellished it beyond that. Halt never told me that beings had been observed on the third night. He simply wouldn’t or couldn’t confirm it. 

According to Peter Robbins, Speigel was interviewing Larry and him for a New York radio show and it was after the show that Williams’ name cropped up. Peter remarked on the conversation: 

. . . I am not certain whether we were still in the studio or already in the cafe when it came up, but I specifically remember Larry asking Lee, certainly at least in part for my benefit, about Halt telling him that Williams had been involved. And I distinctly remember Lee responding in the affirmative . . . 

89s

Clearly there is a disagreement here. It seems strange that Larry would insist I talk to Speigel if he was not certain he would back up his story. However, when I first asked Speigel about his interview with Halt, he gave me a detailed account but there was no mention of Williams. It was only when I asked about Williams’ alleged involvement that he offered the aforementioned statement. Could Peter have been mistaken about Speigel’s affirmative answer or is it possible that Speigel might have misunderstood the question in the heat of the moment, several years down the line? 

Adrian Bustinza disagrees with Larry, and is in no doubt that Williams was not involved, although he does remember Halt mentioning Williams’ name during the encounter. Bustinza has no memories of Larry being at the landing site either. He explained the difficulty of trying to follow what was going on at the time: 

I don’t recall seeing him [Larry] out there, but there was a lot of confusion going on. There was tunnel vision. After the incident Larry was very upset and paranoid, and I had to try to calm him down. He wanted to talk. I remember us walking down the dorm and he was saying, ‘I wonder if they are watching us now, if they have cameras watching us.’ He got me scared. Even back then he was determined to get the story out. Larry wanted to talk, he was talking to everyone. 

Steve La Plume remembers Larry very well. They had first met in a bar in San Antonio, Texas, whilst they were both at the police academy. It was not until the middle of January 1981 that they would meet again. La Plume heard about the major event the morning after it occurred, when some of the witnesses from the night shift walked through the day room on their way to their quarters. At the time, he did not pay too much attention to the witnesses, who were carrying their gear bags over their shoulders and walking with their heads and eyes down as if trying to avoid eye contact with anyone. He recalled how the men in the day room jeered as they passed through. ‘Hey, see any little green men? Did you get probed?’ One of the men retaliated by shouting ‘Fuck you guys! Shut the fuck up.’ La Plume does not remember seeing Larry with the group, but a few weeks later Larry discussed the incident with him in his dormitory. As confirmed by Bustinza, it seems Larry had been hunting out fellow witnesses and had heard about La Plume’s January sighting and wanted someone to talk to who had had a similar experience. Because it was the first time they met since leaving Texas they did not immediately recognize each other. 

La Plume related only what Larry had told him on that first day because he felt that this was the purest form of his story – before any outside influence might have tainted it. Larry told him that something had occurred outside the perimeter fence at RAF Woodbridge. He had been ordered to collect a lightall and fuel it at the gas station. He mentioned that they had trouble, both with filling the light-all with fuel as well as keeping their vehicle running. When Larry’s patrol arrived at the forest, they were ordered to secure their weapons and leave them with another patrol. They then made their way to where they saw a craft. Larry also mentioned that at least one airman was taking photographs, probably with a personal camera, which was later confiscated. There was also a video-camera recording of the event which he believed was authorized because it was later flown to Germany. Larry explained that everyone was in a broken circle around the craft and a colonel was communicating with beings. However, he was very straightforward about the fact that they were not talking, just communicating. Larry told La Plume that he also saw the beings, which he described as three feet tall and resembling kids in snowsuits. There were two of the beings outside the craft, and one inside, and they appeared to be floating around as if inspecting it. Larry said that when the craft took off it joined about five other objects that formed into one unit before disappearing. Steve La Plume’s story seems to give credence to Larry’s, which is also very similar to Steve Roberts’ original story. 

According to Larry, the morning after the incident, he and several other airmen were instructed to report to Major Zickler. The airmen were lined up and checked over with a Geiger counter, doubtless for radiation, and told they were going to be debriefed concerning what had occurred the night before. They were then ushered into Zickler’s office and instructed to sign statements without having the opportunity to read them. Larry managed a quick glance through the statement and realized it was a watered-down version of the actual event. It mentioned only that what he had seen were some unusual lights in the trees. 

The witnesses, having been seated in front of a movie screen, were again told by Major Zickler that they would be debriefed and to be sure to give their full cooperation. Zickler then departed and three men in civilian suits entered the room. One was introduced as an officer from Naval Intelligence and the other two men represented the Armed Forces Security Service. After the introductions the naval commander gave them a briefing about UFOs and how the government had been aware of them for a very long time. The airmen were told that numerous ‘off-earth’ civilizations visited the planet from time to time, and that some had a permanent presence here. They were then instructed not to discuss any aspects of the incident with anyone on the base and if pressed they should just mention they saw lights in the trees. The commander then gave them a pep talk on patriotism before showing them a film, which revolved around the military’s encounters with UFOs. According to Larry, the footage consisted of segments from various eras, beginning with World War Two, the Korean War and Vietnam, followed by footage from the US space missions. He claims that it was during this meeting that the men were told their security clearance had been upgraded. Having received no further confirmation, written or otherwise, he was of the opinion that the latter was mentioned only as a ploy to deter the witnesses from discussing the incident. 

During a conversation I had with Malcolm Zickler, he confirmed that such a meeting had taken place although he did not offer any details. If you have a problem believing that the USAF educate their personnel on UFO matters, let me relate a similar story that was told to me in early 1997. Bruce Taylor, a Vietnam veteran who resides in Seattle, USA, informed me that before going off to war he and other personnel were summoned to a classroom where they were taught what to do in case they came into close contact with a ‘craft of unknown origin’. In the likelihood of an encounter, they were expected to back away whilst observing everything possible, and then report it to their immediate supervisor. Taylor was also shown footage of UFOs in Korea and Vietnam, probably the exact same film that Larry and the other witnesses were shown. Taylor explained how the Air Force deals with this particular subject. ‘What was hard for me was that on one hand they were telling me UFOs don’t exist, but on the other hand they were telling me what to do if I see one.’ I asked him if he had been given any information on extraterrestrials and what they might look like. ‘No, they didn’t tell me what they might look like because that might be too easy,’ he said. He added, ‘I believe there are a couple of different races that fly these craft and I don’t think it would be easy for the governments of the world to tell people what they look like if they are telling everyone that they don’t exist.’ 

A remarkable part of Larry’s story is his recollection of the events whilst under hypnotic regression. The session, which was carried out by ufologist and abduction researcher Budd Hopkins on 15 July 1995, has Larry being taken to an underground facility by two strange men in black civilian suits. This occurred in the early evening following the morning meeting in Zickler’s office, and one has to wonder if certain individuals were singled out. Larry was relaxing in his dorm when he was called on the telephone and told to report to the parking lot within twenty minutes. He was very concerned because earlier that day he had called his mother from the base telephone box and was in the middle of telling her about the UFO when he was cut off in mid-sentence. As he made his way towards the vehicle he was very nervous about what was ahead. 

During the hypnotic session with Budd Hopkins, who is well known for his work with people who claim to have been abducted by aliens, Larry tried to describe what happened in the parking lot. As he walked towards the vehicle, which he thought was a 1980 Cadillac with New York number plates, he noticed Adrian Bustinza leaving his building and heading in the same direction. There were two men waiting for them, and as Larry tried to climb into the back of the vehicle he was sprayed in the face from something that looked like a deodorant can. He complained that his nose, eyes and mouth were stinging and he was very scared because he could not open his eyes and had trouble breathing. 

As the car stopped Larry was pulled out and laid on an icy patch of ground near the Bentwaters flightline. He was then taken through a door and experienced the rapid descent of going down in an elevator. But he was not sure if the elevator was real because suddenly everything became a void. The next moment Larry was in a clinical-type room, sitting upright in a chair having his eyes washed by a man in a white coat, whom he assumed was a military doctor. The room adjoined an office area, but it was not the Bentwaters clinic he recognized. He was then approached by a colonel who ushered him into another room where Adrian Bustinza and six other airmen were seated. At this point Larry was clearly having problems and was very frightened and, according to Budd Hopkins, brought himself abruptly out of the hypnosis. It is certainly an unusual story, but it is the remainder of Larry’s underground experience that causes the most concern, the conscious memory without hypnosis. 

According to Larry, he was still heavily sedated when he was confronted by two men in black SWAT-type uniforms who led him through a narrow corridor where he passed rooms full of computers and high-tech machines. He recalls the operators were dressed in orange and black uniforms. They then went through a pressurized door and an alarm triggered as the seal was broken. The door slid back into a white tiled wall and revealed a large dimly lit rectangular room which led into a smaller area with full-length windows. Larry stepped into the small space and could see a black liquid floor below, which housed a UFO similar to the one he had seen in Rendlesham Forest. 

Exiting from the confined space, he was ushered through a large door which led down a long corridor and into another room full of rows of seating. Larry was instructed to be seated, and as he did so he spotted Adrian Bustinza off to his right. Directly ahead was a large translucent screen and as he stared at it he realized he could not move his head. Suddenly he sensed there was a small figure behind it and he realized he was having a telepathic exchange with an alien entity. The voice began discussing Larry’s life and, as if waiting for confirmation, it would constantly ask if he could remember. 

Larry then heard the being say that it was from another place, another reality. He was told that the underground facility under Bentwaters was very deep and had been there since the 1940s. With the aid of human support it had been expanded in the 1960s enabling the beings to travel in their crafts through an extensive tunnel system that exited into the North Sea. 

An amazing story but what can we make of it? Those interested in this case have had difficulty accepting Larry’s claims of alien beings living underground in rural Suffolk. Most people have simply dismissed it, claiming it is just too weird. Even with a vivid imagination, I find it strange that anyone would want to make up such a bizarre story, especially if they want to come across as credible. One thing that had crossed my mind was that if Larry had seen a UFO underground, could this have been a stealth F-117 aircraft that had been secretly deployed at Bentwaters? The design would most certainly have looked alien to someone who did not know of their existence, and if Larry was drugged it would be even more confusing. According to my source they had been housed in hangars at the far end of the flightline. It is a possibility that the hangars had some sort of lift that would transport the aircraft to a basement area. 

Steve La Plume confirms part of Larry’s abduction story: 

He also told me he was taken in a black car, that when the car pulled up close a window rolled down, and when he stuck his head in to talk to the occupants he blacked out. I do know for a fact that he said he was debriefed and told to keep quiet because ‘bullets are cheap’. He also said he went under the base and there was a parking facility or something like that. He stated that the North Sea was close and they entered the underground base via the North Sea in an underground tunnel or something to that effect. I didn’t see him for a few days after this [relating to when Larry spoke to him in mid-January], and when I did he was upset, because we were supposed to go drinking but he never showed up. 

A few weeks after the statement from Steve La Plume, I told him about Left at East Gate. He reviewed the book and submitted another statement for my perusal. 

Larry never told me that it was Williams who was out there. I only remember him saying that a colonel was present. It was only after we got back to the US [a few years later] and talked about it more that I remember him saying it was actually Williams. He did tell me he was abducted about the same manner that he states in his book. He also mentioned the underground complex under the photo lab. He said the car was big and dark in colour, but never mentioned that there was anyone else with him. I was told this while we were on Bentwaters. 

Considering he had had such a dramatic time in the Air Force, I find it strange that Larry decided he wanted to re-enlist so soon after his separation from the service. But in 1981, following several failed attempts, he consulted Congressman Gerald B. Solomon and some months later he received a copy of a letter written by Lieutenant Colonel Thomas M. Alison, addressed to the Honourable Gerald B. Solomon. It turned out that five months after his discharge, the Office of the Surgeon General, USAF, had permanently disqualified him by reason that he could not fully extend his right arm. Larry has always claimed that he did not receive a medical discharge from the USAF even though the Air Force wrote to Solomon and explained the details of his disablement. Steve La Plume comments: 

I remember Larry being assigned to the supply hut, and I distinctly remember that he was getting out of the Air Force due to his wrist, which he showed me would not move correctly. He explained that he was getting out for medical reasons – or breach of contract because they should not have assigned him the job of security to begin with, and should have caught his disability during his physical. 

Larry supplied me with a copy of the letter of approval for his separation from the Air Force, which was stamped with Wing Commander Gordon E. Williams’ signature. There is no obvious mention of a medical problem (unless it is coded), the separation was agreed on (‘Non Fulfilment of Guaranteed Training Enlistee Program Agreement’). 

It seems as if Larry had a number of concerns whilst at Bentwaters and was under the impression that the AFOSI (known to servicemen as the OSI) were out to get him. Steve La Plume had warned Larry that they were watching him because he had put his name forward with several others for allegedly using drugs. La Plume recalls the incident. 

I was bagged for doing drugs in Amsterdam. They, OSI, could prove it, and guilt on my part knew they could. I was told that if I cooperate they would not hold up my release from the service. I was already snapped at this time and had already had my sighting. I wanted nothing more than get the fuck out of Bentwaters and the USAF. I was in trouble with my drinking and was just a mind full of mush at this point in my life. I am making no excuses. I was weak and they preyed on that. However, I was the one who suggested they might want to take a look at Larry because I knew he had gone to Amsterdam recently or was about to. I was spouting off every name I could to get me out of this mess and get back home. So it was not like they were out to get him. Not from where I was sitting. Perhaps they picked on me hoping I would give them some dirt on Larry . . . 

There were several rumours about Larry being thrown out of the Air Force for being a drug user, and I asked him outright if this was the case, but he absolutely denied it. Edward Cabansag remembers seeing Larry in the supply hut and was told by a fellow airman that Airman Warren was waiting for his release, which was a result of his involvement with drugs. Larry reminded me that he had an honourable discharge from the Air Force (I have a copy of this document) and was never associated with drugs. He believes these rumours were started to discredit him as a witness because the Air Force knew he was talking about the incident. 

Other personnel told me that sometime during 1980 a huge drugs bust was carried out on the Bentwaters installation. Those involved were members of the Security and Law Enforcement Squadrons and they were immediately sent back to the United States. In fact most of the new recruits at Bentwaters in December 1980 were said to have been replacements for those who were transferred. 

If Larry had been busted for drugs he would probably have received the same treatment and may even have been discharged. Besides, I have in my possession a copy of a document with the stamp of Wing Commander Gordon E. Williams’ signature, which proves that Larry himself requested separation from the Air Force and not the other way around. 

Not only did Larry’s attempts to re-enlist fail, but when he applied for his passport to be renewed in 1994 he received a letter stating his request had been denied due to the passport being altered or mutilated. He was told he would have to appear before a passport agent or designated court employee with acceptable proof of his US citizenship. He also had to submit a written statement explaining the reason for the condition of the altered/mutilated passport. 

Larry called the State Department Consular Center in New Hampshire and was told the letter had been sent to him at the behest of the Department of Defense. The reason given for the refusal was that he had been discussing sensitive defence issues on foreign soil. Further attempts to obtain a passport were blocked and Larry discovered that all files relating to him had disappeared from the State Department’s computers. He simply did not exist! 

On 17 October 1994 Peter Robbins wrote to former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, explaining Larry’s passport predicament and asking for his assistance in the matter. Apparently Ramsey, who had represented New York police officer Frank Serpico, offered his advice, but things did not go as well as expected and in the spring of 1995 Larry was again refused a passport. According to both Peter and Larry, Ramsey stepped in and suggested they mention his (Ramsey’s) name, and one month later Larry received his new passport. 

One can see why Larry Warren’s story is by far the most controversial. However, Dot Street and Brenda Butler had to admit that, in 1983, he had certain information about the case that was not public knowledge. But had he picked it up from others on the base, or was he actually a witness? Unfortunately alterations in times and dates have occurred throughout the years. He originally claimed there were two hundred witnesses at the site, then changed it to one hundred and more recently it became forty. However odd this may seem, we must never forget what a trauma it was, and Larry is not the only one who has made errors or has changed his story. 

Nevertheless, his errors are more prominent because his story has changed more often, and this might be where the real problem lies. For instance, in 1983 he told Dot Street that following the incident he had found himself on his bed, fully clothed and covered in mud, with no idea of how he had got there. This story changed until it became obsolete when in 1997 he described walking back to the truck and returning to the base. 

When The News of the World newspaper interviewed Larry for the 2 October 1983 issue he did not claim to have seen any aliens, but a month later (6 November) he gave the newspaper a different story. Still using the pseudonym Art Wallace, he had since undergone hypnotic regression and was able to offer a full description of the aliens. According to the newspaper article, during his session with two unnamed hypnotists, he discovered he had witnessed General Gordon Williams communicating with the entities. We must consider that until Williams was featured on the front page of The News of the World a month earlier, Larry had never mentioned his name, but now he had linked him with the incident. 

According to Skycrash, Fred Max was a behavioural psychologist who had conducted the hypnotic session that apparently helped Larry to recall the names of other witnesses and much more detail of the events. However, this session still sees Larry having blacked out and waking up in his barracks, which is strange considering he has since claimed this did not happen. I found it equally strange that there was no reference to this session, or indeed Fred Max, in Left at East Gate, especially as Larry has since trashed the newspaper article. 

Surely this was important because it would apply to his involvement in the actual incident and would help to quell the accusations that he was not involved. I decided to contact Peter Robbins in New York, who explained that the reason the session with Fred Max was not featured in their book was due to a decision made by Larry. When I pushed Peter for more information, it turned out that for whatever reason Larry was not put under hypnosis but had gone through the motions. 

I already knew there were problems with Larry’s testimony. Several months earlier I had heard what sounded like a full confession that he had not been involved in the underground incident after all. It was discovered on an old audio cassette tape with a faded name scrawled on it, the name Art Wallace, his pseudonym. The tape revealed details of conversations between Larry and Dot Street. Dot had paid me a visit and had brought along several audio tapes, and after listening to them most of the day I was just about to finish up when, towards the end of the tape, Larry’s voice became very anxious. Unfortunately, the tape ran out so I only heard the first part of his statement, but it was enough to confuse matters even more. 

He confessed to Dot that the hypnotic session in 1983 had not been genuine because unbeknown to the hypnotist he had not been fully hypnotized. His excuse was that he had gone along with the pretence because someone had paid for the session and they had said words to the effect that, ‘it better be good’. 

In the conversations with Dot, Larry then went on to explain that he had asked Larry Fawcett and Barry Greenwood to find Adrian Bustinza in order to back up his story. ‘I said, get a hold of Bustinza, he’ll tell you what happened, I just told them their names and where they came from . . . Once they get a hold of Bustinza, I’ll come out. Larry [Fawcett] called me and said, “We finally got a hold of Adrian Bustinza . . .”’ However, it seems Bustinza had clammed up and would not discuss the underground facility, or that they were interrogated, and Larry felt let down. The following is taken from my notes of the recording and it is obvious that Larry was confused: 

It’s real, Larry’s [Fawcett] lost interest with the case. You know this underground stuff; Larry to this day does not believe me. I told Barry [Greenwood] and Larry Fawcett that it didn’t happen to me. I’m telling you it did not happen. When I first came out with that, well, I said it did . . . It was March ’81. What can we do about it? Bustinza and a few others, we went down to this place. This underground garbage, I’ve erased that stuff for ever. I didn’t even see those space things. I told Larry, the thing is, March ’81 I got together with some people. We were all involved, rehashing the whole thing, Bustinza said we were taken down to this . . . Bustinza wouldn’t give him [Fawcett] specific details of the underground. If I said I heard it second-hand no one would believe it. Bustinza said we were taken down to an underground base . . . I did some checking, it seemed there was some fact to him. I’d hoped that Busty would tell him what we went through. Busty denied the underground. I had to play devil’s advocate. OK, I did this. I have an ace in the hole, if I get screwed around by this, it would make . . . [tape cut off] 

Just before this bizarre conversation with Dot Street, Larry claimed he had received a telephone threat from an anonymous source. Dot had already spoken to Larry’s mother, who seemed clearly concerned for the safety of her son. I listened to part of that recording and heard Mrs Warren tell Dot that Larry could no longer talk to anyone, that he had to stop all talking. Apparently, Larry had received a brief call from someone warning him ‘It’s OK for people talking about this, but you’ve gone too far. You’ve ruined families. If you keep this up we’ll be in touch.’ 

Larry believed the threat was as a result of Larry Fawcett’s call to Major Malcolm Zickler’s residence. The Major was not at home when Fawcett called but he managed to talk to Mrs Zickler at great length, which might have upset her husband. Whoever called Larry might not have approved of him giving out Air Force personnel details. Could the threatening call have prompted him to deny his involvement in the underground affair? I asked Larry to explain why he went off at a tangent, telling Dot Street that the underground story was a non-event. 

‘I had just gone public with my name, thinking other guys would start talking,’ he said, ‘but when Adrian denied being in the underground I decided I wasn’t going to talk about it anymore. I just wanted to forget it so I denied I had been there.’ A few days after the conversation with Dot, Larry was flown to Japan to appear on a television show. 

But the biggest surprise was yet to come. More than fifteen years ago Larry had told Dot Street that he had an ace in the hole, but what was that ace? I was about to close this chapter on Larry Warren – and believe me it was the most difficult one to write – when he called with important news he wanted to share with me. It was news I desperately wanted to hear, but it did not come cheap; in fact, it cost me many a weary night rewriting the details time and time again as Larry recounted a different set of events with each conversation. At one point I even considered eliminating the story altogether, but then I knew it had to be told, but only in its entirety. 

Early in 1999 I had called and left a message for Larry, who had been visiting Liverpool, where he was staying with Sue McAllister. There were some final details I wanted to check with him; however, I was not prepared for what I was about to hear. He told me that a few months earlier he had been sent some photographs of the actual UFO encountered by Jim Penniston and John Burroughs, which were taken during the initial incident on 25/26 December. I had heard rumours that someone had managed to take pictures and smuggle them out but had never been able to find any evidence to support this story. According to Larry, someone had read the reviews of Left at East Gate on the Internet and had sent the photographs to him care of his publishers. Included in the package were negatives, a Bentwaters photograph folder, a map with directions to the landing site and a letter from the witness. Larry would not reveal the contact’s full name but gave his Christian name as Mark. The witness was an accountant living with his wife and family in the United States and although he was very nervous about the whole affair and did not want to be named, he had sent Larry the photographs in the hope that it would back up the case. 

The witness had been a bystander who was off duty when he and another airman saw lights over the forest from the nearby village of Eyke. He and his friend became curious and drove back to Bentwaters to collect a camera before making their way to the forest. On passing some buildings by the roadside (Foley Cottages), they saw lights moving through the trees and decided to park the vehicle with the aim of investigating them. But Mark’s friend was frightened and refused to follow him into the forest. As Mark moved closer to the lights he could see two figures and a triangular UFO sitting in a clearing. At one point he was only five feet away from the UFO, standing behind a tree taking pictures. The UFO then lifted up and began moving through the forest, dipping in and out of the trees. Mark thought the others had been abducted and decided to run for it. On returning to the base he put another film into his camera and shot pictures of the ground. This film was then turned over to his superiors, and he was told that it had come out ‘fogged’. Three months later, when he thought it was safe to have the UFO film developed, he risked taking it to the Bentwaters supermarket. A few days later he collected the film, which included pictures of himself and some friends taken prior to the incident. For the rest of his tour, almost two years, he kept them safely hidden on the base, sometimes moving them to other locations when he became nervous. As soon as Mark returned to the United States he placed the negatives and pictures into a safe deposit box and there they remained until they were sent to Larry in late 1998. An incredible story! 

Over the course of several weeks, I listened to Larry as he told me about the pictures and how Mark had kept them safe all those years. In an attempt to get the facts correct I would go over the details, only to find that the story changed during these conversations, which of course gave me cause for concern. Then Larry sent me one of the photographs. It was a glossy black picture with a group of coloured lights in the shape of a triangle and a few other coloured balls of light scattered throughout. I eventually had the photograph blown up and lightened and was amazed to find what appeared to be a distorted forest with a triangle of lights hovering over a clearing. Beneath the lights was an azure mist and at ground level there appeared to be a strange yellow mist rising up a few feet off the ground. It certainly looked interesting and, as promised, I sent a blown-up copy back to Larry. I am aware that the photograph could easily be a hoax. However, until it had been enlarged several times and lightened there was nothing to see except blackness and a few lights, so that in itself is interesting. I asked Larry if it were possible that someone might be trying to set him up, but he was adamant that the source was genuine: not only did he know the identity of the witness, but they had exchanged correspondence and talked on the telephone. 

Besides, the photographs had come not only with the negatives but also with the Bentwaters supermarket folder, and of course there was the map that Mark had sketched, indicating details of the route to the landing site. If these photographs were of the Rendlesham UFO, they were a good piece of evidence, but unless I could talk to the witness, or have something constructive to back them up, I had to remain wary. Larry promised to send  me a photocopy of the Bentwaters folder and a negative. Hopefully, if the negative proved to have coding, it would at least date the film. 

Imagine my surprise then when a week later I received a call from Larry confessing that he was the person who had taken the photographs. I was dumbfounded. My first question was, without doubt, ‘Why did you sit on them for nineteen years?’ This was followed by a barrage of questions. I could not believe that he would not use them in his book or even in the early days when he was trying so desperately to prove his case. Peter Robbins was devastated but still had confidence in Larry, blaming it on the incident and the fact that he had been messed with. Meanwhile, Larry confessed to Peter that he had told me the story and given me permission to use the photograph. Obviously Peter felt betrayed, having been his coauthor and helped research his story for almost a decade. I felt for Peter, I had only worked with Larry on a chapter and knew how intense it was – there were surprises around every corner. The problem was the way Larry convincingly told the first story – all those details. I thought he deserved an award for an excellent performance. 

Larry’s new story was, of course, different. He and Mark had driven to Ipswich railway station and parked Mark’s car in the car park. They were catching a train to London to meet two German girls, but first they visited a music shop that was situated near the station. I reminded Larry that it was Christmas Day and the shops were most likely closed during that period. He said Arabs owned the shop, but when I suggested that back in 1980 it might have still been the law to close on Christmas Day, he decided it was not open after all. 

He now explained that some men were delivering merchandise to the shop and he had stopped them to ask about prices. Mark, I was told, was an airman who had top-secret clearance, worked for the National Security Agency and was posted at RAF Martlesham Heath. On their way back to Bentwaters that night they picked up four other airmen, but how they all got into one old car I have no idea. 

As they approached the Bentwaters base they saw three strange lights in the sky formed into the shape of a triangle that seemed to be making a droning noise. Mark drove to the base, dropped off the other airmen, picked up a camera, and he and Larry headed for Rendlesham Forest. As they approached the cottages they heard Motorola radios and saw a white Law Enforcement vehicle parked on the roadside. Having parked their car close by, they followed the noise of the radios into the forest where they found the UFO, which had three points to its base and looked like a Christmas tree. Apart from the reddish lights, everything was pitch black and as Larry took a photograph the UFO moved up off the ground and the radios became silent. 

Mark suddenly became very frightened and ran away, hiding on the ground in the forest. Larry saw some figures he could not recognize but thinks they were abducted because as soon as he began taking photographs the men disappeared. On leaving the forest, Larry spotted John Burroughs who was standing beside a truck. Of course, at that stage he did not know who Burroughs was. Mark then fired off a blank roll of film (both films were Cannon 35 mm) and Larry took the canisters back to his dorm for safekeeping. 

Larry put the canisters on his windowsill but his roommate was uncomfortable with the situation and told him he should report it. He decided to take only the blank film to his superior, Senior Master Sergeant Lee Swain, who then referred Larry to Major Drury. However, Larry thinks Drury was unaware of what was going on. Later that day he heard that someone called Burroughs had seen a UFO and, realizing there might be a search, he wrapped the canister inside a sock, which he placed in a small canvas bag and took to Steve La Plume. Without explaining what it was, he asked La Plume to look after it in case someone searched his room. But La Plume declined, so he went back to his dorm and hid the canister inside his mattress. 

Larry smuggled the pictures out of Bentwaters by placing them in the bottom of a Wedgwood German beer mug, which he had bought on a recent trip to Germany. He posted the parcel to his mother, who knew nothing about the photographs until he returned home a few months later. Once back in the United States he placed the photographs and negatives in his sister’s safe deposit box. ‘I was very frightened of having the pictures,’ he told me. But then he said he had thought of taking them to the newspapers. Larry suggested I contact Steve La Plume, because although he may not be aware of what was inside the sock, he might remember him asking to look after it. But La Plume does not recall the incident and according to his earlier testimony he and Larry never talked until the middle of January 1981. Larry also told me that Adrian Bustinza knew about the photographs, but when I questioned him he denied any knowledge of them. 

A year earlier I had discussed Larry’s alleged trip to Germany with Peter Robbins. According to Left at East Gate, Larry had just arrived back from Germany the day before his encounter in Rendlesham Forest. Peter assured me that was what his co-author had told him, but I was not convinced. If Larry was in Germany, I thought he could not have been a witness because by his own admission and his records he was on D Flight, which meant he should have been on duty during 26/27–28/29. Therefore, if he had been involved in the second landing, he would have already been on duty the day before. However, since then I had discovered that some of the flights were mixed up due to the Christmas holidays. With this in mind, I realized Larry could have been on a different shift that week, but for no reason in particular I had failed to mention my new findings to Larry or Peter. 

Just when I thought I had heard everything, Larry had another surprise in store for me. He was now confessing that he had never been in Germany during the Christmas holidays but had used the trip to cover up the fact that he had been involved in the initial incident. He claimed that if researchers thought he was out of the country then they would not connect him with it. I was obviously trying to figure out how anyone could connect him with the photographs or his alleged involvement when nobody had known anything about it anyway. This statement was remarkable, considering he had diligently done everything he could to prove the incident had occurred and especially that he himself was involved. Suddenly, I was expected to believe that he was trying to cover up his involvement in an earlier encounter. I could have gone on for weeks with my questioning but I felt there was no point. I was burnt out with this latest saga and had already spent far too much time on the Larry Warren story. 

However, I did ask Larry if he would send me some evidence to back up his claims. I suggested he send me one of the negatives, a photocopy of the strip of negatives, showing the code numbers, a copy of the Bentwaters folder and a letter admitting he had taken the photographs and had copyright to them. These items were promised to me but Larry claimed he might not be able to locate the folder and instead of the ten photographs he originally had there were now only five. In a previous conversation, when we were discussing the mystery witness, he had told me that some of the photographs had been taken before the incident and featured Mark and his friends. Understandably, I was very sceptical about all of this, and until such time as Larry could prove he took the photographs I would remain so. Unfortunately, albeit innocently, Peter related my concern and disbelief to Larry, who then thought it was not worth pursuing the matter with me. I admit I discussed the situation with Peter because we were both totally confused. I believe we were both looking for some positive answers but Larry seemed to be even more confused than we were. 

John Burroughs, who was a witness to two events, offered his opinion of Larry’s story to science writer Antonio Huneeus in an interview in 1990: 

Larry Warren has hurt this case quite a bit. The only thing I can say about Larry Warren’s testimony, that aliens came out, his excuse was that CNN did a botched-up job and he never described those little men like they were and stuff like that. There was something out there that was intelligent, that (hurt the eyes especially) when there was the blue transparent-type lights that were coming out, and the different things that they were capable of doing. That is my stand on that. Now Larry Warren took it a step further and, as far as I am concerned, there was no contact between, he called him the base commander, Lieutenant Colonel Williams at the time, and I did not see him out there. I know for a fact that Colonel Halt was out there and there is a small possibility, if I remember, I did see for a brief moment possibly the new base commander, which would have been Colonel Conrad at the time. But there was nothing that I am aware [of] or through talking to other people that would describe what Larry Warren described to CNN, other than there were blue transparent lights that could be possibly – they did act intelligently, some of the stuff they did . . . There was something else that came off the main craft that was able to do different things and flew over the top of us and flew through a pick-up truck and did stuff like that. 

Larry always told researchers he had an ace in the hole to play, and he has since told me that the photographs are that ace. But are they? Could it be that he was not involved in the Rendlesham Forest incident after all? Throughout my investigation I have found no witness to back up Larry’s story. Whether he was involved in one of the encounters, either standing next to the object or further back in the forest, is open to debate. Did Larry take the photographs of the first encounter or was someone trying to set him up? If a witness really did send the photographs to Larry then it is a real pity, because the story has now become so distorted that unless the witness comes forward there is no way of knowing the truth. 

Sue McAllister, who married Larry in Nevada in March 2000, told me in early 1999 that she believed he was genuine. ‘He’s one of the most courageous people I’ve ever met,’ she told me. Sue recalls the first time she heard Larry talk at a UFO conference. ‘The whole audience were mesmerized by him,’ she said. ‘He comes across as being genuine.’ Sue is a member of a small Liverpool UFO group, and apparently Larry showed some of the photographs to them when he visited England. According to Sue, one of the members suggested they might be a set-up. Obviously, at that stage he had not told the group that he had taken the photographs. Peter Robbins has seen one of them and when I asked him if he knew who was responsible for them it turned out that Larry had claimed witness Ed Cabansag had taken them. After almost twenty years of silence from Cabansag, Larry might have thought he would never have gone public. Was Larry doing this to protect the witness named Mark, did he really take the photographs himself or was he trying to paint himself back in the picture? 

In 1999 Sue McAllister wrote me a letter pointing out that, among other things, Larry’s medical records should be proof enough that he was involved. Larry has produced medical records for an eye problem that he suffered whilst at Bentwaters and another injury that surfaced a few years later. During 1983 he had complained of a burning sensation and bleeding through the skin on his neck and back. On one occasion in 1984 his former wife had rushed him to hospital thinking he had ruptured a blood vessel. According to Larry, the doctors detained him for four hours while they conducted several tests. Finally three doctors entered the room and the most senior of these asked Larry a number of questions. He wanted to know if Larry had ever been in Vietnam or worked around any nuclear devices. When Larry admitted he had worked at a nuclear base, he was told that it was their opinion that he had been exposed to an unshielded nuclear device. 

The doctor asked Larry if he could recall when this might have happened. Larry explained that he could but he doubted the doctor would believe it. Larry was then told that in normal conditions these effects should not show up for twenty years. Considering Larry did not have clearance to work in the weapons storage area, it is unlikely he was exposed to any of the nuclear devices deployed at Bentwaters. But then if he was standing facing the UFO, why would only his neck and back have been affected, and why was Adrian Bustinza, who was also standing facing the object, not affected? 

Peter Robbins went to great pains to research the site where Larry claims the second landing had taken place. In 1990 samples of soil were analysed by Matthew Miniz of Springborn Laboratories Inc., Wareham, MA. Miniz concluded that it was a difficult task due to the time lapse and the conditions the samples had been stored under, but nevertheless his professional opinion was in favour of anomalies in the samples, although he expressed a need for further research. Although Larry is the only person to claim the UFO landed in the farmer’s field, the analysis tends to show that something affected the soil on that particular site. However, local resident Gary Collins claims the UFO could not have landed in Capel Green, which he says was only a road, or the farmer’s field, which was visible from his property. ‘I would have been able to see it if that had been the case,’ he told me. However, so would the occupants of the three properties that were directly facing the site, but they deny they witnessed anything unusual. 

I met Larry Warren in 1997 when he visited my home with Peter Robbins during their promotional tour in England. I found him to be a charming well mannered individual, albeit that I sensed there was hidden anxiety. Against all the odds, I had believed he was somehow involved in the incident along with numerous other witnesses. At no time did I favour his underground scenario with the alien being, but considered that he was possibly messed with. Always, I asked myself the same question. ‘Why stay with it for so long and put up with all the criticism if it was not true?’ Was Brenda Butler right, did Larry get the story from someone else? Certainly, he told Dot Street he had heard the underground story from Adrian Bustinza, and had apparently confirmed it with Larry Fawcett and Barry Greenwood. It was the only way to get the truth out, he had told Dot. If he explained that the story was second-hand it would not be believed, so he had to play the devil’s advocate. This was the gist of what he told her in 1983. I know because Dot, my mother and I listened to those recordings when Dot visited me in March 1999. However, we all agreed it was probably because he had been threatened. 

Adrian Bustinza would eventually admit to having been taken to an underground facility, but his story is different from Larry’s. Was Larry tampered with, either by government agents who gave him several memories and trigger words, or by some alien force that we still know so little about? There is no doubt that he is very bitter and blames the USAF for what happened, but we must then question why he was so intent on re-enlisting so soon afterwards. It is not my intention to discredit Larry Warren; in fact I had hoped more than anything to prove his case was genuine. It is difficult to believe that Larry is intentionally lying, but could there also be some confusion there? 

He has genuinely cooperated, leading me to sources he truly believed would back up his story even when they did not. And he has endured so many years of harassment from all sides and appears to have still managed, sometimes with great difficulty, to hang on to what he believes is right. I have discussed with both Larry and Peter the possibility that Larry could have unknowingly been used to spread confusion and disinformation. Let us also not forget that if he truly was involved in a close encounter of the third kind there are forces out there that would want to silence him. 

But Larry was not one to keep his mouth shut and, as we know, was already discussing the incident within hours of it happening – even threatening to go public. If Larry Warren could not be silenced he could be discredited. It is very possible that he is a victim of the Rendlesham Forest incident but, like Steve Roberts, Larry’s story has become very confusing. 

In March 2000 Larry Warren attended a UFO conference in Nevada where he impressed researchers with the story about the UFO photographs. Only this time he did not admit that he had taken them himself but claimed they came to him from a witness. It was a similar story to the one he had originally told me in early 1999. Larry’s chopping and changing is so much in line with that of Steve Roberts that it actually bears thinking about. 

Here are two seemingly intelligent men who over the years have altered their testimony to such an extent that it has surely discredited the case, yet they appear to have played some role in the events. Roberts told his original story regarding the alien presence to Chris and Brenda, and Larry recounted an almost identical story to Steve La Plume a few weeks after the incident. Did something sinister really happen during those debriefings? 

Could it be that the witnesses were programmed with trigger words or sounds, which every now and again would result in them telling a different story in order to confuse the truth? Larry says, ‘Take me out of the story and you still have a case.’ That is true, but I don’t believe the Larry Warren story will ever go away. It will just change from time to time.

next

The Enigma of

General Williams

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. As a journalist, I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of artistic, cultural, historic, religious and political issues. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Copyrighted material can be removed on the request of the owner.