"Left At East Gate" Vs You Can't Tell The People"
Email Responses From You..... The Readers
Cheers, Sean,
Larry poses 21 "questions" to Georgina. I used the quote marks, because some of them are repetions,
or direct refutations of what she wrote. Only 10 of the 21 questions relate directly to the book, the other 11
are criticisms of her honesty etc.
I certainly recommend visiting the site,. It will be interesting to see the response (if any) from Georgina.
It certainly looks like she ought to respond to defend her position.
Cheers, Joe
Hi,
Just checking out your site. Firstly, your site downloaded quickly, and looks fantastic.
Look forward to reading what transpires regarding the Bruni story, great work sir!
Best Regards
Dan
editor@ufozone.co.uk
http://www.ufozone.co.uk
I've not read Georgina's book but I own a copy of Warren's now what I can make out he disagrees with it. Which is fair enough, but surely any responce by Ms Bruni should be a direct one from Mr Warren. I think this is a personal matter and one left that way. It cant do any good as a whole for Ufology.
But Hey (its only MY opinion)
Cj
Speaking from a position of weakness (not having read either book), I get the impression that Larry is denigrated in Georgina's book (ie publicly), or at least feels that he has been slighted, and he is publicly responding to that. Now it is in the public arena, it is my view that it should be settled in full view, unless they come out with a joint statement which settles the issues?
Just my opinion,
Joe
Larry seems to be a bit pissssssssed with it all. And rightly so, well I hope he comes out on top, (I like the man and he doesn't need that sort of book to contend with ).
Well I'll say bye for now thanx again matey. it's a good read.
Bye
Ian & the gang :)
Good Morning all
I looked at the page as well and have to agree that it was certainly repetitious and that many of the comments were over the top. I found Warren's claim that Georgina Bruni didn't understand the weapons of his unit funny. He mentioned that they didn't carry the M-16 which chambered the NATO round of 7.6. Actually, the NATO standard was 7.62 mm or about .30 caliber which is unimportant here because the M-16 is 5.56 mm or about .223 caliber. And the M-60 is not considered a "heavy" machine gun. Anyway, in this nitpiking world, I thought that before Warren picked the nits, he should get the nits right.
KRandle
Dr Kevin,
Thanks for your insight and commentary with regard to my questions posed to author Georgina Bruni. Yes, I forgot to add the .2 when describing NATO rounds. However you are wrong when you say that USAF L.E. Cops carry M16's. Where you not in the airforce?
Kevin, you didn't really read the question in the first place did you, as the question concerns surface to air weapons. You are correct to describe your comments as nit picky.
Are things quiet on the Roswell front these days?
Captain Kevin, you've been trying to raise a response from me for years. Today is your lucky day, you wrote that I have "issues" but when we had a drink a few years ago you didn't bring any up. (Perhaps you could have counselled me?)
If I remember correctly, you just told me your war stories or something. Anyway, I see it like this, your quite clever on the Internet but in person I didn't notice anything.
Has your PhD gone to your head so much that you have taken to making assessments of people you don't know?
Clearly you are the sage of UFO Updates and that's fine. Personally, I stopped reading that list years ago, I mean how often can abductee John Velez (Who?) retire from Ufology in a day?
But that's your bag Kev.
In future I suggest that you read my book and Ms Bruni's before you get "nit picky with it" (Sounds like a Will Smith song!)
Or better yet, stick to the treasure hunting books. I was told about your book with Esteef, very crafty Kev! And with much spin. Does this make you a spin doctor?
Hey, I know the company you keep, so nothing you come out with really surprises me. As I now live in Liverpool, England, Let me send you an old scouse farewell, Piss of mate, and happy treasure hunting!
From
Larry Warren
(Who is not a Doctor or Captain)
PS. Kevin, when we last met, you asked why I didn't give you a credit in Left At East Gate? I still can't get my head around that one, but be assured, I've saved some space for you in my next one to be called "Dirt From Mars - My 20 (Alleged) Years In The UFO Side Show."
Hee Hee!!
Interesting Sean, me wonders what the Suntan of Bruni will make of all this -- given her 'must get the last word in, even if I don't really answer the question' style.
Watch out, it may only help her book sell more copies!!!
Have you had any response from her? Has anyone forwarded this to her for reply?? If so what does she say..?
Gary
Hi all,
I am happy to respond publicly to these questions. However, I have written the following to the person responsible for the Hull site and for publicly posting this letter:
Sean
Larry will be receiving a private reply to his public letter in due time. Meanwhile, I suggest you do not publish this libellous letter and contact Larry immediately concerning the following statement, which is extremely libellous.
To all that have read this, I'm not the sort that likes to put people on the spot, nor do I like to be perceived as a bully. Ms. Bruni has chosen to include information in her book that she knows is false, she also spun statements about me to fit her agenda, never in 20 years has anyone done this, (Not even the debunkers!) I wanted to take legal action but reminded myself that the many thousands of intelligent people the world over, who have read my book, will find the problems that I have with Ms. Bruni's book to be self evident. Read her book by all means, but you won't find anything to be "Definitive" or with regard to Larry Warren, "True" at all,
Georgina Bruni
Dear Sean,
Thank you so much for sharing the Larry Warren response.
Well done.
Karen
Hi Sean,
Thank you for sending the copy of Larry's message to Georgina. I look forward to reading her response to these questions - which I assume that she will feel obliged to consider.
Obviously, it is not for me to intercede in this dispute as to who said what to whom, but I will add the following for the record.
Although I know that there have been debates and disputes about Larry's story for nigh on 20 years now, I have always found him charming, cooperative and willing to help - although initially (and I guess inevitably) somewhat concerned about the possible repercussions of being the first USAF witness to go public.
Indeed he has never been unprepared to help to try to get the record straight in so far as what took place, and that is a memory that has stuck by me over the years. Because many witnesses have (again inevitably I suspect) been far more circumspect. Indeed some still are. Whilst it is easy to see why they would be it has made it very difficult for an outsider such as both Georgina or myself to fathom out what did / did not happen in that forest back in l980.
It is understandable that there would be disagreements amongst witnesses based on the recall over such a long period of time and regarding such a complex case. Whilst some witnesses have, for instance, said to me - I dont recall Larry being there - they usually add - but it is perfectly possible that he was and I just did not see him, or he was elsewhere at the time. This case contains many strands with different things going on at different times. Much of the problem that comes with trying to resolve it - as we all have been doing for years - comes from slotting these disparate pieces together and knowing which testimony should accompany which aspect of the case.
I dont think any of us can do that alone - although, of course, someone who was actually there has a better chance than most of succeeding. It is not surprising that in what we all write on this case others find things to disagree with. I know they do with my work and thats fair enough since I appreciate its inevitable limitations. I do think using the term 'definitive' was foolish hype by Georgina and her publisher (although rather an expected one these days) - in the sense that I dont believe a definitive version of this confusing case is ever going to be possible.
Unless, or until, someone, somewhere brings everyone involved in this case together under one roof - big brother style - to commune in one place for, say, a long weekend and thrash out every aspect of the case in order to try to piece together an account that matches the best guesses and recall of each person.
Now that really would be useful. Maybe Rockefeller will fund that kind of event as the outcome would certainly benefit UFO knowledge no end. Sadly I dont think it is likely to happen any time soon.
I respect both the books that Larry and Georgina have written for what they add to our knowledge, and the very different perspectives that they bring. They certainly help in any reasoned attempt to create a synthesis of the story. But, of course, there are going to be mistakes, problems and misunderstandings with anything that any individual writes as this case is spread over such a wide area and involves so many people. Nobody can have a true grasp of all of these things.
In the books that I have written or co written on the case - Sky Crash (l984), From out of the Blue (l991) and UFO Crash Landing? (l997) each one has effectively moved on substantially from the one before it and set right numerous errors and false assumptions made within the earlier books as well as certainly creating new ones.
Crash Landing? was merely the best estimate of the situation that I could make in l997 and it differed markedly from what I could have said even a couple of years earlier because new interviews, new data had come to light in the interim. Just as I wouldnt write the same book now if I were writing another on the case because it has moved on significantly during the past five years.
I think the right way to perceive this progression of viewpoints is that we are all issuing our own personal judgements of how we see the evidence as at stands at a snapshot in time. Of course, we will disagree. Theres nothing wrong in having differing impressions of what took place because - truthfully - none of us actually know. Even the witnesses are guessing!
In fact, nothing that any of us could write is definitive - although, of course, a witness such as Larry has a better chance of providing a near definitive version of his own story in his own book than either Georgina or myself could ever do - especially since we have to try to weave together second hand information from dozens of different sources.
So I hope that Georgina will view these criticisms from Larry constructively and use the questions posed to try to build towards a better awareness of what may really have happened - since that is the goal that we all have here.
Whether we agree or disagree on what the answer is. Whether we think the case is solved, or unsolved, we are all surely aware that we are making the best attempt possible to find a resolution that makes sense of all the data and each of us can only make estimations of that resolution because none of us are privy to the actual truth here.
And this includes the skeptics, of course. Some of what they are saying cannot be ignored because there are parts of this case that do now seem soluble. And whilst I agree with them on that much more than I did even four years ago their worst failing is over belief in the all embracing possibility of their answers. Sometimes a case is partly explicable - not wholly explicable - and humility and an admission that there are aspects here we cannot resolve - would often serve skeptics better than over confidence that all things must crumble to their blitzkreig.
I disagree with the skeptics to the extent that I still find some parts of this case to be unresolved (perhaps even unresolvable) and thus still potentially of interest. It may not always be the case but whilst that remains true I will continue to pursue it.
But the contributions of the skeptics are real and easy to overlook. And they should not be ignored as they have added to a clearer picture of what did go on. A picture that bit by bit has been resolving itself and may hopefully continue to do so.
Whether we will ever know the full story of those few nights in Rendlesham Forest who can say. We may not. We certainly dont know it as yet despite everyones best efforts. But it seems eminently sensible that we all keep trying to find it. And I respect anyone whose true goal is to do just that.
Best wishes,
Jenny Randles
Sounds like Ms Bruni is getting a bit of a bashing and rightly so!
Talk to you later,
Thanks,
John
Holy shit!! .....thats some email!!
I read it with interest, its the first thing in Ufology to grip me in over 18 months or more having been away from all this for that long, I wondered if Im destined to merely attend out of interest all the conferences or merely drop out completely.
Its still a dog eat dog world but I enjoyed that so much it has lifted my heart to know that outspokenness is the crux of honesty and that the TRUTH may indeed be out there.
..But....That the truth doesnt hurt unless it ought to!
Please give everyone my regards in Hull and keep in touch,
Bye for now
Hello Georgina/list,
I have ploughed through the "questions" posed by Larry, and think that I have extracted the pertinent ones that relate directly to your book.
I regret having to play the role of grand inquisitor, but if what Larry suggests is not true, then we should be presented with the opposing evidence.
I should point out, I have read neither your book, nor Larry's, partly because of the hype surrounding both books, and partly due to the fact that I have a backlog of about a dozen books that I have bought but not had the time to read yet! I would, however, be obliged if you would respond to the questions that Larry has raised below. I can guess at the answers to some of them, and some are so trivial as to be of no real importance, but taken as a whole, Larry seems to have a point.
I refer to Larry's numbering of the questions:
Q#2. Did you take account of previous witness statements in researching your book? If so, were you selective as to which versions you chose to use?
Q#3. Were you aware of the two distinct branches of the 81st Security police? More importantly, what do you mean specifically by "surface to air" weapons, and did you verify their availiability to the 81st?
Q#6. Did you visit the locations involved at night in the course of your research for the book?
Q#8. Regarding Larry's contemplation of suicide-he plainly refutes your remarks, what do you base your assertions on?
Q#12. I don't know if Larry is getting into semantics here, or he is suggesting that there was no communication between the "Aeronaut" entities and Williams, what is your basis for the interpretation that Larry said there was any such communication?
Q#13. What led you to say that Larry saw a "huge machine land"?
Q#14. What gave you the impression that Larry was "surprised" that Verrano took part in the show?
Q#15. Larry apparently refutes your statement that he was "talking to everyone" about the event. What gave you the impression that he did?
Q#17. Is Larry correct in his contention that the presence of Williams at the event is supported by earlier interviews with participants? If so, what causes you to choose to ignore those earlier interviews?
Q18#. Larry refutes your assertion that he was not cleared to work in the Weapons Storage Area. What causes you to think he wasn't?
Q21#. On the question of Larry accepting an offer by Brenda Butler of false information, did you misquote Brenda? Can you support the quote by Larry that he denies making with a recording?
Regards, Joe
I sure feel that Georgina suffers terribly from PMT.
Marty J
Below are links to other interesting facts about the Rendlesham mystery including exclusive emails
To download some of the latest offical Rendlesham & UFO Files, click the link below........
from Larry Warren (Left At East Gate) and a reply from Georgina Bruni (You Can't Tell The People)
All pictures, drawings and witness statements are copyrighted.
if you want to use any of this material you should contact us at:
Click the links below read up on the new events of Rendlesham.........
Larry Warren Speaks Out
Georgina Bruni's Reply
Emails About Larry Warren Vs Georgina Bruni
Rendlescam!!!
Right Back At East Gate
If you have an opinion about Rendlesham, Email Us Here