Saturday, 20 August 2016

Unpalatable Truths


In May on the Facebook Page that I have created called Ned Kelly : The True Story I wrote that unpalatable truths about Ned Kelly never get a mention on Kelly Facebook pages like Ned Kelly Center and Ned Kelly Central. The anonymous administrator of Ned Kelly Central  (NKC) challenged me on that, saying that unpalatable truths ARE discussed on his FB page and I was welcome to share them there. 

This is part of the reply I made in response:

I am quite certain if I posted ‘unpalatable truths’ there if I wasn’t just ignored I would receive a mostly hostile reception, I would have to defend myself against negative and sarcastic commentary and  (there would be) no actual constructive debate. I appreciate your willingness to at least allow such debates to be started but I have no confidence that they would achieve anything other than make me an even more reviled person in the Kelly world, and annoy people who don’t really want to hear anything but saccharine about Ned Kelly.  

Since then I have posted brief comments on NKC about my Blog Posts so that people who are interested  can go there to read and participate.  But not wanting to be accused of somehow abusing NKC I didnt make it easy to find the Blog by providing a link - I left it for people to search and find it themselves. However even these minimalist Posts routinely provoked outraged reactions from Kelly thought Police who want to wipe me off the face of the Planet. I was accused of trying to Hijack the Page!

Last week, to advise NKC readers of my latest Blog topic I posted this to NKC :


'The title of the latest post on my Blog is “Bill is right about Stringy Bark Creek” but Ive also called it ‘The idiots Guide to SBC’ . Bills clever work in identifying the Two Huts site should be acknowledged and listed by Heritage Victoria as the true site of the Police Murders in the Wombat Ranges.'



NKC decided to elevate this brief notice of mine from its near invisible place on the sidebar to a main posting at the top of the Page, and they posted this heading :

'NED KELLY : DEATH OF A LEGEND' BLOG DEFENDS THEORY ON STRINGY BARK CREEK LOCATION...


What followed was exactly what I had predicted would happen in May if such an ‘unpalatable truth’  became a topic for discussion on NKC : "a mostly hostile reception, I would have to defend myself against negative and sarcastic commentary and  (there would be) no actual constructive debate....( I would become) an even more reviled person in the Kelly world, and annoy people who don’t really want to hear anything but saccharine about Ned Kelly."  

Not one person attempted to discuss the ‘theory’ of the location of the murder site; (saying “its wrong” is not a discussion! ) Instead I was relentlessly vilified and attacked, three different people called me  a liar, the old phurphy of my identity was dragged out by several people, I was called a divisive troll, a racist, biased, ridiculous, a bully, I was  accused of belittling people, and of abuse, I was said to ‘know nothing'. "Is there anyone Dee hasn't insulted, abused, belittled or told lies about?” wrote the notorious ignorant bully who has repeatedly and proudly claimed to be the person who sabotaged my earlier sites and who, when he realised he couldnt work it out failed to supply his promised Part Two about Lonigans murder.

Quite a few people announced they never read my Blog and then supplied their opinion of it and me - all negative.

Yet, despite all this abusive provocation, I think the most controversial response I made was this :
"Isn’t it time Kelly enthusiasts stopped ruining their credibility with unsupportable claims and became a whole lot more rigorous when it comes to making claims about the historical truths of the Kelly story?

It was an absolute debacle of a ‘debate' that the NKC administrator tried to control by initially deleting a few threads of abuse and hysterical attacks directed at me and issuing a stern warning. However the abuse continued and later when he deleted someones vile accusations against me while guessing I must be a Cop, that person spat the dummy and threatened to take his bat and ball and go home and never return. At that point the NKC administrator deleted the entire thread, which of course delighted the Kelly fanatics because once again they had succeeded in censoring discussion on something they don’t want people to think about.

As soon as the thread was deleted, there was a flood of Likes” as the line-up of usual suspects ticked off their approval at the successful sabotage of a valid topic and the bullying of the administrator. I commended him for at least trying.

The irony of course is that they may think they won a battle, but they are losing the war. What they do in behaving in this way is play perfectly into my ongoing tactic aimed at exposure of kelly fanatics as mostly ignorant bullies and thugs. Here was a perfect opportunity for them to answer the claims Bill makes about the Two Huts site, to put up their reasoned case, their evidence and their justification for saying he is wrong but instead they went for my throat. In the same way, on this Blog any of them who wants to can present their case for the site they prefer, and say why it makes more sense than Bills but nobody does. But no, instead of trying to advance their cause or defend their beliefs they stay away and excuse themselves with stupid hypocritical statements about not wanting to have anything to do with someone who is anonymous. The fact that the NKC admin is anonymous has never worried them : its MY identity they’re obsessed with, and is why later, on a different thread one of them made a darkly threatening comment about a few people wanting to have ‘an up close chat’ with me : the implication of that disgraceful threat was clear, and I believe it : there are people who given a chance would assault me for daring to challenge their kelly mythology. That wasn’t the first time such threats have been made.

The other irony is that they think that I write this Blog for them to read, that I am trying to change their minds and convert them to kelly scepticism, and that when they boast to each other that they don’t read my Blog I am disappointed - not at all! Ive learned long ago they are not interested in historical truth about Kelly history, or in rational discussion about it, or in a fair debate about the controversies, as this weeks Dee hate-fest on NKC has shown once again. I write this Blog for the two hundred or so visitors who check it every day from all over Australia in their pursuit of knowledge about the Kelly story. I write this Blog to inform the curious about Kelly mythology and about historical truths and, as I say at the top of the Blog, to expose the vicious campaign waged by modern kelly fanatics against anyone who dares to oppose them. Visitors will read and I am certain be persuaded of the truth about the Two Huts site, and of the way Lonigan died, and of the numerous other lies and myths that are spun about Ned Kelly and debunked at The Death of the Legend Blog, and they will go away better informed. They will also go away with an appreciation, and I would expect an abhorrence of the character and tactics of Kelly fanatics, which have once again been put on magnificent display on NKC. They don’t seem to realise what a huge favour NKC did them when the whole thread was removed! 

They seem to have forgotten the advice given them by one of their own earlier in the year :"Your intentions as a contributor or shall we say going in to bat for Ned will be in vain. Continue to do so will prove more disastrous than what we are currently experiencing."

32 comments:

  1. Dee, once again you lie. The thread fell apart because once again you attacked me. You continually do this and you will continually be rebuked for it. I actually like your blog, although the only time I read it is after someone else notifies me that you have had yet another go at me. I don't spend my time reading blogs or Kelly pages, websites etc. It does not interest me. It is the correct interpretation of history that drives me and its far and away not all Ned Kelly, I can assure you. If you learned to be nice, then things might be different. You continually attack me, Matt Shore, and a number of people I know. When you are cornered you go whimpering to admins and spew forth on your blog about how harsh you have been treated. Let me tell you this. At the moment, a well versed defamation lawyer is looking at your blog, your facebook posts, and particularly the post where you called my armour find a fake. When it comes to making statements in the public domain, you are said to have defamed someone if you make a statement that can be proven to be wrongful, and damaging to a persons reputation. I know who you are, and where you can be found. I will not be wasting my time knocking on your door, but expect a knock from someone representing my legal interests. Such a sad way for you to finish your time as a blogger, because as I have said previously, I like your blog. Continue the attacks on the credibility of myself and my friends, and I promise you there will be legal consequences. I am a little surprised that you have been so remiss not to know this already particularly considering your position. See you in court.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dee, stop whining about being hard done by. The thread was closed down for one reason. You attacked my credibility once again, without provocation from me or anyone else. I assume you have never seen my finds first hand, and I assume you have no idea of the numerous other items recovered from the forge site, not on display, which are directly and unequivocally linked to the making of armour. You assumed I was not going to release my findings in August 2016 when we still have 2 weeks to go. You call my finds fake in a public domain known as social media, which is prosecutable under defamation law. I have lawyers looking at this as we speak. I can only speculate as to your apparent close link with a number of similarly disliked people in Kelly circles. Dee, I don't read blogs, or Kelly facebook pages, unless I am told by someone, that you have attacked me yet again. I don't live my life for Ned Kelly, and I am neither a supporter or opponent of the Kelly Gang. I have made other "amazing discoveries" including finding parts from the oldest gold mine crushing plant in North East Vic, and very possibly Australia. I don't make a lot of noise but I do advise the responsible authorities of my finds. My reputation as a respected researcher and discoverer of Historic sites is well known, and I get calls almost daily from people who want me to help them with research, or locating a historic site. I offer this service without fee. The only person, who has doubted, denigrated, defamed, and insulted me is you, so I do not have any compunction to do what you demand. As stated to you previously, my complete book is now archived and will remain that way until I pass on to some other place. I can assure you steps have been taken to make sure it is not published before I die. A much smaller document will be released this month. No fanfare, just put in the appropriate places. From there, I will cease all involvement with the Kelly story, as I am no longer prepared to put myself at the mercy of arseholes like you. I do know who you are, and I know exactly why you have a blog, and why you are bleeding information from everyone. You will get nothing from me. If you want a copy of the document I am releasing, you will have to get it yourself. The release will be limited, and all copies coded and watermarked so they cannot be reproduced in any way. What I don't understand is who the hell you think you are "demanding" things from people. You have no right, no credibility, and are just plain rude. We don't have to tell you a thing. I bid you farewell as I will never visit your blog page again, and you will not find me on any Facebook Kelly pages, or Kelly websites. Hope you are proud of yourself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Darren you say the NK Central thread fell part because I “attacked" you. Here is the content of the post on that thread on NK Central that I made that referred to you - and please remember it was Matt Shore who introduced your name into the discussion, not me :

      "And regarding Darrens research, does the Vault still claim that the iron plate he found is the most significant Kelly discovery in 50 years and is ‘beyond doubt’ an off cut from Joe Byrnes breastplate? I waited in vain for a year for Mick Fitzsimons to front up with the details of his announced solution to Lonigans death, and it looks as if Darren Suttons explanation of why the ANSTO Scientists are wrong, promised SIX years ago is also not going to be forthcoming. Isn’t it time Kelly enthusiasts stopped ruining their credibility with unsupportable claims and became a whole lot more rigorous when it comes to making claims about the historical truths of the Kelly story?‬‬”

      I don’t think many people would regard this as an “attack” and certainly wouldn’t warrant closing down the discussion as you claim, and so I dispute your claim that I told a lie about why the thread was closed down. The truth is, I asked a valid question of the Vault spokesman and made an observation about the way in which it seems to me that Kelly people make claims about things and never back them up. This was relevant to the debate about the SBC site, about which claims were being made by people who also provided nothing to back them up.


      I also want to answer your question “Who the hell do you think you are ‘demanding’ things from people?” Matt Shore made a similar statement on that thread. The answer is that I have a perfect right to ask you to make good on your announcement, first made in 2010, that you had test results which proved that the ANSTO Scientists were wrong and you were right. You said on Wikipaedia that these results were going to be made available between August and October 2010. ( I am assuming you are the author of that part of the entry on Joe Byrne, Woolshed Jack, a name that I believe you used on the Ned Kelly Forum) I think if you make a promise to people they have a right to ask you to keep it. But in any case I didnt ‘demand’ anything of you, I merely observed that ‘it looks as if ...your explanation ....is also not going to be forthcoming”

      I am very pleased to read now that you are about to release it ’this month’ and I will certainly get hold of a copy if you would at least provide details of where they will be available. I just hope it backs up the Vaults claim that your find is ’without doubt’ an off cut from Joes breastplate. If it does I will be the first to congratulate you on your amazing find.

      And while I am also pleased to read that you like reading my Blog, I am a little disappointed that you are taking steps to bring it to an end! The Kelly world won’t be the same without Dee!

      Delete
    2. "A much smaller document will be released this month. No fanfare, just put in the appropriate places." We will await the release with baited breath. Will you give us a clue as to where some of the "appropriate places" might be? I would have thought that if your claims about the armour off-cut, you would be shouting it from the rooftops!

      Delete
  3. That fool with the FB Hate Page against a book continues to revile you Dee about SBC. Not only that, he continues his wacky guesswork about who you are. I have requested Facebook, among other things, to check out his claim of 1,226 'Likes'. Apparently they don't like questionable claims...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is a nobody in the Kelly world, shunned even by Kelly fanatics who have seen the immense harm he has wrought to their already crumbling public image. His attack on the Kelly Gang Unmasked book collapsed, his hate page on FB sank into oblivion, he failed to front up with his promised explanation of Lonigans death, and he failed to produce the expose he boasted he was about to make of the Fitzpatrick incident. So who would bother to take any notice of such a serial failure and buffoon except equally deluded Kelly fanatics. See who has “Liked” his latest lying rant to see who THEY are!

      Delete
    2. He attacks me from a place - his lousy FB page - that he has excluded me from, so I cannot defend myself , and so that nobody can check on the truth of what he is saying about me he he makes claims about a Thread which has been deleted . He is so like Ned Kelly, who was a cowardly liar who hid behind human shields. What a hero!

      Delete
  4. Rick Hetherington20 August 2016 at 22:06

    The threat of ‘an up close chat’ is a real worry. Bad breath. Body odour. Grog. Silly arguments. Ignorance.

    What if they thumped the wrong person?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dee - Your Total page views are in excess of 120819. The pro-Kelly sites are doing exceptionally poor business. You are getting considerable European interest also.

    Looks as if Ned is utterly stuffed!

    ReplyDelete
  6. The "legal consequences" promised by Mr Sutton are ludicrous nonsense.

    No lawyer in their right mind would ever tiptoe into a minefield like this.

    Tough it out Dee, and give these idiots the flick.

    Darren, just imagine your witness Mick on the stand!

    The defamation law in Victoria isn't necessarily in favour of defamed persons.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Legal reps turning up at the wrong doorstep will rue the day.

    What more need I say?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Good Afternoon Dee. I trust all well. Good to talk to you on the vault page but here I am, back on your turf. Just following up on original question: Have you actually been to Stringybark Creek? I think walking the ground is invaluable in turns of making the call on all the information presented. If you are uncomfortable declaring on here, you have my email address. Cheers. Lokk forward to your feedback either way. And remember, this isn't rable rousing. I am genuinely curious. Thanks. MP

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its such a shame that a proper debate on the Two Huts site was made impossible on those two Facebook pages that were willing to let it happen by the moronic behaviour of certain individuals who don’t realise that ad hominem attacks are not a valid form of argument. I tried to point out that visiting the site cant be any help in deciding which one is the correct one because some of the people who have visited the sites at SBC agree with Bill and others don’t. What has to be done before visiting is an examination of the Burman photos and McIntyres drawings to work out the direction in which the photos were taken and then go to the site to look for something that matches. As Bill keeps saying, its not possible to take a photo looking south form the CSI site that in way way resembles the Burman photos and therefore the CSI site cant be where the Police camp and ambush took place. Mark can you tell us if you think the Burman photos were taken looking South, and if not can you explain why?

      Delete
    2. I believe they were taken looking south.

      Delete
    3. Thanks Mark. Do you think you could have drawn that conclusion if you hadn’t been there and looked at it yourself?

      Delete
    4. But i've been wrong before. Here's the thing Dee. I don't have any barrow to push. As I mentioned on the vault page, I am not one of those guys that get obsessive over the actual site of the murders. For me, it's enough to be at the Kelly Tree and within a certain radius and know that the Kelly ambush and death of the 3 police happened near by. One particular site will never be agreed upon judging by previous arguments anyway. . I read Bill and I read CSI @SBC and both are so bloody strong on good points and not so on others. (the "spring" springs to mind here..) I know this sounds wanky and bizarre too but I don't "feel" the events at Bills site. I can't explain in words any more than a feeling I get (or don't get) in the area. And don't paint me as some sort of fruit loop. It is what it is. I have been visiting Tolmie and Toombullup/SBC region since 1982. Regularly. And perhaps being ingrained with Ians work on the subject has left me blind to other options but the hairs on the back of my neck stand up in some areas of SBC reserve but not in others. Make of that what you will.

      Delete
    5. Question for Bill regarding the slope. How certain are we this slope in the present day existed in 1878? Could there not have been earthworks over the years for some reason or other? Could it be a coincidence there is a present day slope that can be at least suoperficially linked with the 1878 background slope? (I am not trying to stir shit. serious question.)

      Anyway, all very fascinating. Having a consensus one day will be a wonderful thing but you know what? Does the actual pin pointed site really matter? And am I saying that because I don't possess the maths and engineering skills and patience Bill and CSI team do? Food for thought there.. (And now I am going to duck from the expected incoming barrage... wink...)

      One more quick thing though. What does Joe Dipisa think? I know he has spent many a time at SBC measuring, calculating. I would be interested to hear. Anyway, lunch time now. We are heading out for an Oporto burger. Check you all later. MP

      Delete
  9. Hello Mark, Good question.
    The slope south of the two huts site is a natural formation described by the Herald reporter of the time as a little hill.

    The road rises up and crosses it to the west without any disturbance to it formation. If you were to go to my document (click above) and go to page 36 there is a scale map showing the contours and the Herald report on page 37.

    The site fell just outside the Beasley land and was never fully cleared for cultivation.

    The only disturbance there was after the bush fire that went through in 2005. The DSE, now DEPI conducted a 'make safe' the area. They bulldozed all the dead trees on the little hill and pushed the rubble all down the slope. I believe this was a deliberate attempt to smother the significance of the two huts and the slope. I saw this as vandalism under the excuse for the $55 thousand dollar spend giving the Jones site its current status.

    Mark also asks- "Does the actual Pin Pointing really matter?"
    It only matters to those that care!
    It matters to the descendants of Constable Lonigan who was shot right there. It matters to descendants of Constable Scanlan shot dead just a little further down the creek, as it also matters to descendant families of Sergeant Kennedy who also want to know where he was shot, and if we don't have a start point the Sergeants death site cannot be even guessed at. It matters to me simply because I wanted to know.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It matters to me too! I'm interested in your comment Bill that you think there was a deliberate attempt by the DSE to smother the significance of the two huts site and the slope. Is there anything to back that up? I didn't think it was the DSE that had spent the money on the Jones site.

      Delete
    2. Peter,
      The Ned Kelly Touring Route and the works at SBC were Federally funded.

      Here is a run down of relevant dates -

      Sept 2002, my finding the two huts site. Ian Jones notified and invited to be shown the fireplace structures but declines.

      10 Feb 2003, The Age news paper report, 'New Kelly find leaves theory of shootings up the creek'. Within days Ian Jones on radio ABC774 spruiking his 2003 edition of NK. A Short Life, on page 385 denounces my findings and declares the findings as Codswallop.

      2004 Jan, Bill takes the initiative to cover the fireplaces with mess. To do so I need permission from DSE. Its only after I said I would pay for the mess and bring it up myself that two DSE men assisted in covering them.

      2004 Nov, Ned Kelly Touring Route - public meeting at Benalla. I attend in the hope to talk to the organisers but Ian Jones derides this. Main speaker Ian Jones.

      March 2005, I give talk to Mansfield Historical Society. MHS Committee member Mr Bernie Anstee is works manager for the DSE, (DEPI).

      2006 Bill lobbies MHS and DSE to have the proper site at SBC identified. Following SBC signage vandalism Bill submits plans which include laser cut bullet proof steel plate signage for StringyBark Creek story boards. My estimated cost was total $5000.

      2008 April - Wangaratta Council NKTR with Ian Jones as their historical consultant in conjunction with Parks Victoria- DSE - consults company 'Green and Dale and Associates' to draw up plans for StringyBark Creek… and only the Jones site will be signposted. I contact DSE project managers and MHS and request that they question and have that corrected.

      2009 March, In Northern Papers report NKTR, MHS and DSE set up a steering committee, resulting in a 'Stakeholders Reference Group', and even though Bill being a member of MHS, is not invited to attend and thus excluded from the discussions. DSE told me my plans for the two huts were tabled (but ignored). This seemingly well planned strategy by those with agendas resulted in the Jones site being accepted over historically correct Two Huts site on the West bank. the SBC site spend was around $55K if not more guiding visitors to the Jones site.


      If the bushfire affected dead trees in the whole general area of the SBC were felled and cleared away, why did they use a heavy rubber tyred bulldozer to cut the top off the little hill overlooking the two huts fireplaces destroying the original slope and leaving the slope strewn with the rubble there that (1) THEY knew was historically important and (2) why did they also make waste with Linton Brigg's preferred western bank site near the Kelly tree? This destruction followed the stand off between Jones and Briggs when they were making the Documentary Ned Kelly Unmasked- the Glenrowan Inn.

      Delete
    3. I hadn't realised your site has been identified now for 14 years. What a pity. I think there's a lot that could be done at SBC to really bring this story to life. It would be great if the Two Huts site could be properly documented and subjected to a proper archaeological assessment. At the same time the Kelly Camp site on the other side of the ridge might also be cleaned up and perhaps the old tracks connecting these two historical sites could be opened up as well. The site of Kennedy's murder should also be marked in some way, so that people could appreciate the distance he was pursued before he was killed. Of course none of this is likely to happen given the rancour between Kelly enthusiasts regarding the true site. Eventually visitors will stop coming to SBC as it becomes common knowledge that the Jones site is not really where it all happened, and in time it will all be gone and the opportunity to properly identify this very important historical area will have been lost.

      Delete
    4. It is absolutely inexcusable and abominable that any destruction of the SBC site has taken place.

      Delete
  10. Dee, I do normally like your discussions, but feel you may be wrong towards a particular Ned Kelly Facebook site. Your opinions of Ned Kelly Central are (I believe) somewhat harsh. NKC removed the thread you make mention of, because it became personal, and hostile, and the likes you also refer to (after it was deleted) were for stopping the virile garbage, not for censoring. This was evident by a lot of the likes put there by individuals who didn't (or wasn't game to) participate, only after the thread was deleted. The majority weren't liking the removal to stop healthy discussion, on the contrary. From my experience, many of the great discussions that have occurred on NKC have almost always involved many individuals, and not just a few as it was in this case. I'm sure there were many who watched and choked on the nastiness, but chose not to participate. This particular thread was nasty and (in my opinion) not needed on their site, hence the eventual removal by their moderator, and not to censor the very good topic. Many of their participating members are smarter than that, to get involved in a nasty, hot headed thread.

    James

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks James. I like what NK Central is trying to do, and I do understand why they ended up deleting those threads. However what I wish they would have done instead of deleting the entire thread was delete the obnoxious posts that were repeatedly made by one individual in particular . I used to allow anyone to post comments directly to the Forum of mine that that same individual sabotaged - and he confirmed it again in those deleted comments on NKC - and also initially at least to this blog as well, and then at times I would have to remove a few posts that were gross. It can be difficult - its ok to say someone is wrong, but is it OK to say theyre a dickhead? If they make a valid point and then call someone a scumbag do you delete the entire thing or just a few words? In the end I moderated all posts and the worst of them never saw the light of day, and eventually they stopped coming all together because the morons posting them realised it was a waste of time. Posts cant be prevented from appearing on your FB page if the settings allow it, but you CAN delete offensive ones, and I wanted the NKC to do this.

      The other thing that was so disappointing was that as best as I can recall NOBODY,not a single person objected to the posts being made, and NOBODY, not a single person attempted to address the actual topic. For them to emerge after it was all over and express a very ambiguous ‘Like’ is far too little and far too late. But as a result there will be no discussion on what you correctly call ‘the very good topic’. This of course is exactly what Fitzsimons wanted, and he has been getting away with this sort of bullying for years, and took no notice of his fellow Kelly-phile on the SBC Forum who told him he was making things worse for everyone. Maybe we should start a new thread on NKC and see if the moderator treats his nonsense any differently ?

      But thanks for your comments, much appreciated.

      Delete
    2. All the pro-Kelly sites are suspect. They only want to hear from fans not foes, and are a gigantic waste of time.

      Delete

  11. Dee, I have put up a new post at my blog entitled "The J.J. Kenneally Playbook." I wrote it back in August after reading some of the comments here, but just sat on it for a while, in other words, I was letting it marinate. I decided to finally put it up, and it does seem that it is timely as ever as concern recent events of folks talking about suing and censoring! I think the readers might learn a little something about Kenneally's penchant for suing folks and wanting to silence their opinions if they don't match his. In the post I tell about the time in 1943 when he sued Salt magazine for libel of Jim Kelly! It is actually a bit ludicrous when you take everything into consideration. Also, as regards censoring, he wanted to "...organize a meeting in the Kelly country, at which a small committee of censors will be elected, with power to take direct or indirect action against the enemies of truth and justice." Some wild stuff!

    http://elevenmilecreek.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-jj-kenneally-playbook-sharon.html

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hi Sharon, good point in your article about who owns the Kelly story. On the one hand its promoters want the gang and especially Ned to be worshipped across Australia. On the other they see red (!) if it's not the 'authorised' version or if anyone has the cheek to argue when Kelly gurus have made blatant historical errors. Kenneally's highly selective misrepresentation of the Royal Commission Minutes of Evidence is a classic example of blundering bias, talk about a bull in a china shop. Funny you mentioned the National Archives, I'm off to Canberra on Sunday and plan to spend half a day there during the week to investigate something I think will put another hole in the canvas. If I find I'm right, I'll post my findings when I get back in a week or so.

    ReplyDelete
  13. It did sound like Kenneally firmly planted a flag and claimed the "territory" for himself! All of those claims he made that I quote in the blog are laughable now, because as someone recently said to me, nowadays we have so much more access to information and archival sources than any generation before us (and how lucky we are). Kenneally saying that "up -to-date, no one has challenged a sentence in my book" is silly, in hindsight.

    Oh, yeah, if you are going to Canberra to find something in the archives that is not digitized online you might want to take heed of this and maybe call first to be sure what you seek can still be accessed during this time of their upheaval.

    http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/managing-collection/securing-national-archives-holdings/napf/index.aspx

    They have this on that page -

    "There will be disruption to access to the Canberra-based collection from 30 October 2016 to 1 July 2017, as we relocate 15 million records from multiple repositories and rehouse them in the NAPF.

    While we are unable to retrieve all affected records, we have identified high-use records that will continue to be available in the Canberra Reading Room. You can also view digitised records online...."

    ReplyDelete
  14. Many Australian archives have been infiltrated by librarians who have a different take on archives than archivists do. Public Record Office Victoria used to shutdown for a week for a so-called stocktake, during which little was achieved. Access is continually being made more difficult. A plague on all their houses.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sharon. North Carolina is a general predictor of Republican presidential aspirations. Your thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, if you go by the sizes of the many rallies Trump has held in the eastern part of the state versus those held by Hillary, he will win in a landslide! Thousands have attended his events, some with folks not even being able to get in due to capacity crowds, some even lining up in the early AM to get into a 7 PM event so they can be right up front, but when Hillary has made only a very few appearances around here literally only hundreds attended. But there are other parts of the state where she draws big where folks are more affluent and more liberal, and there are so many variables and wild cards in the mix, such as those who fear Trump's policies will knock the biscuit wheels off their gravy train...so it really is anyone's guess who will take NC, but as for my small geographic area, they are ready for the swamp to be drained!

      Delete
  16. Thanks Sharon...

    ReplyDelete

1. Moderation is back on. I haven’t got time to be constantly monitoring what comments are made and deleting the mindless rubbish that Kelly sympathisers have been posting lately. Please post polite sensible comments, avoid personal abuse and please use the same name whenever you Post, even if its a made-up name.


2. Do you want to provide an active Link in your Comment? The simplest way that I can suggest is to click HEREand follow the simple instructions. This site creates the Tag that you then copy and insert into your Comment.