Gothic Speaks!

In "Drive-By Comments", I discussed an unpublished comment by an anonymous poster named "Gothic".

This time, Gothic saw fit to submit another comment (to the above-mentioned blog entry) - and one I've deemed worthy of approval, this time.

So, I'll be taking this opportunity to address the matters raised in Gothic's comment and providing my responses in this very blog entry. If Gothic doesn't mind, of course.

Anyway, here goes:

Just a minute, Anthony, who gave you permission to copy material from "The Cross and The Stake" forum and goodness knows where else over the last couple of years? Who, indeed, gave you permission to identify Seán Manchester which clearly defames and misrepresents him?

Don't you love it when a person doesn't divulge their name...but is happy to address you by your own? It's not the first time Gothic has done this: you'll note that one of the reasons I didn't publish his/her previous post is due to them revealing the name of an anonymous poster on another forum.

Still, it's nice to see I have a "fan", seeing as Gothic reveals I have previously copied "material from "The Cross and The Stake"" (though not on this blog). It gives me a warm, tingly feeling to know I'm being monitored in such a way.

That said, it's not much of a revelation. I'd just call it quoting. Especially as I cite my sources. See, sometimes when people are discussing a matter, they like to actually quote the source they are talking about. You see it done in books. Heaps of times.

Unfortunately, Gothic doesn't seem to be able to make the distinction between quoting something and copy-and-pasting the near-entirety of a document without permission - while the same source chucks a wobbly about copyright violation.

Ya see, I kinda view that as being just a tad hypocritical. I also pointed out that my Windows Live Space blog had been closed down for such unfounded reasons (they ignored my responses proving that I had permission to reproduce certain items).

As to the last portion accusing me of "identify[ing] Seán Manchester which clearly defames and misrepresents him?" - buggered if I know what Gothic is referring to.

If he/she is dealing with stuff discussed in the previous post, then somehow, Manchester must be defaming himself - considering that Gothic's initial problem stemmed from my quoting an extract from Manchester's 1985 book, The Highgate Vampire.

You didn't once approach Seán Manchester for balancing comment or to enquire whether Brautigam's allegations are accurate.

I'd say the more disturbing aspect about this is...how would "Gothic" know if I've consulted Manchester or not?

Besides, the interview was with Brautigam. Also, there have been refutations to it already. Hell, I even linked to one in the previous post.

I've always encouraged open discussion on these matters. That's why I initially founded my forum and blog(s).

Those in support of Seán Manchester, therefore, have every right to address the libellous misinformation you have published and to do so with a rebuttal which obviously includes the original nonsense disseminated by Brautigam and you.

This paragraph highlights another one of Gothic's problems: lack of specific examples.

Here, I am accused of publishing "libellous misinformation" about Manchester. Which information, you might be asking?

Who knows.

Gothic isn't keen to clarify on such things.

Regarding rebuttals, well, the interview itself was partially that. What Gothic doesn't seem to have noticed, is that portions of the questions I asked Brautigam...were based on public [online] items disseminated by Manchester!

So is Gothic trying to say that Brautigam isn't allowed his right-of-reply? That it's ok for one person (Manchester) to publicly comment on another (Brautigam), but if Brautigam wishes to do the same...then all of a sudden, it's "libellous misinformation"?

Talk about a double standard.

For that matter, why is an anonymous poster like "Gothic" even passing himself off as an authority on the matter? How does he/she know that the information was "libellous"? I don't see any credentials, affiliation, not even a name from our Gothic friend.

Indeed, the only hint given to who they are, is this: "Those in support of Seán Manchester, therefore, have every right to address the libellous misinformation you have published..."

That's funny, because that essentially means that Gothic is passing himself off as not only a representative of Manchester, but a legal representative, considering the crimes he/she accuses me of.

I wonder what Seán "Dusted My Sandals" Manchester would have to say about that...

If you don't like it, quit your obsession with Seán Manchester and just try to get a life of your own instead of pursuing people who live on the other side of the globe where distance perhaps makes you feel safe to harass them.

Ah, see, now this is a cunning trick - and one of the oldest in the book.

What you do is, you take something said against you (in this case: "Obviously, "Gothic" is more keen on stalking and harassment than in discussing matters seriously") and then...spin it around and put it on the other person!

Ain't that clever?

Nonetheless, I'll respond to what "Gothic" has accused me of.

Firstly, does Gothic understand that this blog deals with the Highgate Vampire Case, of which, Manchester was a major part of? So how exactly could I avoid talking about him?

That's like me crafting a blog discussing Tom Cruise's film career...but not mentioning the actor himself!

It's also funny that "Gothic" accuses me of "pursuing people who live on the other side of the globe where distance perhaps makes you feel safe to harass them".

How exactly am I even harassing Manchester? If he reads my blog, he hasn't said jack about it. To my knowledge. If I've written untruthfully about him...then how about citing where and when?

It's also quite hypocritical to accuse me of harassment, when an anon like "Gothic" is happy to (attempt) to publish the names of private persons - while remaining anonymous themselves. But worse than that, it's worrying that Gothic seems to embody a vigilante-style attitude towards anything even remotely critical of Manchester:

"Those in support of Seán Manchester, therefore, have every right to address the libellous misinformation you have published..."

Since when?

Drive-By Comments

Speaking of copyright violation, a poster referring to themselves as "Gothic" recently attempted¹ to post a comment on "An Open Query on Religious Belief". I say attempted, because I refused permission for its publication.

And here's why.

Rather than address the issues raised in that entry, they instead accused me of "illegally upload[ing] a book in violation of copyright law".

Which, I didn't do.

They seem to have taken offense at me quoting Sean Manchester from the first edition of The Highgate Vampire (1985). It might have been the bit where Manchster said that was "not pre-eminently religious".

The pseudonymous poster then goes on to provide a link to Manchester's forum before saying, "You may raise any question you like, but kindly observe the forum rule of posting no links and no email addresses."

Almost makes me think they have some kind of authority on it...

But it's hard to tell, because if you click on "Gothic"'s profile, you'll notice that it is inaccessible. Oh well.

However, the main reason I didn't publish the comment, was that it publicly revealed the private identity of a member on the Dark Matters Radio Exploration forum. Obviously, "Gothic" is more keen on stalking and harassment than in discussing matters seriously.

So, permission denied!

¹ Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 6:13 PM.

Copyright Violation

Now isn't this a laugh.

I've just come across a page called "Shroudeater's Truth-Eating - Rob Brautigam's Lies!". It's a copy-and-paste job of my interview with Rob Brautigam,¹ interpolated with anonymous commentary.

Funnily enough, it is identical to an e-mail circulated by the FoBSM...

Now, there's only one problem with the content of the webpage in question: I didn't give its owner permission to reproduce the interview!

This is especially amusing because of the reasons given for the closure of my Windows Live Space page.

I also find it odd that the copyright-violating page is hidden in the website of the Holy Grail Church. I didn't realise plagiarism was part of their ministry.

¹ Which was previously covered in "The Brautigam Interview", "Another One Bites the Dust!" and "The Interview They Didn't Want You to See!".

Highgate Vampire Movie

In the 38 years since the Highgate Vampire story broke in the mainstream press, there have been no movie adaptations re-telling the tale.

Until now.

Well, sort of.

A production by Digital Major and Draw Pictures called Highgate Vampire: The Movie, bills itself as

an interactive horror set in modern times about a vampire infestation in a London cemetery. The story is influenced by true events that happened in and around London’s Highgate Cemetery some time ago.

The description accompanying its trailer on YouTube, goes into a bit more detail:

4 American teenagers hook up online and meet up in London where they embark on a terrifying journey into London's Gothic past.

Personally, I think a straight adaptation would have been much more preferable.

Change of Template

I've never been too fond of the template (a customised version of Douglas Bowman's "Minima Dark") and design I've utilised for this blog:

So, I've decided to select something a bit more aesthetically pleasing.

As of this writing, you'll know be treated to Jeffrey Zeldman's "Son of Moto" template! I still feel a bit guilty for using it, though - it's the same one used by one of my favourite blogs, Niels K. Petersen's Magia Posthuma. Almost feel like I'm ripping him off.

Might have to make some adjustments to it.

An Open Query on Religious Belief

According to the Holy Grail Church's page, "Ecclesia Apostolica Jesu Christi":

Good Friday 1973 and the founding of Ordo Sancti Graal on the summit of an English hill by twelve disciples laid the foundations for the restoration of the Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ in Great Britain. The Hampstead & Highgate Express newspaper recorded on 4 May 1973: “Wearing white robes and carrying a nine-foot-high wooden cross, he plans to set off from Hampstead Heath next week on a pilgrimage of peace. Walking all the way with Seán Manchester will be a group of twelve young supporters, who want to spread ‘the simple, spiritual ways of life originally taught by Christ’.”

Indeed, Sean Manchester's The Highgate Vampire: The Infernal World of the Undead Unearthed at London’s Famous Highgate Cemetery and Environs (London: British Occult Society, 1985) proclaims that "All proceeds from this book will be contributed to the Church of the Holy Grail".

So why do we have the following admittance from Manchester on page 12 of the same book?:

Although not pre-eminently religious, I have been left in no doubt by the course of events that evil is not just an abstract force and, most important of all, that such demonic molestation as I have encountered is no match for divine power once invoked. The set of symbols I work with are predominantly Christian, yet you will find in the text that I cast a circle, what some might call a Magic Circle. While I am not a witch in any sense of the word, I suppose as a secular person handling consecrated material as a protection against hostile psychic forces, I am practicing "white magic". The Circle once cast is a ritualised barrier, a consecrated sanctuary; like a church, a mosque or synagogue - like Avebury, Stonehenge and Glastonbury.

It should be noted that Manchester was later ordained by Illtyd Thomas, a

Primate of the Celtic Catholic Church, who, together with Michael Weston and James Henry Vermeulen, on 4 October 1991, consecrated Seán Manchester, Superior General for Ordo Sancti Graal, Primate/Bishop (with dignity of Archbishop) for Ecclesia Apostolica Jesu Christi (an autocephalous jurisdiction). (~"Ecclesia Apostolica Jesu Christi")