It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do not part with your money...

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
"If you get 25% off places then why are you not visibly promoting yourselves at these locations?"

Perhaps you should have a look at Castle Menzies, RAF Holmpton, Eastbourne Royal hippodrome for starters.... All of these are listed on the website...

"Have tried again to search for the ICO number on the ICO site and I am unable to retrieve anything and have also tried different combinations of the example you gave posted above seeing as on the UKBPA website it says Zl748182 and you gave Z1748182 .. I'll just go ponder over that one for a while.. "

odd, i just copied and pasted the number from the UKBPA site into the ICO search, without even entering any other fields and it came up with it.... i suggest that you are trying to sidestep that one. if you like i can give you a screenshot of where it says Z1748182....

"Nice list of 'sponsors' you've got there.. Also notice you've gotten rid of the upside down cross..."

That was done weeks ago, before this article was brought to my attention last night....

"Still waiting to know which body of the government you work with/are connected to."

We are not, as stated before, working with any body of the government, we work with their co-operation and guidance as to how to set ourself up in the best possible way. i do believe i explained this in the previous post....


"Again, i am not casting aspersions on anyones character.."
"take a look at Brian Lamberts phone number.. Looks like he does not want to be contacted directly unless he chooses" - how is that NOT casting aspersions on his character????

"And from its paying members of course... otherwise what's the point of people paying all that money?"

not at all, the membership money received, goes to cover costs of printing the cards, sending the card(s) out, (remember, the prices for teams have to cover ALL their cards, not just one) and admin fees.

the website admin fees, the costs of writing letters etc, the ink costs, the travelling to meetings as well as all the other costs, come out of Brian's own pocket. Never once, has he, or any other member of the UKBPA taken any money from the work we do. thats what NOT-FOR-PROFIT ORGANISATION means..... the money re-couped, is only what we spend on the services provided.

"I could, but wont to protect others, quote various other peoples responses as to how dodgy this UKBPA stuff all sounds"

so why not have a word with our members and ask THEM what they think about it then, instead of taking the opinion of those who disagree?

The UKBPA is opt-IN not opt-out.... that is the way it was designed, and that is the way it will always be, unless otherwise instructed by some higher body. We have never been under any illusions that everyone would be for it. some people think its a good idea, some people dont, those that dont arent cast as rogue operators just because they dont join, in exactly the same way that those who DO shouldnt be cast as charlatans....

At the end of the day, too many groups, take liberties, at least we provide a database whereby anyone with any complaints/enquiries can come to us and complain/ask for more info on whether groups are reliable or not.

Imagine if you will....

an old couple, scared witless by events they dont understand happening in their home.

is it better to have somewhere they can come to check on what a group is like and have their house investigated for free?

or is it better they have nowhere to check, and pay for a group who is unreliable/dodgy/money grabbers?

and there you have your answer....

that is exactly the service we provide, at no cost to the public, the organisation exists, so that our members can be recorded as reputable groups, whilst also, having somewhere to register complaints should their working practises be less than reliable.

if you think that is out of order or dodgy, then i suggest you have hidden agenda's you dont wish to be made public....

as you can see, by taking more than a 2 minute pre-cursory look at the website, the UKBPA does not, and will not condone anyone who charges for their services....




posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 02:52 AM
link   
So here's my slant. What you (ATS) have failed to do in your obligations towards journalism standards is make it clear that you are not immediately suggesting UKBPA are 'scamming'. By mere reference to the word 'Scam' you ARE indeed suggesting such and this in itself is a direct attack on another organisation.

As an example of inference causing offence, if I were to suggest (as you have done) that there is a suspicion that all Muslims are terrorists I would be in severe breach of several legal issues. Now please advise where you understand the contrary applies with your hint that UKBPA and 'Scamming' are not to be associated?

However, the argument is not completely about UKBPA but in standards generally. Again, the phrase 'Own house in order' springs to mind. You have posted articles that are clearly not based on fact but mere supposition on a number of occasions, 'Don't Pay...' being the prime example. You question whether UKBPA has ISO status and they have provided you with such. You then question the motives and again, UKBPA have provided such. Getting nowhere with your personal attack you then accuse UKBPA of not being genuine (again by inference in thread posts) that they are unheard of. Would it then be fair to ask many of the listed venues if ATS had made their presence known? I think it fair to assume that the answer would be a resounding no. From my experience no venue would actually divulge their client base as this would potentially cause offence to the group concerned and possibly become a data protection issue. Having said that, most venues don't take too much notice of storing names for public consumption vis, a clerk reporting that a group visiting a year past called Wraith Rovers had explored their venue unless there is kudos in doing so - and in that respect, a TV show such as Most Haunted would probably be as good as they will recall.

Finally, if UKBPA would like to hire me as a legal representative I would be happy to oblige and of course, would consider placing ATS and its staff under close scrutiny. This would involve an in depth investigation over financial background and taxation. I'll leave the matter in their hands but a word of advice is given: It is far better to offer a sincere apology and a written retraction of commentary than to simply deny everything as being a direct attack. I'll leave it up to yourselves and UKBPA how you want to play it next.



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by PWEditor
odd, i just copied and pasted the number from the UKBPA site into the ICO search, without even entering any other fields and it came up with it.... i suggest that you are trying to sidestep that one. if you like i can give you a screenshot of where it says Z1748182....


Yes it is odd, especially as at the top right corner of your web page it shows a slightly different number from the one that is at the very bottom.

Either way, none of those numbers work on the main ICO web site, which surprisingly, one of you keeps getting confused with the letters ISO..can't think why that is.

Still waiting to know which body of the government you work with/are connected to as you have not clearly answered the question. You stated earlier;

The UKBPA actively works WITH and takes advice FROM the government

www.abovetopsecret.com...
So, again, who do you work with and/or take advice from?


so why not have a word with our members and ask THEM what they think about it then, instead of taking the opinion of those who disagree?

Why don't you get your members here and answer this thread instead? Or are you worried you might lose more reputation or your belief that you have some form of authority?

By the way, who gave you the right to decide what is or isn't standard practice for paranormal investigations?


At the end of the day, too many groups, take liberties, at least we provide a database whereby anyone with any complaints/enquiries can come to us and complain/ask for more info on whether groups are reliable or not.

And sometimes, those who believe they are in power or have some form of control on certain things eventually take too many liberties also...


Imagine if you will....

an old couple, scared witless by events they dont understand happening in their home.

is it better to have somewhere they can come to check on what a group is like and have their house investigated for free?

or is it better they have nowhere to check, and pay for a group who is unreliable/dodgy/money grabbers?

That's just plain fear mongering along the similar lines of "if you've got nothing to hide", or "if you don't buy now, you'll lose out later"...


having somewhere to register complaints

And just what do you believe you can do if anyone does register a complaint? Make arrests? Take people to court? Impose fines?
I don't think so!


if you think that is out of order or dodgy, then i suggest you have hidden agenda's you dont wish to be made public....

lol


as you can see, by taking more than a 2 minute pre-cursory look at the website,


Oh, I've taken a good look at your web site and had a good laugh to be honest.. Especially when you read things like this;

CRB Disclosures

Offered of not disclosures are frowned upon when in fact they will gives you protection when working with or helping the generalpublic , so by us introducing them we can now indeed offer more reinsurance to the general public and supporting location.

The Downside

To not have a disclosure in this now called industry no matter what your environment is can be open to all sorts of allegations, just one silly mistake can put you in jeopardy if working in privet homes or public events etc . So don’t be frightened of a disclosure it’s there to protect you and others.

www.ukbpa.org...

Hilarious..
Please get someone to proof read and sort out the spelling and grammar issues.. How can anyone take any site seriously if you've got type as bad as this.

That particular page seems to be praying on the fear and paranoia of others in order for you to get what you want to happen..
You simply can't trust anyone these days, and that includes your site and its database and ideas that it can be allowed to carry out CRB checks..



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 09:16 AM
link   
"Either way, none of those numbers work on the main ICO web site, which surprisingly, one of you keeps getting confused with the letters ISO..can't think why that is."

REALLY odd that....



thats what i typed....



that was the result.... odd huh?????

"So, again, who do you work with and/or take advice from? "

We have spoken to, and worked with The Rt Hon Oliver Letwin, but more often, liase with his PA, seeings as you wish to keep pushing the issue....

"Why don't you get your members here and answer this thread instead? Or are you worried you might lose more reputation or your belief that you have some form of authority?"

i believe one of them has been posting on here, yet you seem to disregard THEIR comments....

"By the way, who gave you the right to decide what is or isn't standard practice for paranormal investigations?"

OUR MEMBERS set the codes THEY wish to abide to, NOT us. we asked them, they put forward what they felt was reasonable, WE PUT IT ON THE WEBSITE. simples....

"And sometimes, those who believe they are in power or have some form of control on certain things eventually take too many liberties also..."

as explained before, the MEMBERS set their own rules, codes of practices, ethics etc, a fact although explained MANY times, you seem NOT to be grasping....

"That's just plain fear mongering along the similar lines of "if you've got nothing to hide", or "if you don't buy now, you'll lose out later"... "

how exactly is that scaremongering? i was putting forward a PERFECTLY FEASIBLE scenario.... one that happens on a regular basis i would imagine. too many people pay out for groups when there is no need. We have a checkable database of reputable groups who DONT charge, so answer me this, would YOU pay for a group with no references, when you could simply check the database and get a good, reputable group for FREE????? no, didnt think so....

"And just what do you believe you can do if anyone does register a complaint? Make arrests? Take people to court? Impose fines?"

No, if the complaint is serious enough, the group are removed from the UKBPA database and marked as unreliable, if its a minor issue, they are warned that should any infraction occur again, they will be removed from the database and marked as unreliable, something we havnt had to deal with yet, because our member groups (as explained before SEVERAL times) set their own codes and conducts etc....

"Hilarious..
Please get someone to proof read and sort out the spelling and grammar issues.. How can anyone take any site seriously if you've got type as bad as this"

Brian is dyslexic.... he has problems with spelling, do you usually mock the afflicted? you dont need to answer that, im fairly confident i already know the answer....

"That particular page seems to be praying on the fear and paranoia of others in order for you to get what you want to happen..
You simply can't trust anyone these days, and that includes your site and its database and ideas that it can be allowed to carry out CRB checks.."

could you be anymore blinkered???? DOH the CRB checks only further go to prove that we are trying to be reputable, and protect the public from charlatans, as you put it....

and i suggest again, if you have issues with CRB checks, then you have something you wish to hide, as the only response i got to that last time was "LOL" i dont exactly see you denying it....
edit on 15-6-2011 by PWEditor because: spelling mistakes



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 09:17 AM
link   
It seems curious to me that so many NEW people have joined, just for this thread and to blast ATS !

Perhaps I am just suspicious !



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Qwenn
 


no one is blasting ATS, however, they are blasting the accusations presented on this page.... entirely different matter ALTOGETHER, but then, im sure your an intelligent person, and i didnt need to tell you that, right?



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tailspin1
Getting nowhere with your personal attack you then accuse UKBPA of not being genuine (again by inference in thread posts) that they are unheard of.


I don't recall making a personal attack... I do question the UKBPA's authority though.
You're just a web site charging people for membership and a photo ID card.

Anyone can set themselves up and claim to be an authority on almost any subject.. reminds me of the quack doctors peddling their bottles of coloured water..

Also it seems you have been heard of.. been doing a little research.. Funniest thing is where I found you all..
It seems that your own members can't agree on the authenticity of a picture..
to quote;

Nick Thurston, of the UK British Paranormal Association, said: "This image is extremely clear and is certainly that of a spirit manifestation of a full human figure.

Would love to know how he came to that conclusion..
And right after that, an almost opposite response comes from;

UKBPA vice chairman Clint Symonds said: "This is one of those pictures that makes you sit up and say wow. But obviously it is also a picture that needs deep examination.

"It is so easy these days to fool the public with paranormal phenomena due to modern software."


In my opinion, it's one of those pictures that makes me want to sit down and quietly groan 'photoshop'.
Anyway, let's have a look at where these words appeared....
The Sun

Yup, that's right...the Sun..
Now, I wonder what people think of this 'newspaper'? Let's have a look...



It is a terrible news source that does not get any real respect here on ATS or most other places for that matter. But if stories like that are dogged by people who in the things we do here you must know that the sun is complete BS. It is known for posting untrue stories and hoaxes. It is a cheap tabloid and not an actual news source, the sun is right down there with national enquirer and other similar papers.

And the thread that this came from just so happens to be...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
... on the exact same story reported in The Sun..
It's a small world..

And, If i am not mistaken, there have been several other similar stories related to ghostly images caught on camera that have been 'reported' in the Sun but they just appear to be nothing more than publicity stunts to bump up ticket sales for certain locations..

As for the photographer of this ghostly image, it appears that he has a bit of a status.. seeing as he's also 'taken' photos of UFO's being chased by helicopters too;
rashmanly.wordpress.com...

I'm not exactly sure what damage that exposure in the Sun did to your reputation, but I reckon it might have been a lot more than just this single, small thread.. Millions of people would have seen the Sun, whereas only a few hundred would have seen this thread.. and this thread is on a global site..



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 06:43 PM
link   
lmfao

im not even sure you HAD a point there?

if so, what was it? the only reason i could see for you wanting to discredit us via that article, was because two different members, asked on different occasions, have two different beliefs....

Clint being scientifically minded, Nick being spritually minded, so once again i ask....

What WAS your point??????

Incidentally.... i noticed you've not addressed ANY of the answers i gave you earlier, why would that be??????
edit on 15-6-2011 by PWEditor because: additional text insert



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tailspin1
Getting nowhere with your personal attack you then accuse UKBPA of not being genuine (again by inference in thread posts) that they are unheard of.



Originally posted by Extralien
I don't recall making a personal attack... I do question the UKBPA's authority though.
You're just a web site charging people for membership and a photo ID card.


I think you will find that as a statute in law 'inference' is a consideration and you make plenty of inferences.

However, that said, the game of 'tit for tat' you are clearly playing makes you look (in jest) more of a 'tit' producing your unfounded 'tat'. Again, far easier to apologise and move on but professional integrity appears (for now) beyond you.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 04:00 AM
link   
reply to post by PWEditor
 


my point was clearly stated;

your own members can't agree on the authenticity of a picture



you've not addressed ANY of the answers

As you have had a habit of trying to avoid questions, especially one about who allowed you to obtain this position of power/authority.

reply to post by Tailspin1
 

I have nothing to apologise for.

Keeping it simple, I'm not going to get into a running argument with you.
You've come in here upset that someone dares to put you down.
You've even had one of your posts removed by forum staff.
You have no authority except for that which you have given yourselves.
You're self styled and clearly out to set yourselves up as a governing body, which I'm sure, many people in the field of the paranormal (and other categories that you are trying to cover) will resist you.

There are teams and individuals out there who are already way above anything you could ever provide.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 07:16 AM
link   
"You've come in here upset that someone dares to put you down"

nope, I've come here to address the accusations you've made.... and also to answer your questions, which i have done.

"You have no authority except for that which you have given yourselves"

and how do you think trade unions started? by people wanting to make a difference....

"admin edit: please do not post libel about us on our own website. Thanks..."

please do not allow unfounded allegations about other people to be posted on your website, thanks

edit on 16-6-2011 by PWEditor because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   
And that's what I find odd about this ATS forum. (interesting term as it isn't really a forum but a page where abuse is a one way street) It allows those in favour of the original argument (unfounded as it is) to post diatribe and vitriol but when a post disagrees with the original and reverts to the same vitriol (though not directed) it is removed.

So, in order to address the balance I retract the inference that the originator of this thread may be a 'tit' for posting his personal 'tat' and ask him to readdress some of his posts inferring an element of 'scamming'.

Will this happen? Probably not. Just how many cents/pence per click are you making in keeping this diatribe going?
edit on 16-6-2011 by Tailspin1 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join