Vampires Staked - Amazing Tale...

[Myth Buster]

I notice you didn't answer the question.


ETA:

As posted by me in another thread:




I would like an answer to why you seem to be so time consumed with defending manchester when you don't agree with him, or have a personal or professional relationship with him as you have claimed. I also would like to have an answer as to why the above quoted statements seemingly contradict each other.

Where is the contradiction? I cannot see one.

You might have to hurry because I have been threatened with a ban (subject to Darat reviewing two posts of mine that addressed with evidence falsehood posted by Farrant on the "David Farrant - Psychic investgator" thread).

 

[Ducky]

Where is the contradiction? I cannot see one.

You might have to hurry because I have been threatened with a ban (subject to Darat reviewing two posts of mine that addressed with evidence falsehood posted by Farrant on the "David Farrant - Psychic investgator" thread).

Perhaps if you didn't continue to threated people with prosecution under a UK religious hatred law or continue to post things that are appearing to be attacking people under a 30 year old feud you wouldn't have to face Darat's warnings. He was very clear about what he expected.

However you stated clearly that you are "no more connected to Manchester than The Vampire is to Ferrant" and that is demonstratably false if you are in communication with "his people" over these threads and the legality of them.

So I will directly ask again:

What is your connection to Manchester or his organization? What is the specific nature of your association with him? We're all very much tired of the canard that you fight on his behalf out of some righteous duty, and quite frankly no one here believes it. If you wish to have any measure of believability here, I would recommend you come clean about your connection to Manchester.

 

[Cuddles]

Edit : Bad comprehension by me. Please ignore this post. No, your still looking. Stop it. Read the next one, it's far more interesting.

 

[Ducky]

Care to respond at all Myth Buster? You've posted quite a bit in the other thread since this, how about responding to this?

 

[The Overseer]

Back to the First Post

Hi there folks,

I am The Overseer of Did a Wampyr Walk in Highgate?, a small MSN Groups forum. I can't post you the URL to it, because I haven't made my quota of 15 posts on this forum yet.

I am not an apologist for Manchester, but was previously a member of one of his forums, before my membership was revoked.

Why am I telling you all this? It relates to disclosure. You see, the first message in this topic was written by a member named "songstress", seemingly out of the blue and obviously a direct attack on Sean Manchester which, even read at surface level ("total 'kook'"), is quite apparent.

However, I find it curious that she neglects to mention that she is a member of the Highgate Vampire Society (I won't divulge her name, but her nickname appears on HVS-related sources as well). The HVS is presided over by one David Farrant.

You can read a brief sort of "correspondance" with songstress, if you will, on my forum (which you'll have to presently find on a search engine, I'm afraid), if you go to "Messages" on the main page, then "General" and go to the "To songstress (HVS Member): A Response" thread.

Also, she might care to divulge what she thinks of the alternative supernatural events cited by the President of the HVS as happening at Highgate Cemetery and weather or not she fully supports his testimony (as she was not present for the events herself). Especially in light of her referring to Manchester as a "total 'kook'".

Only fair to hear her view on both "sides" of the Case I'd say, if she wants to post something that could be easily be mistaken for a smear campaign.

You can read Farrant's version of events at Highgate at his home page (which you'll have to google, too). Go to the "Interviews" section in particular and, of course, feel free to read through anything else present on the site.

Form your own opinions.

 

[Big Les]

Hi Bish. You do realise that original post is eight months old, don't you?

 

[Rrose Selavy]

Yet another Sean Manchester Vampire Hunter thread rises mysteriously from the dead...

 

[The Overseer]

Hi Big Les and Rrose Selavy,

Rest assured, I am not Sean Manchester or anyone connected to him. I have disclosed my "role" in the matter in my previous post.

Feel free to check it out yourselves.

You should also have realised I wasn't him, as I highly doubt the Bishop would point you in the direction of Farrant's webpage...and encourage readers to browse through its contents!

While the original posting was quite a long time ago, the responses on the thread aren't so old - the last being from January 18th (prior to my own previous contribution).

Also, my post can hardly be irrelevant, as you saw fit to respond to a thread - as I have - that has been dormant for nearly 2 months. This suggests you've both been keeping an eye on it, possibly for further posts...or that you randomly stumbled across it, and decided to add your own two cents...however abstract they are from the actual content of what I wrote.

All the best.

 

[Rrose Selavy]

Hi Big Les and Rrose Selavy,

Rest assured, I am not Sean Manchester or anyone connected to him. I have disclosed my "role" in the matter in my previous post.

Feel free to check it out yourselves.

You should also have realised I wasn't him, as I highly doubt the Bishop would point you in the direction of Farrant's webpage...and encourage readers to browse through its contents!

While the original posting was quite a long time ago, the responses on the thread aren't so old - the last being from January 18th (prior to my own previous contribution).

Also, my post can hardly be irrelevant, as you saw fit to respond to a thread - as I have - that has been dormant for nearly 2 months. This suggests you've both been keeping an eye on it, possibly for further posts...or that you randomly stumbled across it, and decided to add your own two cents...however abstract they are from the actual content of what I wrote.

All the best.

The fact is you've , like Mythbuster have joined soley as a "neutral observer and seeker of truth", to resurrect a thread, add to another thread and in doing so revive the 35 year old feud for which two members have been banned .-

When we post to a thread we automatically get subscribed and notified of posts. maybe we should have ignored you.

However if you have any actual evidence of vampires walking the Earth, please feel free to post.

 

[Paul]

Also, my post can hardly be irrelevant, as you saw fit to respond to a thread - as I have - that has been dormant for nearly 2 months. This suggests you've both been keeping an eye on it, possibly for further posts...or that you randomly stumbled across it, and decided to add your own two cents...however abstract they are from the actual content of what I wrote.

Or that, being subscribed to the thread, an automatic email was sent when your post was submitted. bugger!, too slow as usual!

 

[The Overseer]

Hi Rrose Selavy,

The thread was never quite dead, as your postings in turn reveal. I have not re-invoked a feud, because what I am stating is a simple fact of disclosure.

I am not arguing with anyone here, which would be even harder to do, as no-one has actually directly discussed any points in the post I contributed.

The fact is, I knew about the thread a while ago, and the original message, but have only recently gotten around to responding to it.

As to the Myth Buster association, I'm sure even songstress herself could refute it, as she would be aware of me from my own forum.

My post on this thread had nothing substantial to add to the existence of vampires (which wasn't the original topic), but more on the intent behind the purpose of starting this thread in the first place.

If you can refute the post which has ignited you into responding on this thread again, then feel free to do so.