Before moving to that I'll list 3 places that have completely stopped comment from the hate-siters.
1. The Message Board Seller, have a policy not to run Bain or Karam threads since an influx of posters there in 2010 led by Glenda O Brien and Christine Williams, the later making death threats as a way to promote her reasoned arguments.
2. The International Justice Conference, who had a influx of sisters protesting that David was speaking at the Conference in March. Yes, the same people who daily call for David to speak. Schizo?
3. Beatties Book Blog, who 'dared' to publish the foreword of 'Trial by Ambush.'
4.Trade Me, continues to host them of course, and allows them to post links.
This is all disturbing, most particularly to me the attack on a book blog. Most people appreciate books as wonderful things, some with a life of their own, a chance to learn more, to make discoveries or be transported in some ways. Attacking a book blog is the 21st Century equivalent of 'book burning' done in the name ironically of a deceased teacher of children. I know things have got bad with the sisters but what is next?
Well, one thing that was next was a radio 'show' somewhere out of Invercargill, the host Vinnie Eastwood, a rather disturbed individual it seems, who laughed loudly about defamation because of a broad cover of use of the word 'allegedly' he apparently attends to his defamatory, freedom of speech show. I did tune in to listen to Parker and Purkiss. Obviously interested to hear them speak, and to listen to what they said.
Generally, they tried to withhold information from a willing, giggling, Eastwood, who has the type of character that interjects over the top, and goes off into weird descriptions of what the speakers were intending to say in his mind. One might suspect that he was trying to get Vic and Kent to make some further defamatory speech, but they didn't need any help with that. Purkiss is a pom, Kent I would say had a pleasant radio voice. Both men however, by their voices, are very slow unless that was a deliberate perhaps to garner sympathy. They did certainly ask for money,despite claiming that they'd got a 'lot in' already. Kent gave a totally incorrect description of what 'hearsay' is, and Eastwood came over the top to assist with an equally incorrect description. Their 'case' for Robin bore all the hallmarks of general one sided sister diatribe.
Mainstream media it was not, with a howling DJ who must have been on drugs and unfortunately, for him, defamed a number of people including a prominent nzer who has taken and won defamation cases before. By far the most important thing for me was that I got an clear idea of how Parker and Purkiss think and their relative intelligence. Notably they seemed not to understand that the host, in order to get away with defamation, ran his show as though it were a comedy, no doubt in an effort to say that everything said was satirical. Calling somebody a thief might be funny to the host, but I'm not so sure about the person he named might feel about that. Indeed, the overall picture, including Vic's obvious anxieties, reeked of desperation and lack of wit - generally showed the minds of 'book burners.'