Campsite Destroyed (2)

[chelefoot]

Earlier in the thread I posted the efforts of one person to contact anyone at several organizations who, if there had been any kind of call made regarding an indecent the that area, those people would know. She was told over and over that no such record exists of any kind of disturbance in that area during the time frame that the campsite incident was supposed to have happened.

 

 

I have done my own research and there is no way any form of animal attack occurred in Sam Houston National Forest that required hospitalization during the time frame of the video.  In fact, the whole thing looks like a bunch of drunk campers had their tent too close to the fire, had a fight for whatever reason (drunk?).

 

There are definitely animal tracks in that site but they aren't BF.  Also, the broken trees appear to be the result of weather that came through at an earlier juncture.

 

I am amused and saddened by the cult-like status the Sasquatch Chronicles podcast has become, even more so than I am amused and saddened that Dr. J gets any form of media attention.  I suspect Bob Garrett may have been questioned by authorities for taking the video, even though there is no obvious crime scene there. There were no charges, no incident report. That is why there is no trace of the event on official channels but hacking into his computer did not happen in my view.  I think Mr. Garrett wanted a way out of the commitments to doing his radio show and BF research for whatever reason.  The whole chain of events makes no sense, has so many giant holes of obvious fabrication it's astonishing.  It is one tall tale after another and thankfully, the research I have done was not a big investment in time.  If Garrett did not want out then I have no idea what the motivations would be to come up with this giant fairy tale.

Plussed.

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

Earlier in the thread I posted the efforts of one person to contact anyone at several organizations who, if there had been any kind of call made regarding an indecent the that area, those people would know. She was told over and over that no such record exists of any kind of disturbance in that area during the time frame that the campsite incident was supposed to have happened.

 

 

 

I think it was this blog: http://bigfootanarchy.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-ultimate-camping-story.html

[Guest]

Understood on all fronts Chasing Rabbits.  In re-reading my text I guess I gave the impression I did a medical records search.  That is not the case. I was not thorough in describing my theory.  The video kicked off Bob Garrett's problems with "the feds." The ridiculous chain of events he claims occurred afterwards are what was gnawing at me.  I guess I needed a pet project because i have not let this one go.

 

If hacking was not alleged then I would not have any expertise to do any research and poke around back channels.  It so happens I am in the network security field (not a hacker) and I know a thing or 2 about DHS and DOD, etc.  I know what their policies are so unless there are rogue wildlife biologists with a budget to burn on black ops intent on shaking Bob Garrett down for all he knows, the whole thing is bunk. 

[jayjeti]

Earlier in the thread I posted the efforts of one person to contact anyone at several organizations who, if there had been any kind of call made regarding an indecent the that area, those people would know. She was told over and over that no such record exists of any kind of disturbance in that area during the time frame that the campsite incident was supposed to have happened.

 

 

 

 

When the issue is government cover up it becomes problematic when you say there was no incident or government cover up of it because there is no official record of the incident.  You can't use lack of government records to counter the idea of a government cover up.  So, Its no shocker that "She was told over and over that no such record exists." 

Edited September 3, 2015 by jayjeti

[Guest]

Jayjeti or anyone who believes the feds have an interest in covering up BF, what exactly would the motivation be for them to devote resources to such a project?  With everything a government is responsible for and the way budgets are drawn up, even covert ops by various agencies, what would be the end game?  Let's say the objective was to not alarm citizens who go to national & state parks.  Does it make sense that they would target one guy and make his life miserable. How far would that objective be met by suppressing a guy's podcast and web site and some inconclusive video taken at night that at best shows drunken people getting into a fight and burning their tent.

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

If I came across a "torn up camp", which looked like it was recently torn up (fire still going, etc.). I would report it to the cops because I couldn't say 100% it was a drunken fight and I'd rather err on the side of caution. But I deal with the government (state and Federal) enough to know that I would document that I reported it (with a 'memo to myself' that included time, date, with whom I spoke, what I said, what I was told, etc. ) If the cops didn't show up in a reasonable amount of time, I would report it again.

 

It's just like if I came home and found contents of my neighbor's home strewn across their yard, the doors wide open and windows broken, I would call the cops, not presume it was a drunken brawl.

 

I think if Garrett is being harassed by the Feds/law enforcement , it's not due to Big Foot. One scenario that I could see law enforcement harassing Garrett is if Garrett called the cops and the cops didn't respond to his 911 call. That would be a problem for law enforcement, especially if it became known they did not respond to a 911 call. It's a PR nightmare for them. Where I live, every few years there's a 3 or 4 month period when EMS or the cops either respond very late to a call or don't respond at all. And it devolves into press conferences,  community meetings, investigations, hearings, etc.

 

Additionally, if Garrett is being monitored by the Feds, I don't think it's due to Big Foot. Someone who frequents a wooded, relatively isolated areas would probably land on the watch list for DEA (if a meth lab was running at the Bureau of Standards http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/dea-investigates-apparent-meth-lab-explosion-federal-science-facility-n397521, it can be run in the woods!). Garrett is in Texas, so he could land on an INS watch list (he might be running a safe house for illegal immigrants). And finally, in our post 9/11 world, Home Land Security might watch someone who frequently is in the woods: paramilitary stuff was already a delicate subject in the 90s, it's even more delicate now.

[Guest]

I share in your frustration. I the spirit of Campsite Destroyed here is another:

 

1981 September

St. Clair County, Michigan

Michigan State Troopers and local police report a man heard some noise looked outside and seen greyish black 6'4 Bigfoot creature tearing up a tent and throwing his bicycle 30 to 40 feet.

 

I don’t know if there is a cover up but something isn’t right and the whole affair left enough tell- tale signatures that led me to believe that somebody had some money and logistics to coordinate the whole event if that is what occurred.  For anyone to believe you should believe everything you’re told officially would be naïve and that is demonstrated over and over. I show over 700 separate accounts where law enforcement have been drawn into the topic of Bigfoot/ Sasquatch, the military 78 times and other governmental agencies not necessarily law enforcement 463 times so to think government isn’t aware of Bigfoot/ Sasquatch is not correct.  

 

I don’t wish to draw this out with a position paper therefore I will stay brief by pointing out that a few instances of law enforcement have told public efforts to keep the reports of Bigfoot  secret but it backfired, and in another an officer strongly advised a citizen to avoid talking about what they seen.  Like you, I think it is all bunk, if those were all isolated cases but they’re not. In the report down below the reporting person describes how they were directed – not asked to deny any knowledge of this mysterious best that leaves large tracks and enjoys dog and closely resembles primates.

 

Monroe’s ‘Monster’ Mystifying

Police Get Reports Of Hairy Something

 From the Blade Correspondent

MONROE, Mich., Aug. 17- Thousands of curiosity seekers swarmed over Mental Road in Frenchtown Township last night trying to catch a glimpse of a hairy monster who allegedly stalks the area and terrorizes motorists. The monster, described as 7 feet tall, 5 feet wide, and weighing about 500 pounds, has been sighted about 15 times in the last two months by members of the same family.  All have given substantially the same description to state police of the Flat Rock post, adding that the monster “grunts like a mad dog.† Cpl. David Swanson said that last night “there was traffic on Mental Road than the Detroit-Toledo Expressway.† “Cpl. Clair Dechow, of the Erie post, who admitted that efforts to keep the reports secret have backfired, “ Toledo Blade, OH Tuesday, Second News Section, August 17, 1965 page 18

 

August 31, 1978

Byron, Livingston County

Continuing to report matters of mystery, two area citizens repeated rumors of a second Bigfoot sighting which took place 8 p.m. Thursday in Cohocta on Cohocta Road. “The sources say witnesses of that scene were strongly requested by a Livingston County deputy to refrain from talking about the incident.†The deputy’s reasoning, according to the sources, was to avoid media coverage that might attract curious onlookers and prevent authorities from catching the creature. Information given to the The Argus-Press last Saturday by Sgt. Bill Johnson of that department, disputes such claims. There was, however, a reported sighting at that area and time, he says. Johnson, who says he responded to that so-called “large and hairy†monster call, reports being at the scene about 9:40 p.m. He notes the complainant was a 15-year-old boy. Johnson continues that he thoroughly searched the area in question, which had “no foot tracks whatsoever.†He notes he was making tracks, thus is certain anyone or anything else would also have.    The Argus Press, Owosso, Mich., Wednesday, September 6, 1978 page 13

 

Hiking, LEO, Carcass, Denying Exists, Destroying Tracks 

2002 October

Stone County, Mississippi

Workers with the USDA encounter the carcass of a half eaten dog while conducting timber survey. There was an abundance of large tracks in the area. The Anthropolgy Department of the nearby University of Southern Mississippi was asked to send someone to identify the tracks but was unable to at the time. The Hattiesburg Zoo was also asked to send a primatologist to the site as soon as possible to cast and identify the tracks. It is unknown if the zoo responded or not. Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks was unable to provide any knowledge of what could have made the tracks. All employees of DeSoto National Forest were an email regarding the recent event. We were explicitly instructed to deny any knowledge of it and not to encourage anyone to hunt the creature that made the tracks and ate the dog. We were further instructed to stay clear of that area until further notice although none of did. The tracks were viewed by an anthropology graduate student from USM the day they were discovered and they are described as resembling large chimpanzee tracks. So much so that all zoos were contacted within miles to see if one had escaped. The tracks had two large toes on each foot, like an opposable thumb, closer to the heel that the distal end of the foot. This toe was flattened and atrophic indicating that it no longer served as a necessary appendage. The second and third toes having evolved to take the place of the big toes which would be expected in a semi-bipedal creature. The word expressed to USDA employees was that the tracks were from an unknown and undocumented primate. The local sheriff’s department and FBI sealed the area and removed the carcass of the eaten dog and made casts and took hundreds of photographs but nothing of the findings or conclusion of the incident were ever revealed. The site was raked clean.

GCBRO

http://www.gcbro.com/MSstone0003.html

Edited September 4, 2015 by Gumshoeye

[jayjeti]

Jayjeti or anyone who believes the feds have an interest in covering up BF, what exactly would the motivation be for them to devote resources to such a project?  With everything a government is responsible for and the way budgets are drawn up, even covert ops by various agencies, what would be the end game?  Let's say the objective was to not alarm citizens who go to national & state parks.  Does it make sense that they would target one guy and make his life miserable. How far would that objective be met by suppressing a guy's podcast and web site and some inconclusive video taken at night that at best shows drunken people getting into a fight and burning their tent.

 

I can relay some of the speculations people have forwarded in that regard.  If sasquatches were a recognized species there are claims it would hurt the billion dollar parks and recreation industry.  Possible endangered species acts would greatly impact logging, mining, and other types of land use.  One thing brought up is the propensity for the government to keep secrets, and to keep things under wraps, i.e. the UFO phenomenon, that once an agency has set a tactic in motion it can take on a life of its own.   If it was determined to be a species of man they could be granted special rights and the problems that would arise from that.  Other fringe theories involve the government/military doing testing on sasquatches for military or other purposes.  

Edited September 4, 2015 by jayjeti

[Guest]

I get the PR aspects with the police.  That is a concern for them no matter what and if suspected BF activity is in play that makes it more complicated.  That means no matter what the cops say it will be construed as a cover up.  They probably don't have any answers any more than the people reporting the problem.  Realistically, the police are not in a position to even investigate it thoroughly.  I don't think any government agency is in a position to investigate either.  I just don't see the cornucopia of federal expertise and attention given to the problem at hand based on 1 guy - Mr. Garrett - who in all fairness, is just not important enough to warrant such attention.  A little legwork assures anyone who looks there's no drug or immigrant problems.  That guy is all about deep woods tracking of an unknown species.

 

I was thinking this wasn't about BF as much as it was about Garrett but cannot come up with what that "it" is.

 

Jayjeti, the only part of your statement that has the possibility of ringing true is the tourism statement.  There is no species defined to be endangered and logging, mining is not going to be interrupted unless you are thinking people will form a human chain to protest in the forest.  I'd love to see the facebook crowd abandon their cell coverage and find their way into the deep woods of east texas to make their statement.  The rest of what you say is not plausible without strong evidence - none of which is at risk of being "uncovered" by the campsite incident.  

Edited September 4, 2015 by Wingman

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

I get the PR aspects with the police.  That is a concern for them no matter what and if suspected BF activity is in play that makes it more complicated.  That means no matter what the cops say it will be construed as a cover up.  They probably don't have any answers any more than the people reporting the problem.  Realistically, the police are not in a position to even investigate it thoroughly.  I don't think any government agency is in a position to investigate either.  I just don't see the cornucopia of federal expertise and attention given to the problem at hand based on 1 guy - Mr. Garrett - who in all fairness, is just not important enough to warrant such attention.  A little legwork assures anyone who looks there's no drug or immigrant problems.  That guy is all about deep woods tracking of an unknown species.

 

 

If Garrett isn't involved in anything illegal (drugs, gun running, etc.) and if he is being harassed/monitored by the government due to BF, that would be very disturbing.