Arcadia Discussion Zone

I have not been "rude and offensive" about Rosemary Ellen Guiley. At least I got her name right, which is more than you managed. Others in her field of interest have commented on how often she is inaccurate in what she writes and publishes. This can only be described as sloppy journalism. That is not rude or offensive. That is an informed opinion. Just read her coverage of the Highgate Cemetery Vampire case in a later book she wrote. Anyone who has access to the public records will find her claims, dates and attributions are generally flawed throughout. Guiley's reference to "Ruthven Glenarvon" was part accurate and part false. I have already identified which part is false. As for Duncan Campbell !!! This journalist has a long history of collusion with a certain chum of yours. Campbell was complicit in the manufacture of bogus articles and "news" stories for such dubious (and now thankfully defunct) outlets as City Limits. Campbell is an atheist with leanings towards a form of communism. His intense dislike of Bishop Manchester is due to the bishop's uncompromising traditionalism, faith and willingness to stand up and be counted where supernaturalism is concerned. Most with an interest who are Christians, including priests, will nowadays only admit behind closed doors to a belief in vampires. Campbell was also aware that the party he colluded with down the years was disingenuous in what he publicly claimed about the supernatural and the occult. This suited the "humanist" journalist perfectly. He provided much sought after publicity to that quarter and the articles which manifested where clearly intended to undermine and mock the supernatural and the occult. Consequently the truth was sacrificed on the altar of sensationalism, and with an agenda to boot which suited both collaborating parties!

On the matter of writing styles I will say this: those of us who are literate and of a certain age do share a way of writing. But it is obviously still not the same. It is do with the education system of the day. Your erratic style, spelling, syntax, grammar etc, is unbelievably close to that of your chum in London who had very little education from what I can gather. Yet I know you are not him. You are both, along with many others, revealing a style that befits your background and persona. If you examine the bishop's contemporary authors of a similar or slightly older age than him, some of whom are also his friends and associates, you will find a remarkable similarity in their writing styles.

If I appear (to you) to know a lot about the bishop it is because he is an author who writes autobiographically, pens blogs, gives interviews, and has described everything in detail himself that I have mentioned on this forum. And I happen to choose his word over those of his detractors.

Thanks David and Jenny--I am a bit busy so havent time to write much over all CDf meanderings but one thing I will ake CFW to task over is my situation with Lady Armytage. Lady Armytage consistently denied access to RHG by the YRHS a completely genuine local history group,--she always said she was too busy--- yet she allowed Princess Anne, Tony Robinson and assorted Yankee professors and other "important" people, plus a local the late big shot Sir Donald Thompson up to her new house built on the priory ruins on the proceeds of the sale of the Hall---well its all in the dare-i mention -it new book, access. Were it was for blood sports or history or a bit of both I dont know. FACT. Ruthven Glenarven who he might or not be but if not his nibs himself. Read the article and analysis yourselves which i will send on pm--was one of the "nobodies" refused yet "RV" went a -tresspassing with his two still unanamed assistants, to Kirklees, with his vampire gear in his cricket bat case( see the interview with Jonathon Woss) discovered "finger width holes and blood drained animals" indicating vampire population in the area and if he didnt encounter a vampire--which should have been a possibility in the mind set of the famous vampire hunters -- but instead he maybe expected the teddy bears picnic or fairies at the bottom of the garden, and he came all the way to Yorkshire to do this---- he went up there looking for something--PRAY ENLIGHTEN, O CALDERFWITH, WHAT WAS YOUR MASTER LOOKING FOR?


Anyway to get back to the late lady a who some folk are still doffing their caps to posthumously, I said she did not allow us access. If in doing she made herself bad publicity, it is not my doing, surely even you can see that!


damiana

You start by saying "might or might not be" and then continue as if he is who he is not.

The person who used the pseudonym and sent a request to Lady Armytage was not Bishop Manchester whose interview with Jonathan Ross did not relate to Kirklees. The discovery of "finger-width holes" was made by someone else and at least two years prior to the bishop's vigil. There was no claim of a "vampire population in the area" and at no time has Bishop Manchester positively identified the Kirklees phenomenon as being a vampire.

Why did he write about it in his Vampires Hunters Handbook and The Unexplained magazine then?


your friend damiana

David--have pity. CFW-- not being the bish himself of couse, is threshing around in a mire of absolute absurdity. I will private e mail my analysis of the kirklees vampire-ghost- fairy, teddy bears picnic--hunt--vigil-- accidently found myself there through no fault of my onw---- saga onto you. You have seen it before and I wonder if we should post it up, if we do it will make it look like a made up story but then again , the indefatigable michievallean Caldewitch may be able to explain it all on the behalf of his master and enlighten us all where we have erred.

damiana

Caledfwlch,

Firstly, I'd say Guiley's work is a lot more authoritative than yours, considering she actually met up with the Bish for her chapter on the Highgate Vampire. I've never seen him write a refutation to her saying he used Ruthwen as an alias.

Is there one? Perhaps you could provide it.

You tend to have a bit of a dismissive attitude towards Guiley, but don't actually single out what she said that was incorrect.

As to the Kirklees thing merely being a "vigil", sorry, that's crap, as I've proved elsewhere.

What he wrote did not identify his vigil at Kirklees as a "vampire hunt" or the phenomenon as a "vampire". The public perception and media attribution was just that. But it was never positively identified as such by Bishop Manchester.

You've "proved" nothing of the sort. You're just full of it, Hogg. And full of yourself. You're some johnny-come-lately who thinks he can get his fifteen minutes' worth of fame by attacking public figures at about as safe a distance as possible. You hide behind a computer screen and wallow in your own sense of self-importance. But you're a nobody, Hogg. A nobody who is trying to feed off the fame/infamy of others who you don't know and who certainly don't want to know you. You're the worst kind of nerd - the paranoid kind.

Bishop Manchester wrote to Guiley and her publisher about the "Ruthven" matter. She will confirm this, as will her publisher. If you want to read his "refutation" of Guiley read his The Vampire Hunter's Handbook.

What's incorrect about Guiley's take on Highgate?

I have borrowed much of the following from elsewhere, but never mind that. It reflects my own observations about Guiley's travesty.

Thirteen years after publication of Vampires Among Us (1991), Guiley published The Encyclopedia of Vampires, Werewolves, and Other Monsters. Guiley's entry claims that "a massive vampire hunt by self-proclaimed vampire hunters was organized for the night of Friday, March 13, 1970" when, in fact, the mass public vampire hunt of hundreds of people was not organised at all. It was entirely spontaneous due to a television transmission about the suspected vampire on the evening of 13 March 1970.

"Hundreds of vampire hunters invaded the cemetery, armed with wooden stakes, garlic and crosses. No vampire was found, but the cemetery suffered vandalism and theft damages amounting to £9,000 to £10,000. The vandals left behind graffiti and the exhumed remains of a female corpse, and stole lead from coffins," claims Guiley.

In actual fact, the cemetery suffered no vandalism whatsoever as a result of the mass vampire hunt or any subsequent vampire hunts. Vandalism, moreover, decreased from March 1970 onward as a direct consequence of the attention the cemetery was receiving. The female corpse which was disinterred in August 1970 had nothing to do with vandals or vampire hunters. The police correctly treated it as an act of black magic ceremonial attributed to Satanists who were probably disturbed before they could hide all the evidence. Nobody at the time regarded the outrage as anything to do with vampire hunting or vandalism.

Guiley continues: "As lurid stories fueled more interests, vampire hunters and the curious continued to enter the cemetery at night. In 1974, a group of vampire hunters claimed they had found the vampire and had destroyed it, but others disputed this."

By 1974 there was no claim by anyone that a vampire was active at Highgate Cemetery and it certainly was not claimed by anyone to have been "destroyed" in the cemetery. It was alleged to have been exorcised at an entirely different location on the borders of Highgate and Hornsey, nowhere near the notorious graveyard. (See The Highgate Vampire by Seán Manchester, page 143).

Guiley further claims: "To discourage occult activity and vandalism, the cemetery was closed at night and access was severely restricted."

The cemetery had never been open at night. It always closed by 5.30pm in the summer and 4.30pm in the winter. Access was only restricted in the daytime because safety could not be guaranteed and Friends of Highgate Cemetery, who had taken on the responsibility from Camden Council who had bought the graveyard from the private cemetery company who owned it during the vampire haunting, could not accept the liability of people walking about with gaping holes in the ground and trees falling all around.

Guiley finally claims: "From 1977 to 1980, mysterious animal deaths were reported in the areas near Highgate Cemetery. The bodies of pets and various small wild animals were found with wounds in their throats. It was speculated that dogs or wild animals were the culprits, but the 'vampire theory' also stayed in circulation."

Yet anyone who has researched this case would be aware that the mysterious deaths of animals attributed to vampiric activity had moved away from Highgate by that time. They were now centred miles away elsewhere.

Rosemary Guiley's Encyclopedia of Vampires, Werewolves, and Other Monsters continues in her tradition of sloppy journalism invariably at odds with known facts in the public annals as recorded by those who were present at the time which clearly she was not.

Whatever, but if you or the bishop--your styles are identical, were to adopt a less aggressive manner of speaking to people and not to brow-beat them in the first instance, or use hurtful terms like sloppy, hack, liar, dingy etc and accuse people of having "hate campaigns" against you ( have you ever wondered why the bishop must be the most unpopular man on the planet, according to you anyway) --or the bishop, and to furthermore get your facts wrong as in the redmonkey film affair but offer no apology; if your communication skills were a little more user friendly perhaps the poor bishop would not be beleagued on all sides by people who rightly do not take kindly to be spoken to in these terms. Maybe then instead of this confrontational mud-slinging, from both sides, more could be usefully achieved. As it is no-one gets anywhere because the bishop party will never back down, admit there might have been a misunderstanding. If you are his friend trying to help him in his plight then I have to say you are doing him no favours.
Much of your info is wrong, second and third hand and at the end of the day hearsay.

damiana

You mean...what you do behind your alias?

As to proving nothing...time to quote the Bish on his own words, eh?



That's from his "The Kirklees Vampire" article for The Unexplained 38 (1992), p. 761, which I covered here.



HAHAHAHA! Says the guy absolutely obsessed with George and secret natterings behind the Arcadia curtain...going on in his own head? That's gold, mate. Gold!



How about you quote it here. I'm not gonna buy an entire book for a tiny refutation.

He does have a proclivity for aliases, though. George Byron's one (once again, playing on his Lord Byron obsession) and admitted to me that he uses others, but was pretty damn vague about it.



And blah de blah, blah. You pinched that from the C&S, for the record. I remember that appearing after Guiley gave me permission to reproduce her Highgate Vampire entry on my forum. They, however, didn't have the same courtesy.

However, I wasn't asking about her encyclopedia.

Try to stay focused, Caled! What's wrong with her entry on the Highgate Vampire in Vampires Among Us (1991)?

I have just re-read the Kirklees Vampire as the article is actually entitled and it mentions vampire hunting in it several times. I have an entire critical analysis breakdown of the article which I might pm out--as it actually quotes from the article itself with comments, but defintely vampires in it and Lady A's refusal. No getting away from it, folks ! Once again the truth has been found out, despite anything CALDEWITCH says to the contrary and if he does I will quote right from the article--( not that that will make any impact on him, he'll just ignore the inconvenient facts and move onto some other supposed wrongdoing against ye bishop !)

DAMIANA

Barbara,

Yes, Caled's balderdash has been exposed cos I took the time to quote the Bish on his own words. So, a lil credit, please!

Now, as to your critique, why restrict it to PM? I'd be interested to see what you have to say on the matter. But please, paragraph the bloody thing, would ya? Try and keep it legible for our sakes'.

The reason I haven't put it on here is because it uses direct quotes, all in paragraphs and my comments and questions. Someone might shriek copyright theft! Anyway It has been seen before somewhee I can't remember where. The general critique is that it does not make much sense, if you have read it you will understand why, who are the two unnamed assistants, why take a route round the gatehouse, was Clifton village really in the grip of vampire fear and having their homes exorcised by priests--where was all the back-up evidence for starters. The word Vampire is mentioned at least 6 times--I must go back and count--it was definitely a vampire investigation even if he doesnt want to call it a hunt, though why the fuss--about a minor point to distract people of the real issue of trespass. Also what is more it was a FAILED vampire hunt by the world famous vampiologist of all time, and-haha--- the poor people of Clifton were left at the mercy of the still roaming undead, though it ends by saying "one day i will go back etc."Okay they did a VIGIL while they were hunting---vampires/ghosts/fairies or teddy bears----he says he was there--translate trespass--if he didn't trespass then he wrote a load of made up bumph. As many people suspect--he is betwix a rock and a hard place. I would admit the trespass, its only a cicil misdemeanour, its not even a crime, unless you do damage. Its a bit of a lark and adventire, thwarting the burley Mellors-lookalike and his blunderbus, especially Robin Hood derring do style, cos you have been denied your heritage just as Robin Hood was denied his by the invading Normans. BRAVO MANNY I say if you hopped over the wall in your cassock and pop pom hat weilding your trusty stake and candleabrum!


damiana

That is an absurd thing to say. We do not have identical styles any more than you and your London chum (even though you both make identical errors when attempting to write).

For you to talk about "adopting a less aggressive manner of speaking to people and not to brow-beating them" really takes the biscuit. Have you ever stopped and looked at what you and your cronies have published on the net about your chosen victims? It is absolutely disgraceful. Most of what you and your bunch say about others is defamatory and actionable. The only reason you have got away with it so far is because your victims tend to ignore you.

The fact is that Rosemary Ellen Guiley's coverage of the Highgate Vampire case is sloppy and that is not just my opinion. Quite a number of commentators have made the same observation. Duncan Campbell is a newspaper hack and, like many hacks, publishes articles he knows to be largely manufactured. This he did with your chum for a number of years in disreputable organs like City Limits. I don't know where "dingy" comes from, so I can't comment about that accusation. But those who spread malicious falsehood about Bishop Manchester and others are liars. That is the only term one can use to describe them.

"Have you ever wondered why the bishop must be the most unpopular man on the planet"? No! Because he is not unpopular. They are your words, not mine! I have always found that he is very popular. While he has well in excess of three thousand Facebook friends, you have just twelve. Who is the unpopular one?

I did not get my facts wrong about Red Monkey Films. This matter has been covered and your preposterous reasons for them abandoning the project is just as it sounds - preposterous! It has nothing to do with me and I have no interest in your Robin Hood obsession, but everything I have said in private about the Red Monkey matter is factually correct.

Talking to you is a futile exercise, as others have discovered to their cost, and I shall now cease altogether.

I have rm e mail to state that what you say about bmanchsters involvement is untrue. I will ask them to kntact you direct

damiana

Tony, I'm 100% with ya on this one..."Now, as to your critique, why restrict it to PM? I'd be interested to see what you have to say on the matter. But please, paragraph the bloody thing, would ya? Try and keep it legible for our sakes'.

I have asked her to get the dicki out of whatever a poggy is and duplicate the style of text which is in her edited books. I feel lots of pity for those who edit her books to make the author of them come across as literate. I notice we are not alone in this elusive quest.

If we really get lucky D + D, Inc will get back on topic and make te relevant tie-ins to what is the outcome of thislatest tome to peddle the Robin Hood myth-legend.

Hey Tony, do ya wanna see how easy it is nowadaze to create an urban myth... check this out,... hehehe...
http://www.moneyteachers.org/Breakfast.htm
http://members.beforeitsnews.com/story/ ... eaner.html

Red monkey films have denied to me personally in a recent e mail that the film was dependent upon Bishop Manchester being it it, they have said that this is absolutely untrue, he was asked once and declined, the film went ahead as planned, there are other reasons--which have been explained to me privately--why it has been delayed. Caldewitch, you are either deliberately choosing to tell the wrong tale or someone else is giving you the wrong story!
The bishop's involvement is immaterial, unimportant and not needed.

damiana

Roger, I wonder how many vamp fans bother to read the rest of the forum, 'cuz here is another take based on yer observation.

In this coming Easter, today, actually, thee is a Saint who was blessed with the privilege of bearing the stigmata like Jesus, Sister Anne Catherine Emmerich, this quote comes from her eyewitness of what happened when Jesus was crucified....

...."I remember nothing beyond facts I related concerning descent of Jesus into Limbo, where He went to present to souls there detained grace of the Redemption He merited for them by His death by His suffering; I saw all these things in a very short space of time; time passed so quickly it seemed to me but a moment. Our Lord, displayed before me, at same time, another picture, I beheld immense mercy He bestows in present day on poor souls in Purgatory; for on every anniversary of this great day, when His Church is celebrating glorious mystery of His death, He casts a look of compassion on souls in Purgatory, frees some of those who sinned against Him before His crucifixion. On this day I saw Jesus deliver many souls; some I was acquainted with, others were strangers to me, but I can't name any of them.

Our Lord, by descending into Hell, planted in the spiritual garden of the Church, a mysterious tree, fruits of which--namely, His merits--are destined for constant relief of poor souls in Purgatory. The Church militant must cultivate the tree, gather its fruit, to present them to that suffering portion of Church which can do nothing for itself. Thus it is with all the merits of Christ; we must labor with Him if we wish to obtain our share of them; we must gain our bread by sweat of our brow.

Everything which Our Lord does for us in time must produce fruit for eternity; but we must gather these fruits in time, without which we can't possess them in eternity. The Church is the most prudent thoughtful of mothers; ecclesiastic year is an immense magnificent garden, all those fruits for eternity are gathered together, that we may make use of them in time. Each year contains sufficient to supply wants of all; but 'woe be to that careless dishonest gardener' who allows any fruit committed to his care to perish; if he fails to turn to a proper account those graces which restore health to the sick; strength to the weak, or furnish food to the hungry! When Day of Judgment arrives, the Master of the garden will demand a strict account, not only of every tree, but also of all the fruit produced in the garden.

The 'gardeners' she mentions are the clergy, especially Bishops. All the parables 'boot wasted talents, lazy servants, etc are also 'boot said same clerics + Bishops. They carry a huge responsibility, 'cuz every soul lost to satan due their neglect will weigh against these clerics come Judgement Day.

I know some will say what does this have to do with poor olde Robin Hood lying in desecrated ground that had some sort of a questionable rite-ritual performed over it. This will be dealt with come Judgement Day as well.

Happy Eater to all, may God have mercy on yer soul, y'awl.

Barbara,

Firstly, it's already been established that the Bish was on a lil "unofficial vampire hunt", so you don't need to worry too much about copyright theft. But you did mention that you know the name of the two assistants who accompanied him.

Who were they?

Also, do you think you can get around to answering why you installed a self-professed vampire hunter and a self-professed psychic investigator, respectively, as the Patrons of your Robin Hood society?

Cos, seriously, I'm starting to think it's a pseudo-paranormal group.

jabbs,



I'm starting to wonder if she has a ghost writer meself, jabbs. Hahaha, the writing styles are indeed markedly different.



Yeah, the childish nicknames and phrases like "cap doffing" and such, would be pretty laborious to get through as well. Also, I wonder if she knows just how ironic this was:



A shame too, as she can be pretty clear-headed when she wants to be.



And speak of the devil...here's his latest:



Can't help himself.



Well, just look at Highgate and now Kirklees! And sure enough, there's always people waiting in the wings to make a quid off it.

Dave,



Hahaha, yes, a genuine Catholic who trespasses on private property with a coupla occultists (you and Gareth) to witness a pagan spell for dispersing the spirit of Robin Hood.

Oh, and angrily rants and insults people on forums.

Also, outta curiousity, Dave, exactly what qualification to you have for labeling "genuine" Catholics?

test

OOPS SORRY

Happy Easter to you David also, and also see

www.coscomentertainment.com/robinhoodzombies.html


I have sent you on further details and the analysis of the Great Vampire Hunt of Kirklees critique.

I hope you can read it, as the two most LITERATE of critics, and CREATIVE beings cannot read my joined up writing for which they
had better get their eyes, not to mention brains, tested.

damiana


more later when i have gone through my files