New British MoD UFO release: Smoking gun at last?

[Garuda]

On UFO Digest, Nick Pope wrote an article called UFO, a smoking gun at last?.

In it he talks about Project Condign’s final report that, dealing with the Bentwaters case, has the sentence: “Several observers were probably exposed to UAP radiation”.

He, rightfully, points out that it's contradictory that this report was classified “Secret UK Eyes Only”, where the official position was that UFOs had no defence significance. (Then why classify it?).

It's an interesting read, but, personally, I don't think that's a smoking gun...

The article can be read here: http://ufodigest.com/article/ufos-smoking-1101

[calikid]

On UFO Digest, Nick Pope wrote an article called UFO, a smoking gun at last?.

In it he talks about Project Condign’s final report that, dealing with the Bentwaters case, has the sentence: “Several observers were probably exposed to UAP radiation”.

He, rightfully, points out that it's contradictory that this report was classified “Secret UK Eyes Only”, where the official position was that UFOs had no defence significance. (Then why classify it?).

It's an interesting read, but, personally, I don't think that's a smoking gun...

The article can be read here: http://ufodigest.com/article/ufos-smoking-1101

Very interesting. News to me that the MOD still has a few files left to release... set for 2015 according to Pope in this article. Guess they lied last year when they said "that's all folks" and posted the last/final release.

[majicbar]

On UFO Digest, Nick Pope wrote an article called UFO, a smoking gun at last?.

In it he talks about Project Condign’s final report that, dealing with the Bentwaters case, has the sentence: “Several observers were probably exposed to UAP radiation”.

He, rightfully, points out that it's contradictory that this report was classified “Secret UK Eyes Only”, where the official position was that UFOs had no defence significance. (Then why classify it?).

It's an interesting read, but, personally, I don't think that's a smoking gun...

The article can be read here: http://ufodigest.com/article/ufos-smoking-1101
I would say this logically is the smoking gun. There is no scientifically possible explanation which fits the facts other than one which accounts for technological craft that are what the UAP are. That MOD and their contractor have identified other UAP cases which have caused tangible artifacts of comparable nature, places the phenomena as being real and extraterrestial. This is one of those cases where when one has rejected all the other possible explAnations, despite being improbable, the conclusion cannot be otherwise. We are so used to being careful and reasonable that when the truth is so obviously before us, we can not now fail to see this for what it is.

[Garuda]

I hear what you're saying, but on the other hand, this is not the first case where radiation was detected...

[newyorklily]

I hear what you're saying, but on the other hand, this is not the first case where radiation was detected...
The Cash / Landrum case comes to mind and that happened about the same time as Bentwaters.

[calikid]

I would say this logically is the smoking gun. There is no scientifically possible explanation which fits the facts other than one which accounts for technological craft that are what the UAP are. That MOD and their contractor have identified other UAP cases which have caused tangible artifacts of comparable nature, places the phenomena as being real and extraterrestial. This is one of those cases where when one has rejected all the other possible explAnations, despite being improbable, the conclusion cannot be otherwise. We are so used to being careful and reasonable that when the truth is so obviously before us, we can not now fail to see this for what it is.

We see it "for what it is", but I'm still left with questions.
Real? Yes, the witnesses seem very reliable
Extraterrestrial? Maybe. But I'm not so sure. While the craft was nothing like you or I have even seen (apparently using anti-gravity propulsion, beyond anything publicly known), that is not to say they don't exist in some dark military project's hanger.
Maybe the craft are advanced tech, too expensive to mass produce except as proof of concept?
Maybe the landing was a demonstration of ability to people "in the know".... but the question remains, by whom?
Or as you say, maybe it is E.T.
But what was the point of the visitation?
Valuable data from this sighting, but still many questions....

[calikid]

On UFO Digest, Nick Pope wrote an article called UFO, a smoking gun at last?.

In it he talks about Project Condign’s final report that, dealing with the Bentwaters case, has the sentence: “Several observers were probably exposed to UAP radiation”.

He, rightfully, points out that it's contradictory that this report was classified “Secret UK Eyes Only”, where the official position was that UFOs had no defence significance. (Then why classify it?).

It's an interesting read, but, personally, I don't think that's a smoking gun...

The article can be read here: http://ufodigest.com/article/ufos-smoking-1101

I subscribe to the UK "The National Archives" newsletter. (http://enews.nationalarchives.gov.uk/MAN-2YU54-B78KDFIZ12/cr.aspx) Lots of interesting historical information.

I sent an email inquiry regarding any possible future "RAF Bentwaters" releases (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ufos/).
Will post any reply I receive.

[calikid]

Got a reply from The National Archives. No joy. :(



Dear Mr xxx


Thank you for contacting The National Archives.



I'm not aware of any more UFO releases to come (series DEFE 24) – please see this link to highlighted information on previous releases: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ufos/



You could try making an FOI request to the MOD via this webpage: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-defence (see 'Make an FOI request')



Best regards





Mark xxx

Principal Records Specialist - Contemporary

Advice and Records Knowledge

The National Archives

www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/contact









-------------------------------------------
My original request:


From: contactforms@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 2:03:11 PM

To: ARK Records Enquiries

Subject: TNA140125440: General enquiry (General enquiries) Auto forwarded by a Rule



ENQUIRY DETAILS FIRST NAME: xxx LAST NAME: xxx
EMAIL ADDRESS: xxx@yahoo.com
COUNTRY: United States
CATALOGUE REFERENCE:
ENQUIRY DETAIL:
Hello,



I have enjoyed your UFO released over the past few years.

While I understood the last "batch" was the final release, recently I have heard there might be a few more records related to the "RAF Bentwaters Incident" yet to be shared publicly.

Can you tell me when/if a release date been scheduled?



Thank you
xxx