March 25, 2018 — Michael Allen with J. Randall Murphy

[Michael Allen]

Digital burst, not pulse transmissions, there is a big difference.

A burst transmission or data burst is the broadcast of a relatively high-bandwidth transmission over a short period. Burst transmissions broadcast a compressed message at a very high data signaling rate within a very short transmission time. This technique is popular with the military and spies, who both wish to minimize the chance of their radio transmissions being detected, a low probability of intercept and low probability of recognition. I seem to recall that this type of signal was developed in the late '70s and became widely used in the early '80s by the military. Anyone know more about the development curve?

Burst transmission - Wikipedia

Timing around the 80s with LPI (Low probability of intercept) and LPR (Low probability of recognition)

In Bennewitz's case it may have been short burst of analog? But as Chris indicated --> Pareidolia - Wikipedia

I don't think it would have been a huge mystery to the NSA (if they originated the transmissions) as to how he managed to recognize and detect these burst transmissions. It isn't as if we are dealing with VLPI/R ...lol "very low probability of intercept and recognition"

Edit: I would imaging this is a most basic form of transmitting sensitive information -- many levels down from encrypted transmissions -- it raises the question as to the real purpose not being what Doty claims (something reserved for highly classified transmissions).

 

[Randall]

Digital burst, not pulse transmissions, there is a big difference.

A burst transmission or data burst is the broadcast of a relatively high-bandwidth transmission over a short period. Burst transmissions broadcast a compressed message at a very high data signaling rate within a very short transmission time. This technique is popular with the military and spies, who both wish to minimize the chance of their radio transmissions being detected, a low probability of intercept and low probability of recognition. I seem to recall that this type of signal was developed in the late '70s and became widely used in the early '80s by the military. Anyone know more about the development curve?

Yes. My mistake in the terminology ( I fixed it - thanks ). I did look it up. It's quite interesting. They even used it in public television at one point to add text content. If people recorded a show, apparently they could play it back frame by frame and read it. I'd never heard of it before you mentioned it, and it's definitely another possibility in addition to the DEW stuff. BTW - Loved your story of your little adventure on the base and missed you on the last ATP!

 

[ethel]

I'd just like to express my appreciation to all concerned for what was a very entertaining and enlightening couple of shows. All the more impressive when once considers the fact that they were evidently produced under 'trying' circumstances - I sincerely hope that your situation improves soon Gene.

FWIW my opinion of what Rick Doty had to say on the show last week was that there were almost certainly some grains of truth wrapped up in a fair amount - to say the least - of disinformation.

In other words, old habits die hard.

I do think though that he might actually want to get some information out there - at his own behest and not just necessarily because he's still retained as an asset by former employers - but of course we're then back to the old problem of having to sift out the signal from the noise again, aren't we?

Chris is spot on when he points out that any information relating to methods or practice will most likely be disinformation - after all, if he is on the level, Mr Doty doesn't want to fall foul of his former (current? ) employer, not least because he doesn't want to lose his pension..

Either way, it was absolutely fascinating to hear him on the show and I would dearly love for you to have him back sooner rather than later.

Thanks again for the sterling work,

Dave.

 

[pigfarmer]

I'm having a hard time understanding why the specifics of what was being tested at Kirtland actually matter with regard to this week's show. Clearly there was a lot going on in that area at that time and it was sensitive enough to involve AFOSI. Conjecture over exactly what it was seems like self-inflicted misdirection; I don't think it actually matters a whole lot.

If Doty returns I'd like to ask him about what Bennewitz actually saw near Manzano that prompted him to contact the base.

 

[pigfarmer]

I do think though that he might actually want to get some information out there - at his own behest and not just necessarily because he's still retained as an asset by former employers

Yup.

 

[pigfarmer]

I think Doty may have been the camera operator in this one. Clearly AFOSI edited out any mention of Government involvement

 

[ethel]

Ah, Rick'd like you to think the toast was perfectly-burned - as to whether or not it actually was..well..

 

[Burnt State]

We didn't dwell on this, but Doty more or less disavows "Mirage Men."

Why? Did they get him to say what was really on his mind i.e. perception management? Seems to me like he's either still in the game or his ego needs fluffing.

 

[pigfarmer]

Two crashes at Roswell. Not original. Never heard of it before but I wonder if this was Doty's source:
Roswell UFO Crash: There Were 2 Crashes, Not 1, Says Ex-Air Force Official | HuffPost

Kevin Randle certainly has, and this was a few years ago:
A Different Perspective: Richard French, UFOs and Roswell

 

[Frank Stalter]

NP. I find some of the coincidences there, well, perhaps a bit too coincidental. Yes it's conspiratorial. But can we write it all off so easily, especially when it seems believable that agents from more than one agency were actively involved in the Bennewitz affair? I also think the strange stress related deaths in the UK make the intrigue larger than just Bennewitz and Doty. Plus those photos really do look a lot more like some sort of ionizing effect from a DEW than a solid craft of any kind. If I had to place a bet, my money would go on this crazy DEW Star Wars theory before I'd put it on aliens. I mean when one thinks about it, that's basically what Doty was telling us. Blinding soviet satellites with lasers is pretty much a Star Wars type of thing.

It all could have been terrestrial, technicians and their task-managers messing around with energies and processes beyond their understanding. Or it might all have been, as seems to me, associated with growing suspicion or even knowledge that alien forms of interference were taking place within these developing technologies. Has any reasonable explanation ever been provided by the US government for the discontinuance of the so-called 'Star Wars' program? Considering that technicians and theorists in considerable numbers involved with this technology started meeting violent deaths by means that could equally be understood as applied to them rather than initiated by them, it would make most sense if those individuals had been psychologically overwhelmed, perhaps terrified, by that suspicion or knowledge and became loose cannons, unreliable for the purposes of keeping all of this secret.

 

[Frank Stalter]

Burst transmission - Wikipedia

Timing around the 80s with LPI (Low probability of intercept) and LPR (Low probability of recognition)

In Bennewitz's case it may have been short burst of analog? But as Chris indicated --> Pareidolia - Wikipedia

I don't think it would have been a huge mystery to the NSA (if they originated the transmissions) as to how he managed to recognize and detect these burst transmissions. It isn't as if we are dealing with VLPI/R ...lol "very low probability of intercept and recognition"

Edit: I would imaging this is a most basic form of transmitting sensitive information -- many levels down from encrypted transmissions -- it raises the question as to the real purpose not being what Doty claims (something reserved for highly classified transmissions).

Then why are we the public still completely ignorant about what was happening?

 

[Frank Stalter]

Two crashes at Roswell. Not original. Never heard of it before but I wonder if this was Doty's source:
Roswell UFO Crash: There Were 2 Crashes, Not 1, Says Ex-Air Force Official | HuffPost

Kevin Randle certainly has, and this was a few years ago:
A Different Perspective: Richard French, UFOs and Roswell

[Note: this post is not by or from Frank Stalter; it is from 'Constance' as currently trapped within Frank Stalter's identity on this forum and within his own technical access to posting here, now compromised by faulty software currently functioning in the forum and collapsing my identity and access to the forum within Frank's]. Again, sorry Frank.

Constance said: Reading the KR material at your second link. I am not one who believes every word that issues from KR's pen, or one who is persuaded by the slender types of official 'evidence' he relies on to dismiss the claims of individuals such as Richard French. So I think the following paragraph, for one, requires comment:

"About 18:50 into this Cassidy interview, he explains why they wanted to keep the Roswell UFO crash secret. Here is where another problem develops. According to what he said to others in other interviews, one of the alien spacecraft that crashed near Roswell in July 1947 had been shot down by a new weapon that worked along the lines of an electromagnetic pulse (EMP). But when asked why the government kept the crash a secret, he said it was because we had no defense against the aliens and their craft. First he was telling us we could shoot them down and later saying that we had no defense against them."

The ability to shoot down a ufo in New Mexico with an experimental weapon in 1947 machts nichts regarding our species' ability to defend ourselves from extraterrestrial craft. During WWII and in the early manifestions of waves of ufos in the late 1940s the people 'in charge' here had no f-ing idea what they were dealing with or how to defend against it. And of course it has turned out over seven decades and counting that whoever/whatever directs ufos to this planet has no intention of destroying us or the planet. If taking the planet over and putting it to better use than we have done was the ET intention, they would have put all of us humans into a swift mortal sleep long before we had nearly destroyed the integrity of this planet's ecology. K. Randall's page has for many years now succumbed to the skeptics and outright debunkers who have largely occupied it, and he himself has been sitting on a fence for so long that his b-lls must be turning blue.

 

[Frank Stalter]

Has anyone in this thread, or another one here, yet noticed this?

2 Pilots in Different Planes Saw the Same UFO. The FAA Can't Explain It.

 

[Frank Stalter]

Kevin Randle signs off regarding Robert French with this:

"What this demonstrates is that even a man with a fine military career will invent tales to bring the spotlight on himself. Money doesn’t seem to be the motivation. It is the power of the spotlight and those who will believe practically anything as long as the message is one they wish to hear."

Look at the aged man in the picture. Does he look like he gives a rip about 'the spotlight'? Like many others before him, he has information he has wanted to share with the public for a long time, and he's almost out of time to share it.

 

[pigfarmer]

Kevin Randle signs off regarding Robert French with this:

"What this demonstrates is that even a man with a fine military career will invent tales to bring the spotlight on himself. Money doesn’t seem to be the motivation. It is the power of the spotlight and those who will believe practically anything as long as the message is one they wish to hear."

Look at the aged man in the picture. Does he look like he gives a rip about 'the spotlight'? Like many others before him, he has information he has wanted to share with the public for a long time, and he's almost out of time to share it.

Constance:

Well yes, to me he does. Who knows what his motivations are. Corso was another one. KR at least took a look at the man's credentials. I'd do the same thing. The Stolen Valor Act of 2013 exists for a reason.

Not suggesting French is faking his military service but embellishing to sell his book - could be. In that video even the interviewer said he had some doubts.