Oh what tangled webs we weave ...
- Thread starter Robbo
- Start date
- Status
Robbo will no doubt be along shortly to provide that information leachy ...
No Leachy. It means that the information was sent to Robbo nearly a week ago and that the accounts will be published when all of the cash has been distributed. Which is what was said all along by Tim and Al.
are you actually serious?? all the posts leading to this point and you haven't paid the blindest bit of attention....good work!!Brilliant this must mean the accounts have been published and there is proof
Could someone please show me where the link to it is???
Rebel Tackleberry @ 10.04AM 12-02-2012 said:
Robbo @ 6.38PM 12-02-2012 said:
Rebel Tackleberry @ 8.17PM 12-02-2012 said:
Robbo @ 8.54PM 12-02-2012 said:
According to this you said on 12th February that you had only just heard about the councillor. Yet, you were sent an email on 7th February, containing details of the councillor and his contact details, which you say you never had. Going by Tacks account, no reason not to, he's no liar, you replied to that same email on 8th February, proving you received it.Rebel Tackleberry @ 9.30PM 12-02-2012 said:
So, is Rebel Tackleberry the new owner of P8nt?
Really?!? Has it? How many 'Sup-Air' ballers do you see commenting on this thread without any evidence or knowledge of what's been going on? Because all I see are mostly people that have been customers of shoreline in the past.
I can assure you that 99% of tourney ballers have said fek all in this thread and saying things like that only creates a wedge where there isn't one!
I'd lay an awful lot of money that there have been far more people in the tourney scene reading this than there have commenting on it...
Let's not make this into a tourney v scenario thread - as we all really know that is not what has gone on here. Wise words there Phoenix. I for one love ALL forms of paintball, although only really have time and money to play scenario, but have really enjoyed the odd occasion I happen across a tourney field.
Ok this is my final posting on the matter, after which time i will say nothing....Lets put it to bed one time once and for all. I will not be responding to any later posts, questions or comments. I have much more important things in life to be dealing with than this lot.
First thing first, at no time in the thread on UKS did i say the S4S was a fraud, i merely asked the question about the charity number to which i was massively flamed and as stated in this thread by the MODS on UKS, probably quite harshly. It seems that others take my comment asking about a charity number as some sort of allegation of wrong doing.
Now if the MODS had jumped on those posts using the word charity and describing the S4S as a charity made days and weeks before my question about the CN then perhaps this whole business would never have reared its head. It isn't helped by the fact that Mr Barnett himself refers to S4S as a charity publicly in several locations and also articles.
However, i am not the only one who asked the question and the reaction everytime was just the same, to flame the enquirer and ball them out in the forums or delete their comments.
Such reaction has raised many peoples suspicion.
Right that said lets move to the next point which has now become relevant.
If these funds were raised and are now being distrubited, yes quite rightly there would be a set of accounts. yes quite rightly a third person should over seeing the allocation. But when was this explained in all the threads dating back to September last year or earlier?
Do you see where i am going with this?
If a sum of money has been raised its very simple to say x,y,z has been raised. You don't need to publish the accounts, you don't need to wait till its all distributed. Its very easy, just state how much has been raised.
You see?
Its Mr Barnett and his MODS on UKS that have presented all the smoke and mirrors in the matter not me, i merely asked a question, as did others, and it is Tim Barnett and his inner sanctum that have made everyone suspicious with their dance around the houses games.
Next point; as for my team being trained by Jim Frenshy, yes they are. This is a recent thing that has come about as after playing various games at various grounds we decided that the people we would most like to be associated with as a Team would be Warped, after all they have been in the business as long as any one can care to remember. Thats our decision and has no bearing on anything. The connection and suggestion that Mr Barnett makes in that this is all some master plan engineered by warped to smear Shoreline is all in his head.
However, i am aware of Mr Barnetts quite open comments about his plans to dominate the market and undermine warped simply because he feels some one at warped disrespected him by calling him boy.
In all the years i have played this game i have never seen so much bull and bluster from one person, its sad that this is now effecting the game. As a player, as a father of daughter who plays and as a team captain i know where i wish to play, i know the teams we enjoy playing alongside and against, we know the grounds that are our scene, Mr Barnett is pissed because it doesnt involve Shoreline. Sometimes in life thats the brutal honesty, people are jealous, or think that they are the only one that matters.
Get over it Mr Barnet, i have.
Moving on swiftly; for those in the know, those that are even on the slightest interested......http://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2011/04/david-jack-was-exonerated.html
Perhaps Mr Barnett will take this on board, he can even contact Cowley Street and discover that after a ten month police investigation and the seizure of my computers and servers, after my home being dawn raided, i was cleared of sending the email, i was cleared of any involvement, i was reinstated into the party and actually went on to stand in the following years elections. He may also like to take a look in the Royal Courts Of Justice under Cartel and Wright v Jack and see who won that case, he may also wish to look up Burleys Solicitors and references from the Solicitors Regulatory Authority which described the fraud i exposed there as ' the largest fraud exposed in the 185 year history of the Law Society'.
It is a criminal offence to publicly promote a course of words or actions to which you know are false. It is also a criminal action to republish words or statements that you know are false.
So one time Tim, publicly, here now, i request you apologise for your libel against myself and admit you got it wrong.
First thing first, at no time in the thread on UKS did i say the S4S was a fraud, i merely asked the question about the charity number to which i was massively flamed and as stated in this thread by the MODS on UKS, probably quite harshly. It seems that others take my comment asking about a charity number as some sort of allegation of wrong doing.
Now if the MODS had jumped on those posts using the word charity and describing the S4S as a charity made days and weeks before my question about the CN then perhaps this whole business would never have reared its head. It isn't helped by the fact that Mr Barnett himself refers to S4S as a charity publicly in several locations and also articles.
However, i am not the only one who asked the question and the reaction everytime was just the same, to flame the enquirer and ball them out in the forums or delete their comments.
Such reaction has raised many peoples suspicion.
Right that said lets move to the next point which has now become relevant.
If these funds were raised and are now being distrubited, yes quite rightly there would be a set of accounts. yes quite rightly a third person should over seeing the allocation. But when was this explained in all the threads dating back to September last year or earlier?
Do you see where i am going with this?
If a sum of money has been raised its very simple to say x,y,z has been raised. You don't need to publish the accounts, you don't need to wait till its all distributed. Its very easy, just state how much has been raised.
You see?
Its Mr Barnett and his MODS on UKS that have presented all the smoke and mirrors in the matter not me, i merely asked a question, as did others, and it is Tim Barnett and his inner sanctum that have made everyone suspicious with their dance around the houses games.
Next point; as for my team being trained by Jim Frenshy, yes they are. This is a recent thing that has come about as after playing various games at various grounds we decided that the people we would most like to be associated with as a Team would be Warped, after all they have been in the business as long as any one can care to remember. Thats our decision and has no bearing on anything. The connection and suggestion that Mr Barnett makes in that this is all some master plan engineered by warped to smear Shoreline is all in his head.
However, i am aware of Mr Barnetts quite open comments about his plans to dominate the market and undermine warped simply because he feels some one at warped disrespected him by calling him boy.
In all the years i have played this game i have never seen so much bull and bluster from one person, its sad that this is now effecting the game. As a player, as a father of daughter who plays and as a team captain i know where i wish to play, i know the teams we enjoy playing alongside and against, we know the grounds that are our scene, Mr Barnett is pissed because it doesnt involve Shoreline. Sometimes in life thats the brutal honesty, people are jealous, or think that they are the only one that matters.
Get over it Mr Barnet, i have.
Moving on swiftly; for those in the know, those that are even on the slightest interested......http://liberalengland.blogspot.com/2011/04/david-jack-was-exonerated.html
Perhaps Mr Barnett will take this on board, he can even contact Cowley Street and discover that after a ten month police investigation and the seizure of my computers and servers, after my home being dawn raided, i was cleared of sending the email, i was cleared of any involvement, i was reinstated into the party and actually went on to stand in the following years elections. He may also like to take a look in the Royal Courts Of Justice under Cartel and Wright v Jack and see who won that case, he may also wish to look up Burleys Solicitors and references from the Solicitors Regulatory Authority which described the fraud i exposed there as ' the largest fraud exposed in the 185 year history of the Law Society'.
It is a criminal offence to publicly promote a course of words or actions to which you know are false. It is also a criminal action to republish words or statements that you know are false.
So one time Tim, publicly, here now, i request you apologise for your libel against myself and admit you got it wrong.
First, I believe Tim has been banned from this forum, so don't hold your breath waiting for an apology.
Second, the amount raised by S4S was published on UKS and has been linked numerous times on this thread: http://www.ukscenario.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=27042&hilit=support for soldiers
Third, congrats on being cleared of those allegations - although I'm confused as to why you bothered standing for election again when "the money in painball world series is much higher and more attractive than an MPs wage in any event!" ahem,
Last edited:
- Status