I know I've been neglecting this blog for a little bit (well, ok, not that long), but you'll see why very shortly!
I generally don't like referring to my writings on the Highgate Vampire Case (and its participants) as they tend to attract unwanted attention.
Even Niels has encountered the shady types associated with the Case and his blog is about as innocent as you can get.
I'm guessing other readers have, too.
But this time 'round, I think I need to make a sort of public service announcement on it, especially due to the topics I've covered in the last few days.
This is also to give readers an idea of just how deceptive its primary protagonists can be.
Oh, by the way, if you're not familiar with the Highgate Vampire Case, then here's its Wikipedia page.
Read it?
Ok, good. Let's start with David Farrant.
Despite his insistence that the "feud" between himself and his arch-nemesis, Bishop Sean Manchester, is a "one-sided" affair, it very clearly isn't.
Despite pathologically trying to avail himself of the "vampire hunter" tag and promote his lack of belief in "Hammer-style" undead, he's also the same guy insisting that the "vampire" is "still active" (at rather timely circumstances) and still gives talks on the Case, despite declaring his interest in it "dead".
Query him further about certain quotes and actions, and you come up against a slippery slide of wanton deceit and sidestepping.
And now, onto Manchester.
Hoo boy.
In the last few days, I've focused on the fact that he's a blatant plagiarist.
Now, you'd think that a Bishop would (at the very least) admit to such misdeeds, and apologise for the error of his ways, wouldn't you?
Not this one.
It all began when I noticed that a blog post he "wrote" commenting on Barack Obama, seemed slightly, mmm, off-kilter. On a hunch, I decided to google portions of it.
Here's what I uncovered.
Most interestingly, large chunks of the post were cribbed from the blog of a right-wing British political party, the BNP.
I confronted Manchester on this matter by commenting on his blog.
Rather than confess, he instead deleted my comments and presented heavily-truncated versions of them as part of answers to unsuspecting readers.
The saga of this back-and-forth lunacy is compiled here.
In the meantime, I decided to have a peek into the Bishop's ecclesiastic "credentials". You might be surprised to see what I found.
As a side note, it might be amusing to know that he also wound up excommunicating one of the men who ordained him.
But the saga doesn't quite end there, ladies and gents! Oh no!
For the "crime" of trying to get the Bishop to admit to his "sins of omission", I was banned from commenting on his blog and also publicly labeled an anti-Catholic homosexual! (note: I'm neither anti-Catholic, or homosexual.)
So, if you wish to traipse into the minefield of dung that is the Highgate Vampire Case, I advise that you wear very sturdy boots!
Other than that, if you encounter either of these shady characters, or their affiliates, be it in person or on your blog/forum, I'd recommend extreme caution (lest you be publicly maligned or harassed by e-mail or some other means) and a hefty dose of skepticism.
Oh, and be very cautious of giving access to personal info.
Thanks for listening!
And now, back to our regularly scheduled program...
I generally don't like referring to my writings on the Highgate Vampire Case (and its participants) as they tend to attract unwanted attention.
Even Niels has encountered the shady types associated with the Case and his blog is about as innocent as you can get.
I'm guessing other readers have, too.
But this time 'round, I think I need to make a sort of public service announcement on it, especially due to the topics I've covered in the last few days.
This is also to give readers an idea of just how deceptive its primary protagonists can be.
Oh, by the way, if you're not familiar with the Highgate Vampire Case, then here's its Wikipedia page.
Read it?
Ok, good. Let's start with David Farrant.
Despite his insistence that the "feud" between himself and his arch-nemesis, Bishop Sean Manchester, is a "one-sided" affair, it very clearly isn't.
Despite pathologically trying to avail himself of the "vampire hunter" tag and promote his lack of belief in "Hammer-style" undead, he's also the same guy insisting that the "vampire" is "still active" (at rather timely circumstances) and still gives talks on the Case, despite declaring his interest in it "dead".
Query him further about certain quotes and actions, and you come up against a slippery slide of wanton deceit and sidestepping.
And now, onto Manchester.
Hoo boy.
In the last few days, I've focused on the fact that he's a blatant plagiarist.
Now, you'd think that a Bishop would (at the very least) admit to such misdeeds, and apologise for the error of his ways, wouldn't you?
Not this one.
It all began when I noticed that a blog post he "wrote" commenting on Barack Obama, seemed slightly, mmm, off-kilter. On a hunch, I decided to google portions of it.
Here's what I uncovered.
Most interestingly, large chunks of the post were cribbed from the blog of a right-wing British political party, the BNP.
I confronted Manchester on this matter by commenting on his blog.
Rather than confess, he instead deleted my comments and presented heavily-truncated versions of them as part of answers to unsuspecting readers.
The saga of this back-and-forth lunacy is compiled here.
In the meantime, I decided to have a peek into the Bishop's ecclesiastic "credentials". You might be surprised to see what I found.
As a side note, it might be amusing to know that he also wound up excommunicating one of the men who ordained him.
But the saga doesn't quite end there, ladies and gents! Oh no!
For the "crime" of trying to get the Bishop to admit to his "sins of omission", I was banned from commenting on his blog and also publicly labeled an anti-Catholic homosexual! (note: I'm neither anti-Catholic, or homosexual.)
So, if you wish to traipse into the minefield of dung that is the Highgate Vampire Case, I advise that you wear very sturdy boots!
Other than that, if you encounter either of these shady characters, or their affiliates, be it in person or on your blog/forum, I'd recommend extreme caution (lest you be publicly maligned or harassed by e-mail or some other means) and a hefty dose of skepticism.
Oh, and be very cautious of giving access to personal info.
Thanks for listening!
And now, back to our regularly scheduled program...
No comments:
Post a Comment