tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2997733378318038892.post6989304465347979171..comments2023-09-19T02:49:29.058-07:00Comments on Penkridge Mystery 1964: The Police Interview and the Telephone callStephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05703422395548853032noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2997733378318038892.post-86506541041767508232009-08-06T15:28:50.543-07:002009-08-06T15:28:50.543-07:00Hi Nick, RAF Chicksands as intrigued me for someti...Hi Nick, RAF Chicksands as intrigued me for sometime especially since its wartime use in intelligence gathering and later by the USAF in signals intelligence during the period in question. Bill English's description of his work at Chicksands sounds not unlike that of "S M Brannigan's"...?<br /><br /> “It was my job to analyze the translated transcripts of radio transmissions that had been received from Soviet bloc nations through the listening post at Chicksands. We monitored military frequencies mostly. I had to assign what we called a probability rating to the material and create a possible scenario that might result from the transmission or might have resulted in the transmission.<br /><br />SteveStephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05703422395548853032noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2997733378318038892.post-31533151710904330512009-08-06T14:58:41.215-07:002009-08-06T14:58:41.215-07:00Hi Ian, I vaguely remember this incident, neverthe...Hi Ian, I vaguely remember this incident, nevertheless it does indeed highlight what can be described as a mixed response by the individual authorities concerned when they encountered the object(s) as John Keeling says:<br /><br />"What occurred to me after looking into it for a number of years is that rhetorical question: what would we do if aliens landed? <br /><br />"Are there any contingencies from the authorities for it? This is the classic model to test that, and it would appear that we're not ready."<br /><br />Although this is a valid point the interesting thing with this incident was the fact that not only were the hoaxed UFO's placed in a line across six different counties, but the local authorities response to the objects actually differed, whereby in Cleveland a Bristol Aerospace engineer was brought in to examine one object. In Wiltshire the Army was actually called into the affair, So while the response varied, generally caution appears to have been exercised, although the underlying consensus early on was that the objects were considered to be an elaborate hoax.<br /><br />John Keeling’s Book would definitely be worth a read, ideally with a view to an in depth look at each of the individual authorities responses to the object, not to mention the American response to the whole affair. It would also be interesting to see the response times to the objects being found, the arrival of the authorities and the subsequent media attention.<br /><br />Let us know when Keeling’s Book is released!<br /><br />SteveStephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05703422395548853032noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2997733378318038892.post-8961172765889278932009-08-06T08:26:45.028-07:002009-08-06T08:26:45.028-07:00Steve
I don't personally know of anything lin...Steve<br /><br />I don't personally know of anything linking UFOs with Chicksands. However, a man named Bill English claimed to have read a report at Chicksands on UFOs. If you Google him + UFOs + Chicksands, I'm sure there will be plenty to find.<br /><br />Cheers<br />NickNick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2997733378318038892.post-22279736527924377922009-08-06T02:35:02.424-07:002009-08-06T02:35:02.424-07:00Stephen - I found something interesting on the bbc...Stephen - I found something interesting on the bbc website today. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7843647.stm The news story talks about the faked incident on 1967 were students hoaxed the country with several sophisticated saucer shaped devices. It also made mention that the US government wanted to get involved which caused something of a diplomatic incident. Albeit a hoax this would be the perfect blue print to explore what might happen in a real life situation - which might have mirrored the incident in 1964? Some of the departments and people involved in establishing the hoax might also have been involved in the Penkridge incident or be aware of people who were? I might try to get in touch with John Keeling, or at the very least get hold of his book.Ianhttp://twitter.com/shotgun_smokinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2997733378318038892.post-14510388097879485442009-08-05T14:35:45.112-07:002009-08-05T14:35:45.112-07:00Hi Ian, Yes, it would be a real positive if in the...Hi Ian, Yes, it would be a real positive if in the near future information comes to light which reinforces Harold South's testimony. Further research is of course on going, I do find it useful to put my thoughts in print hence my weekly blogs, although having said that its easy to be the sceptic and my last two blogs have highlighted this aspect quite well.<br />I take your point with the concerns of Government but having said that I believe beside being inept they can also be manipulated, deceived, directed (when required) and to a certain extent controlled by much smaller and powerful key elements within their own respective cabinets.<br />(Take a look at the death of Dr Kelly and the investigation into the Iraq war or the mysterious deaths of the scientist's at Marconi)they can be adept at covering their tracks.<br />While its true you could never prove beyond reasonable doubt that there was never a crash/retrieval at Penkridge, Stan Friedman's quote comes to mind "Absence of evidence is evidence of absence" Is this all the proof our Government needs to remain silent and prevaricate?Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05703422395548853032noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2997733378318038892.post-27463757805406437292009-08-05T10:33:16.071-07:002009-08-05T10:33:16.071-07:00Stephen. Interesting blog entries. I always find ...Stephen. Interesting blog entries. I always find it helps to think through the possibilities - it often opens up new avenues to explore. They say it is impossible to prove a negative. I take heart from the fact that no one will ever prove beyond a doubt that there wasn't a crashed ufo ;) It would be nice though to find semething that showed once and for all that there was some merit in the story.<br /><br />Everytime the government screws something up of mine, I ask myself are they really capable of keeping secrets like this, really. I don't think I need to give an answer to that.<br /><br />Beaurocracy and incompetence go hand in hand. If there is something to find, someone will find it. I'm sure of it.Ianhttp://twitter.com/shotgun_smokinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2997733378318038892.post-416887831500843902009-08-04T13:53:54.048-07:002009-08-04T13:53:54.048-07:00Hi Nick, Yes, there are a lot of potential area...Hi Nick, Yes, there are a lot of potential area's to explore. The FSR is certainly worth looking into. The reference to Melksham was also interesting, although talking of Military bases, RAF Chicksands which was in use from 1961 by the USAF as a signals installation that utilised the FLF9 signal finding antenna system. Did you ever come across Chicksands being involved in any UFO activity during the 1960's?Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05703422395548853032noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2997733378318038892.post-8641826948367645572009-08-03T15:18:20.531-07:002009-08-03T15:18:20.531-07:00Steve
No need to apologise - it's a controver...Steve<br /><br />No need to apologise - it's a controversial case, and one that is as frustrating as it is intriguing!<br /><br />The other things that may be worth following up on (based on what South said) are (A) the Melksham comment/angle; (B) the Red, White and Blue pub angle, and see if any old-timers in the area might recall that; (C) if you can get hold of them, checking out old issues of things like "Flying Saucer Review" etc to see if they had published any reports around that same time and from the area. So, maybe checking FSR issues from early 1965 onwards might be profitable; and (D) finding out more on the motorbike club, where it was, and who at the club had allegedly heard about the crash.<br /><br />Bear in mind too that Meklsham is very near RAF Rudloe Manor - which has a murky UFO history. Maybe that's an angle worth checking too.<br /><br />Cheers<br />NickNick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2997733378318038892.post-30361312444669727482009-08-03T14:01:22.111-07:002009-08-03T14:01:22.111-07:00Hi Nick, Many Thanks, your comments as always are ...Hi Nick, Many Thanks, your comments as always are much appreciated. The blog's sceptical view was slightly ham fisted in its approach I'll admit and (as I suspected at the time) came across in the wrong way, no doubt the product of trying to put one's thoughts in print! Sorry!<br />I suspect at this moment in time I'm covering ground which as pretty much already been covered by SUFOG's original investigation but feel it necessary to try and get an indepth knowledge of events that happened in and around the area in 1964.<br />I think I've mentioned before that it may well be the case that the two incidents are not quite one and the same, so at some point it may well be a case of focusing back on Leonard Stringfield's original Account.<br /><br />StephenStephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05703422395548853032noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2997733378318038892.post-79671301106126993032009-08-03T08:08:38.513-07:002009-08-03T08:08:38.513-07:00Steve:
These are valid points relative to South, ...Steve:<br /><br />These are valid points relative to South, and I would agree that the whole angle of potential surveillance is one of the most controversial.<br /><br />Even if there was surveillance, I don't think the chap had been watched for (then) 32 years.<br /><br />It would (I think) have been renewed surveillance.<br /><br />But, you're quite right: the idea that South made a call and the call to him was being returned is a distinct possibility.<br /><br />However, as you'll know from the book, this was an area on which South claimed to have been flustered by that whole situation -in terms of what was said to him, at least.<br /><br />I would stress, however, that he didn't object when Irene asked if she could try and trace the call - which, conceivably, could have resulted in us confirming that South made the first call himself.<br /><br />We didn't get confirmation of that, of course, but it's interesting he had no problems with Irene digging into the phone-call angle and trying to resolve it.<br /><br />A couple of other things: as you know, Steve(because we've discussed it in email), but as regular followers of this blog will not know, is that the investigation of this case in the 1996 period onwards was not strictly mine.<br /><br />To explain for those who may not know: as my book shows, when details of the Penkridge story first surfaced in 1991 via the researcher Leonard Stringfield, I tried to chase it down as best I could.<br /><br />But, I didn't really get anywhere - aside from confirming that the MoD had a lot of UFO sighting reports on file from the Feb/Mar 64 period.<br /><br />So, I put it on the back-burner. Then, after meeting Irene in the summer of 96, I gave her the details of the story to (a) see if she had heard of it (she hadn't); and (b) to see if the Staffs UFO Group wanted to pursue the matter (which of course they did).<br /><br />So, the investigation of 96 onwards was very much SUFOG's - my only active role (as you know Steve) was to go along on the South interview. I didn't take part in any other follow-ups/leads that SUFOG ucovered - but I do recall they existed.<br /><br />One was something to do with the road-block (someone else who had some knowledge of it, and I recall there was a link with the Fire Brigade here); and someone who looked into the issue of the police people involved.<br /><br />So, my point is this: that chapter in my book, was written from my own perspective, and based on my one and only involvement in the SUFOG investigation. Whatever else was done investigation-wise did not involve me; but I heard of it when there was anything new that SUFO had heard.<br /><br />Irene definitely kept me informed of the other info, but working from memory 13 years later, the 2 above leads were, I think, the most substantial ones they followed up on.<br /><br />I'll be the first to admit that the South story is problematic in the sense that there are (as there always is in Ufology!) unanswered questions.<br /><br />I would say, however, that the key to the case (granted it won't help resolve the South issue, however) would be if you could get permission to review the original files of Leonard Stringfield, and determine the full data in his archives that relate to the original source of the story - that might open a lot of doors.<br /><br />I don't have contact details for his family, and not sure of the status of his files, but it may not be too diffuclt to find out.<br /><br />Cheers,<br />NickNick Redfernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07199813303416083671noreply@blogger.com