Friday, 19 August 2016

SPI Scotland's Alyson Dunlop Issues Statement About Larry Warren's Recent Conduct.



Is This Supposed To Be An Apology?
                                     
I received an interesting series of messages today from various people regarding a statement issued by Alyson Dunlop of SPI Scotland. Her statement addresses the recent behaviour of Larry Warren and the attacks upon myself. Although she does apologise, she mostly absolves herself from any wrong doing which was absolutely not the case. She fully engaged in the attacks and allowed Warren to speak that way about me on her radio show, and at a later date on a Facebook thread she claimed; "It was all just 'banter' and 'larking about'. In fact it was far from that. Alyson was fully involved and had every opportunity to stop the attacks at any time, as you can see for yourself if you hit these links.

The Start Of It All

The Conference And Aftermath

However, in spite of those facts, issuing this statement was absolutely the right thing to do morally and I cannot criticise a person for doing the right thing, no matter how late in the day it is. Unless of course she is just being a self servative for her possible future engagements? I can only speculate at this point.

As she has not sent this directly to me by way of email or facebook post, I am not sure if it is an apology or a break out of jail free card. All she has to do is unblock me or send me an email. If she has realised that I am not the person Warren paints me as and also understands that I was merely defending myself and my family, she has nothing to concern herself about. After all, I was never the one issuing threats, nor did I disrupt anything to do with SPI Scotland, ADX Files or anything else for that matter. It was, as I am sure you will understand after reading this, totally the other way around.

                                                           Alysons Facebook Note.

Statement on the Conduct of Larry Warren

I would like to make a statement about the events surrounding the Scottish UFO and Paranormal Conference 2016.

The reason Larry Warren was barred from attending the conference was because he made an appalling comment which, although it did not directly threaten anyone in particular, was clearly still a threat of violence. It was certainly disgusting and completely unacceptable. I am sure many will already have read it, but for those who have not, his response to the suggestion that Sacha Christie would like to attend and ask him a question was:

“this is the outlaw way…I have family and very close friends at the conference! If you (whomever) makes a move on me or those I love…understand this,,,,i will jump off the stage and put your windpipe through your spine…you are a threat at that point and your life will end! REALLY and faster than venue security could deal with…………..be smart………….stay at home with your chickenshit internet baby!”

I deleted the comment, and phoned Larry at home. I spoke with him for an hour at 2am. In my opinion, he seemed to be under the influence of something, and was raving for the most part about various things. I assessed the situation and decided that a conversation about his conduct would be pointless.

Due to having the knowledge of the public fall out between Sacha Christie and Larry Warren, I panicked at the thought our conference would be disrupted by Ms Christie. Whatever question she had in mind, I felt it would be a bad idea for her to turn up. One comment led to another, and things did get heated. Everyone said things in the heat of the moment. At the time, I had no idea of the impact it would eventually have. The intention was to diffuse the situation, although I can clearly see it did not read that way, and for that I would like to apologise. I have no personal grudge against Sacha Christie. In fact, I respect her intellect and exhaustive research.

My focus throughout was the success of the conference. Following several phone calls with Mr Warren, I began to feel very differently about the decision to have him as a speaker at all. However, with only a few weeks to go, we had little choice but to keep moving forward. Furious though I was at Larry Warren’s behaviour, I knew people wanted to hear him. As a conference organiser, my personal feelings and growing apprehension had to be put to one side.

Fuel was added to the fire when Larry Warren spoke out on my radio show, ADX-Files. This time, he actually named Sacha Christie as his antagonist. His conduct on the show was embarrassing, as he threw caution to the wind with harsh and boorish remarks. I asked the other organisers if they felt I should edit his comments out, but it was decided that no, it should be left as it was. He was entitled to his opinion. We did feel one particular statement should be edited out. This was a repeat of the threat which I have included above in italics.

Much has been made of Malcolm Robinson saying we talked for longer. We did. There was an issue with Skype – which listeners can briefly hear discussed. It meant that Larry Warren’s very interesting account of his Bigfoot sighting was unusable. Every second word was omitted, making it completely distorted. This resulted in the recording of that section being unintelligible. It would have been incredibly annoying for the listener, who would not have been able to understand what was being said in any case.

A further accusation was made by a Canadian writer that I deliberately pre-recorded the show when my website states that my shows are live. In fact, I rarely if ever use the ADX-Files website. I did initially when the show started, and it was indeed live when Andy Young was producing the show. However, there were issues with that, as regular listeners will remember. After sorting out the Skype/Windows 10 problems, I invested in a Skype recorder and now record, produce, and edit the show myself. I like to spend time on editing, as is my prerogative. I like to level the volume of the speakers and take out anything that is repeated or unimportant to the conversation. There is no sinister intention, as has been implied. It’s simply the way I like to produce my show to get it to a quality that I personally approve of. I don’t mind that it takes up a lot of time, as I enjoy the process of crafting the show from beginning to end.

The conference radio show, however, was disastrous. Glasgow University Union was informed of the comments made on SPI Scotland’s Facebook page by Larry Warren. Several complaints were raised with them, and they immediately banned Mr Warren from being on their premises. This, I knew, was a major blow to our conference. However, I did secure the other union at the University of Glasgow, the Queen Margaret Union. Two days before the conference, Thursday 23rd June, we were informed that they too had decided to ban Larry Warren from attending the conference. Larry was immediately informed. There was absolutely nothing more we could do to ensure that he was a speaker. The QMU and the university were, in my opinion, well within their rights to ban him as it affected their reputation as much as it did ours. At that point, the only focus had to be that the conference went ahead. We had invested not just time, but an enormous amount of money. Speakers’ travel expenses were about £1000 alone, hotel bills of approximately £550, and the venue hire of £300. On top of these expenses, the QMU insisted, due to the violent nature of the threats made by Larry Warren on social media, that we pay a further £450 for university security.

Strangely, Larry Warren decided that even although he was banned from attending the conference, he would still travel up to Glasgow on the Friday night and partake of our hospitality. As we were not responsible for him being banned, and we could not cancel the first night’s accommodation in any case, we agreed. We had hoped that, although disappointed, he might speak with conference attendees afterwards in a more informal setting. His response to this suggestion was “Fuck that!” and he abruptly ended our telephone conversation.

On arriving in Glasgow, Larry and his friends proceeded to give us the cold shoulder. He made an excuse to leave my company twice when I approached him. I did not attempt a third time. On the morning of the conference, I was surprised again to see Mr Warren in the car that came to pick me up (along with 100 of his books which had been lying in my flat for several weeks). He seemed more amiable, and helped to take books up to the front step of the QMU, loudly voicing how disgusted he felt at the way he had been treated. Leaving his co-author with only six copies of Left at East Gate, he returned with his friends to his hotel room and filmed something which could be presented to the audience before Peter Robbins’ talk, who was our final speaker of the day.
The conference was a great success. The feedback was phenomenal. Everyone really loved all the talks. I have heard rumours that there were many complaints that Larry Warren was not present. This is not true. Two people I spoke to said it was unfortunate that he would not be there. Literally, that was the extent of the complaints we received about Mr Warren’s absence.
Peter Robbins, as the final speaker, received a rapturous applause. His talk was outstanding, and sealed the deal on a hugely successful conference. Myself, Malcolm Robinson, and Ron Halliday were justifiably proud of our achievement and of our speakers, none of whom was more important than any other. They were all fantastic and each contributed to creating an unforgettable day for the audience. Even the QMU staff and security enjoyed it. The union manageress was extremely friendly and helpful, assuring me that we were welcome to hold our event there next year.

Afterwards, Larry Warren refused to join myself or the other organisers, nor did he invite us to join his company, although he did invite some people to join him for drinks. When I extended the invitation via Tino Megaro the stony response, as he shrugged and left, was that he couldn’t promise anything. Having been in his corner for so long, we were extremely hurt that he seemed to have turned on us. We were also bemused that we were being treated this way, especially when we were footing the bill for his bed and breakfast for three nights. He left on the Sunday morning, having barely spoken to either myself, Malcolm, or Ron. We had to therefore also pay the hotel bill for a night that was not used.

On the Monday, I was even more astonished to be added to a private Facebook conversation along with Larry Warren, Peter Robbins, and the other organisers. For some reason Tino Megaro had included Sue McAllister, Ben Emlyn-Jones and Gary Heseltine in the conversation. I have no idea what any of the events actually had to do with those three people, or in fact with Mr Megaro. Again, I was bemused. The gist of the thread was how we could “Move forward” as a united front against Sacha Christie’s attacks. Ms McAllister pointedly commented that she believed the conference organisers had “allowed” Larry to be banned, and had not tried hard enough to ensure that he got to speak. At this point, I had heard quite enough. I stated, as I will state now, that I wanted nothing more to do with any of them. My words were not so polite, I must admit.

I have since seen Larry using the same terminology that the organisers “allowed” him to be banned and did not try hard enough. I have read his derogatory comments about the University of Glasgow, and even that he was proud to have been banned by them. He should not be proud. He should be ashamed. Not once has he, or his “team” ever addressed the real issue: that Mr Warren threatened Sacha Christie by stating in writing that he would “put your windpipe through your spine” and “your life will end”, both expressions being extremely disgusting and frightening terminology to use. However, it is my understanding that it is not the first time that Mr Warren has used such threats. On another occasion, he told Ms Christie that she was “so fucked” and that she “best move”.

I truly wish there had been some way of removing myself from the whole sorry saga before it escalated as it did. I have said to my closest confidantes that I completely understand Ms Christie’s anger. I do. Absolutely. I had to make a decision with no time to spare. My priority had nothing to do with my own personal views. My priority was purely with the success of the conference. There was far too much as stake, not just financially, but for those who had booked flights and hotels in Glasgow. I was aware that many people were coming from all over the UK and Europe. I apologise sincerely that Ms Christie was treated the way she was. I also apologise if she felt bullied by the organisers. The comments that were made in the heat of the moment were unprofessional, regardless of the circumstances.

Many people have become increasingly baffled by what Larry Warren does and says. I have not been in contact with him since the conference, although I have been in contact with Peter Robbins who remains a friend. In my personal opinion, Mr Warren’s behaviour and conduct has become increasingly absurd and openly arrogant when he finds it acceptable to pretend to inexplicably forget the name of SPI Scotland, as he apparently did on Ben Emlyn-Jones’ HPANWO radio show: Larry Warren Speaks. It was reminiscent of Colonel Halt who pretended to forget the name of Left at East Gate last year during a walk in Rendlesham Forest.

In the last few days, Mr Warren has taken the decision to unfriend me on Facebook, along with several people who are friends of mine, for what reason we do not know. I am not particularly bothered by this, as I am indifferent to what Mr Warren does and does not do. His conduct before, during, and after the conference showed what kind of man he actually is. I do feel sorry for those he has also recently unfriended who considered themselves to be his friends, fans, or just interested researchers. However, I am not sure if I would want to be associated with someone who makes, seemingly, uncontrolled and unfiltered threats on social media.

His most recent activity concerns clearly manipulated photographs of him and the rich and famous dead, such as Stevie Ray Vaughan, Phoebe Snow, and John Lennon. Have these pictures been altered in order to validate his claims of deep friendship and ownership of apparently gifted items that he has since, with the verbal permission of the likes of Sir Paul McCartney and May Pang, been attempting to sell to the highest bidder? It is my understanding that he sells what he claims to be their memorabilia. However, I have seen May Pang’s response vehemently denying she ever gave him anything.

I am truly sorry you will ever have to learn of Larry Warren’s deceit. The evidence that I have seen that he sold memorabilia to unsuspecting buyers, which I understand he then had to buy back after May Pang provided her real signature, is also unquestionable. Should we now question the veracity of the charismatic and narcissistic Larry Warren?

After reading this, I know there will be tears. You no doubt invested a lot of energy and most importantly your trust in this one symbol of truth. To find out that he is far from that ideal is shattering. To learn that your hero is actually nothing more than what I would describe as a con-man, I know, is devastating. What else can we conclude, given the evidence? I will always respect the 18 year-old who witnessed the Rendlesham UFO, as Adrian Bustinza confirms. I will always respect the 21 year-old who told the world about it. Sadly, I have lost all respect for the man he became.

ALYSON DUNLOP
Glasgow
18th August 2016 

4 comments:

  1. Definitely was the right thing to do. I was happy to see it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was very surprised to be honest. It takes guts to admit you were wrong. I respect that.

      Delete
  2. It's a fumbled apology at best, but at least they now agree that Sacha WAS NOT the perpetrator - something I continually told them. AD now realises how he really is. He turns on anyone who doesn't follow him blindly. I'm glad she released the statement, but it doesn't absolve SPI of the smear campaign. I wonder if Malcolm Robinson will put out a statement as well.

    Why wait so long to speak up? Why "go with the crowd" and not be like those who knew what would happen? Has the BACP finally spoken to AD regarding her unethical behaviour and involvement?





    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whatever her reasoning, it is a better situation than it was yesterday. She wasn't alone in her actions, but she was alone in her apology. I am also interested to see what might happen next. xxx

      Delete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.