Sunday, 18 January 2015

Kelly is an Icon because of Rubbish Like This Video:


‘Ned Kelly: Our Historic Outlaw” is a 15 minute lecture on YouTube given by Professor John Molony as part of a lecture series called  “Convicts to colonies”  organized by the National Portrait Gallery in Canberra in 2011. You can see it here:

No doubt the reason John Molony was chosen to give this lecture was not just because he is an Australian History Professor, but also because he is the author of a Ned Kelly biography, his own version of the life of Ned Kelly published as “I am Ned Kelly” in 1980. Being a retired Professor by the time he delivered this lecture, he had acquired a certain authority in the world of Australian History, and also a casual,confident and convincing style of lecturing. This made it an easy video to watch, and I have no doubt would have persuaded anyone with only a casual acquaintance with the story, which is almost everyone, that what Molony was telling you was history, that he was outlining the basic facts of the kelly story.  In fact this video is only fleetingly in contact with the truth - it is in fact a dreadful piece of Kelly propaganda that I am sure the Kelly fanatics would adore, but it left me shaking my head and thinking, “well no wonder the Kelly legend lives on”

Now, if this narrative had instead been spoken by an ordinary self–confessed “Kelly Tragic” – say someone from the Ned Kelly Forum or one of those Lawyers who keep popping up to defend Ned on TV and in the Press - then such a video wouldn’t be much of a surprise. If you knew where the person was coming from you would expect to hear his “side” of the story. He’s a believer – he’s not interested in making a case for “unbelief”.

But if you were getting the story from a Professor of Australian History is that what you would expect ? What I would expect, and I think all of us ought to expect from a Professor Of History, unless he clearly states that he is expressing his own personal viewpoint, is something “Professional”, an objective and balanced account that informs us of what is known, what is not known and what is controversial. He can still tell his story in his own way, but should indicate where this part is in dispute, that claim is controversial, here is a gap, here is an undisputed fact, this is an allegation…

But no, Molony abandons any attempt at balance and professional and scientific objectivity and makes use of the opportunity to deliver a very unbalanced, inaccurate, and highly skewed Kelly story. He paints Kelly very much as persecuted and hard done by, a supremely decent brave pioneer Australian who was innocent of any serious crimes and even of the murder for which he was hanged. By contrast, the Police were corrupt and conniving beyond belief.

The well documented and extensive criminal past of the greater Kelly family, and of Ned in particular is unmentioned except for two crimes which Molony characterizes as minor and he says the charges were probably trumped up. He mentions them only to make his point that by the time Ned was 17 what he had learned of the Law was that “if they were out to get him, protestations of innocence were useless… futile..” In fact there are many examples in the Kelly story of charges being dropped for lack of evidence, sentences being reduced on appeal, early release from prison for good behaviour: inconvenient for Molonys narrative, but well known and documented. Protestations of innocence were NOT “useless, futile" Molonys flagrant misrepresentation of what is known about Ned Kelly would constitute professional negligence if such behavior was indulged in by a Lawyer or a Doctor -  but a Historian seems to be able to get away with it.

His view of the Fitzpatrick incident is also in contrast with just about everyone elses :  He starts this part of his talk by focusing at length on the character of Fitzpatrick  whom he casts as a sleazy irresponsible womanizer, and then says 
“Mrs Kelly, who was out the back, came inside to find Fitzpatrick trying to rape Kate”
an incident that he said was “hushed up” because 
“in those days, for a girl to carry the stigma of  having been raped was virtually to sign the warrant for your own life…and indeed poor Kate ended up drowned in a creek, probably suicide, out near Forbes”

This is an outrageous bit of muckraking.  As Molony would well know there are so many versions of what may have happened that evening at the Kelly homestead, so many inconsistencies and obvious lies about it, perhaps from all sides involved that there is no certainty about any of it, other than there was a failed attempt to make an arrest and violence that resulted in injury to the Policeman.  Some, but not all of the versions imply something improper between the Policeman and Kate but to publically declare, in the face of all this unertainty that unequivocally the Policeman tried to rape a 14 year old Kate - an absolutely abominable act -  and then link all this to the rest of her tragic life and suicide is absurd and dishonest. I would say almost nobody believes the attempted rape story -  but what a marvelous way to get any viewer who is unfamiliar with the story to take pity on the Kellys and to hate the police! 

Does he inform us that none of this would have happened if the Kellys hadn’t been stock thieves?  Of course not.

Ned, he informs everyone was 400 miles away, perhaps in Dubbo thereby making the Police allegation that Ned shot Fitzpatrick appear beyond absurd, impossible. But nobody believes that story any more as I am sure Molony would have known in 2011: Neds own brother didn’t even believe it.  And of Dan he says “whether he was there, I cant be too sure” - really?  Is the opinion of every other author and source on this topic, that Dan was there, not good enough? 

But facts like those ruin his story so Molony ignores these annoying details. He wants to paint the police as universally corrupt, sleazy, lying and murderous, and the Kellys as innocent and as victims.  “He didn’t have very much control over his own destiny” he laments of Ned towards the end of the Video: what utter nonsense! No control over his decision to be a stock thief? No control over his decision to resist a handcuffing and fight police that ended up in him being chased up the street? No control over his decision to ambush the Police at Stringybark? No control over his decision to take hostages and rob banks at Euroa and Jerilderie, rip up train tracks, take armour and dynamite and hostages to Ann Jones Inn at Glenrowan?

Molony sure drank deep of the Kelly Cool Aid! Excuse me if I don’t follow his example!

There’s no point in me further deconstructing this lecture and pointing out the myriad places where Molonys personal agenda and prejudice has him so egregiously miscasting and massaging  the Kelly story. His treatment of the Fitzpatrick Incident says it all - his interest is not in historical accuracy but in promoting his own interpretation of it. In my opinion its a thoroughly unprofessional and dishonest account of the saga, and the people who watch it will go away seriously misinformed, something that concerns me but obviously doesn’t trouble the arrogant Professor who has apparently convinced himself of the rightness of his view, his interpretations, his analysis and his conclusions, and they are the only ones that count, and the only ones the Public need to know about.


My point is not that he shoudnt be allowed to believe whatever he likes about Ned Kelly - he should be; everyone should be. My point is that being given a Public platform on the basis of his stature as a Professor of History and his career as an historian and published author on the subject, it is an abuse of that privilege to use that platform to push his own personal view without declaring that that’s what they are. Without doubt Molony would know that his views are not mainstream except perhaps  among Kelly fanatics, whose prime interest we already know is not in historical accuracy and in truth but in Mythmaking and story telling, in lionising Ned Kelly and demonising the Police. Molony may be the High Priest of the Kelly religion, but he is a very diminished Professor, in my view.

For that Video: 1 star (for providing an excellent example of Kelly Mythmaking in action)

37 comments:

  1. That video was highly thought of by our anonymouse visitor on his facebook site about that book. He liked the vid a lot.

    That is a shocking review. All the more reason for your blogs to be published in permanent form. The Kelly fanatics inckuding Neducators have long and short-term memory-loss when it comes to damning facts about their hero.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Prof had the luxury of a paid research assistant for his book. Not many Ned authors can say that! He tried to turn Ned into a colonial 'Brian Boru' figure, but instead left us with a rotten, blarney-speaking young thug who left a trial of wounded and dead police. While reading this back, I realised author Peter FitzSimons has an army of assaistants who help him grind out endless popular Australian pulp fiction.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dee,
    I thought Molony's video was pretty good. I would invite other readers to give their opinion.

    There are always two sides to a story and like the now deceased Chief Justice of Victoria (late) John Phillips who was sympathetic to the Kelly cause, as was Prof Molony.

    I'm sure you could sit in front of a 1000 people audience and tell your version of how it was, but all from your perspective.

    Remember the meagre police pay packets were coming from the British establishment, and the BIG rewards offered for the apprehension of the Kelly brothers, from the LAND squatters private establishment, the Stock Preservation Society.

    Today I keep reading about how bad the Unions are for business people (Murdock Press) but you never read how todays businesses have influenced local and national Governments to the tune of Billions and Billions like Macquarie Enterprising owning airports and car parking, the later which makes them more $ than all in or out flight charges. Just as there is something wrong today, the same as in Kelly times.

    Not much action at NKF these days ?
    Bill

    PS I wonder what happened to those hundreds of participants that joined NKF?
    Perhaps they have all been frightened off by draconian rules and are coming back to your very interesting forum blog.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sorry Bill, its a small point but the meagre pay of Victoria Police came from the Treasury of Victoria after 1852.

    Phillips' 'Trial of Ned Kelly' was published while be was a barrister. His later weitings and speeches as a judge and CJ about Ned were more temperate.

    I agree with Dee.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks Bill, you raise lots of interesting points - as usual! - and I also would like to see more people commenting. The Neducator on NKF swore black and blue he has never and would never comment here and I thought why on earth not? Why would a person not want to join in a discussion about something they have an interest in and opinions about? Why wouldn’t anyone want to defend their fondly held views, and make a case for their side of the argument? You are right to wonder where the NKF people have gone - they are afraid to comment here but worse, they are afraid to comment on their own website. Or maybe their minds are empty and they just have nothing to say? But everyone is welcome here and as everyone can see for themselves the only things I don’t permit are gross rudeness and personal attacks, and there have been very few of those.

    But tell me Bill - or anyone else - what did you think of Molonys allegation about Fitzpatrick raping Kate? And do you agree with him that Ned didn’t have much control over his life? (NEWS FLASH: My next post will be about Molonys book, probably ready by Friday))

    ReplyDelete
  6. Talk about jealousy Dee and Bill, you are forgetting that NKF has its members only areas which are used quite frequently and that is because the members don't want their post picked apart by anonymous false named trolls and blogs such as this one. Draconian rules I think not Bill didn't you help to write some of those rules but then was the first to break them. With all of your few real named people on your website Dee there isn't much going on here at all. Start worrying and working about that Dee and leave other websites alone as you do not have the right information to be commenting all your assumptions are wrong just like your blog.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm looking forward to Doug Morrisseys new book in February. Just ordered it. Interesting cover, using the Sidney Nolan Kennedy art. I like it. I think the book is going to enrage a few in the Kelly World. I can see a storm brewing. But that's good isn't it? Healthy debate is exactly that. Healthy. Just no nastiness I hope. All these differing opinions keep the Kelly Story alive, kicking and relevant. what a God awful plod it would be if we all thought the same. Cheers. Mark

    ReplyDelete
  8. So, according to Anonymous the NKF people are hiding in their Members Only area because they are scared of me! Amazing how this once Public Forum retreated into a secret Members Only Club once something turned up on the Net challenging them and offering something different. But what would we be jealous of? The only NKF thread this year, on those two letters has recorded 397 views in two weeks - over that time we have had 5 times that number of views. People are voting with their Mouse as my Pageview Counter shows. Anonymous, running away and hiding in your secret forum is not going to save the NKF. Ive already told you what will.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Nobody said anything about members hiding or being scared of you Dee and 397 views on one topic on NKF you failed to mention the other 200 or so topics which have received numerous more views than you. Also what you say will save NKF is of no relevance as if the admin would listen to a nameless person like yourself. For your information again it's not a secret members area the members wanted it and that's what the admin gave them to stop anonymous false named trolls and blogs/forums like yours from picking at their posts instead of becoming real named people and joining the best Ned kelly website so just stop your wrong assumptions again.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Harry that’s Ok, 'Treasury of Victoria'
    The Poms certainly had a handle on the finances of state and Victoria were the puppets for the British beneficiaries to our natural wealth, and what got up peoples noses was they were not even allowed to own GOLD for which Victoria was abundant, not only that if you went out and found any, they were forced to sell it to the Government for a set price, and the bulk of all that gold found went back to Victoria's England that helped built up the cophers of Britain.

    In 1951 my father, established a dental business in Hawthorn Melbourne. As part of his kit was a set of small portable Gold scales so he could weigh gold and alloy any mixtures suitable for gold teeth fillings that my Dad made for Melbourne dentists. Would you believe there were restrictions for owning those gold scales. Just another example of draconian legislation only lifted in 1976.
    Web- http://www.perthmint.com.au/research_information.aspx

    The reason for this was the Govt wanted to control who dealt in gold. This was 1950's, but imagine what it may have been like for the average bod in the street in 1800s. Ned and his fellowman did not have a chance unless you buckled under and let them ruling classes tell you what was allowed or not.
    Bill

    ReplyDelete
  11. For Dee,
    Prof Molony and Ian Jones in their generation were able to speak to and listen to and record oral history from the sons and daughters of the families of the Kelly outbreak. These men were able to be hear second almost first hand what went on in those days.

    If the Professor alleges there was a case for 'rape' there was probably was. Many subjects like this were taboo. Look how long it has taken for the numerous cases of rape by prominent people in powerful positions we can read about in the media today, and some as recent as 1970s that we had never heard about till now. I would never discount the professors rape allegation simply because he did the research and had enough conviction to write about it. Someone would have had to have informed him, and then that person that did would not be willing to be singled out, so its always going to be a delicate matter. I agree it is too easy to make allegations which later are difficult to prove, but there is always some truth even though it was not written in black and white.

    Dee says "But tell me Bill, Did Ned have control over his life" ?
    The thing to remember, we are all the product of our time. At 12 Ned was the oldest male in the family. He grew up in rather tough times and I know first hand, a dear childhood friend of mine, was always blamed for doing things he did not do simply because this family was not considered amongst the uppity classes of society and they had acquired a negative reputation in the district for no particular reason. He was my best friend. The family were most wonderful to us and very typical Australian but Tony lost his mum at a critical time in his life to cancer, his compass was lost.
    So did Ned have control over his life? I would say yes, but like my friend Anthony, he simply fell through the cracks, a victim of circumstances beyond his control. Anthony retreated into a solitary bush life existence and in 1989 he was murdered near his tin mining humpy west of Ingham QLD.
    Did Tony have control of his life?
    Bill

    ReplyDelete
  12. For Anonymous,
    I did write the rules for NKF membership all 10 of them.
    Can you please tell me and the readers here which of those 10 rules were broken by me?

    ReplyDelete
  13. So anonymous if real named people join NKF they can visit the Members Only area can they? I seem to remember last year that the Key Master created two kinds of Membership and “Contributors” - like Sharon - were excluded. You don’t even trust your own Members!

    As for Bill - I hadn’t realise you were so well acquainted with NKF - I thought you were just a naughty Member who got chucked out for having independent thoughts! Do tell Bill!

    And the point about the Molony video I was trying to make was simply that a Professor should not abuse his status to push personal views which nobody would take notice of if they came from someone like the Key Master. In the notes to his book “I am Ned Kelly” Molony sources the rape story to a newspaper article from 1933, wherein a man claiming to have known the Kelly family well said that it was “universal family tradition”. But yes, a discussion can be had about the truth of that claim , and there may be grounds for saying it might be true : but should you then say “it WAS true, this is what actually happened - which is what Molony did on that Video. We should also have a discussion about the reliability of oral history one day. It would shock many in the Kelly world I think!

    ReplyDelete
  14. It must have been a long time since you have read the rules of NKF Bill as some of the rules were changed and some were added to deal with people like yourself.
    Rule 11 Members must not divulge any information from the members only areas of this website at all. If caught doing so it will result in immediate de’registration and banning.
    Also all members including Sharon were asked to change their password when one of your spies Dave H hacked some members email addresses and was releasing information from the members only areas. Some members didn't and all that didn't were given contributor status and were given more than a month to do so. Most of us members did and were quite happy to to keep our private information just that private considering you Dee allowed our admins address and phone number to be posted on your forum which was deleted. All these things have been done because of trolls like you and your blog. You have also already been told numerous times what Bill did and he knew for a fact that his actions would receive severe consequences.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I totally agree with Mark regarding how debate (either pro or con) of Ned Kelly serves to keep his name alive. Just because we all don't agree on everything doesn't mean that we can't have civil conversation and exchange of ideas. What I am thoroughly sick of (and I am sure I am not alone in this) is the constant back and forth and mudslinging and accusations and wrongful assumptions and attacks between certain forums and websites and people. What has passed before is over. It is done and we cannot go back and change any of it no matter how much any of us wish we could. So, let's just please move forward. All of this carrying on is distracting and it wastes precious time, time that could be spent furthering our knowledge and sharing ideas and opinions about this most fascinating era in Australian history. I do wish that this was more like a forum because at times I have questions I would like to ask or have info to tell that sometimes does not fit in with the

    ReplyDelete
  16. oops, full message did not post above..meant to say - I do wish that this was more like a forum because at times I have questions I would like to ask or have info to tell that sometimes does not fit in with the current conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I think a work is imminent that shows nearly everything about the Fitzpatrick incident is wrong. The absurdity of the Kate attempted rape is obvious anyway. A policeman alone in the Kelly home groping Kate seems crazy. and is. Much of the Kelly story is made up and untrue. It is being gradually dismantled and sent to the tip.

    ReplyDelete
  18. The rules of the Ned Kelly Forum are irrelevant since noone here will need to consider them. The website is moribund, with few posters or visitors. There is nothing new there. The half-dozen active members talk gibberish, and whinge about this Blog with its thousands of viewers. Game Over.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Sharon I hear what you’re saying about the quality of the debate. I think its legitimate to comment on, to criticise or make fun of content and the antics of members and contributors to other sites in the Public Space, but one has to be careful that the fine line between whats legitimate debate and pointless mudslinging is not crossed. I know I am guilty of doing that on occasion - I will try harder not to, in future. Promise!

    Craig Duff, last year sometime the anti-MacFarlane guy declared he was going to dismantle the Fitzpatrick incident, and I came across an email from him somewhere - Bail Up I think - from ten years ago saying something similar. Is this the work you refer to Craig Duff? If it is, its been a very long time coming but I predict it will be rubbish. But it will be an interesting read whoever produces it I am sure.

    You know, I am getting the feeling that 2015 is going to be the year that the tide starts to visibly recede on the Kelly myths. The momentum has been building since publication of the Kelly Gang Unmasked, we then had Fitzsimons book which went nowhere, then Ned Kelly Under the Microsope which introduced science and rationality to the debate, then the Psychopath paper which further promoted a rational and scientific approach and very soon the Morrissey book, which will probably further expose the weaknesses in the Kelly myth. During this time none of these books have been discussed on the NKF or the Ironoutlaw site - the brief discussion on the NKF FB Page about the CSIRO book was deleted, as was the MacFarlane book discussion on the NKF, Bill and Carla and others were kicked out - in fact the two main Internet spaces for the Kelly devotees are moribund in the face of all this increased interest in the facts rather than the Myths. The only action so far this year on NKF has been two people hysterically over-reacting to a newspaper article, and no-one has posted to the Outlaw site since Mid December. Yes I too am really looking forward to the Morrissey book, and have my order in ( Free Postage in Australia!)

    ReplyDelete
  20. No, this is a new academic work about Fitzpatrick. I haven't actually seen a draft, but the writer was convincing in his search for contemporary evidence. I don't have his permission to discuss further.

    Is there a link to order the Morrissey book?

    ReplyDelete
  21. here is the link

    http://www.connorcourt.com/catalog1/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=7&products_id=318#.VMGtWS6Z_tR

    ReplyDelete
  22. Regarding Kate and Fitzpatrick, Ashmead in his manuscript says that the pair were already in a romance long before April 15, 1878. Of course, there is so much in Ashmead that has been disproved, so there is no telling if this is the truth or anywhere near it. Also, somewhere I read where Kate fell pregnant by Fitzpatrick! So, it runs the gamut from they were already involved, to she was not interested in him at all (or maybe spurned him after she found out about the other women he had been subsequently involved with) and he touched her up or raped her. Then we have Ned saying that the whole Fitzpatrick/Kate thing was "a silly story" and that if Fitzpatrick would have attacked Kate that the country would not have been big enough to hold him (Fitzpatrick) or something along those lines. So, for now, we just don't know the whole truth and maybe never will.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Thanks for those comments Sharon. They support my view that there is very little certainty about this event, and therefore that to unequivocally call it attempted rape is a gross misrepresentation. Why would Molony do this except to gather support for the Kelly cause, and further damage the reputation of the Police? The only other explanation is that he really did believe it, which is what I am going to suggest in my next Post : He put the Kelly helmet on and eventually forgot that he was wearing it.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Appreciated the link, Sharon.

    (That fellow wth the facebook hatepage might need to start another.)

    ReplyDelete
  25. You are welcome, Craig. I wonder if we can expect a g'day from Morrissey here at this blog or elsewhere after he is getting all of this free publicity?

    Dee, there is no doubt in my mind regarding Fitzpatrick being somewhat lecherous (but maybe not in the same league as Redmond Barry). His hormones seemed to be in overdrive given his history with the ladies! I would not have felt too comfortable being found on a lonely bush path by him, but I would have felt safe as yesterday if I met up with Ned Kelly. :)

    ReplyDelete
  26. I could have sworn that I changed my password early on during the security scare at NKF. Yet I remain a contributor. I figured that happened as a punishment for some reason or reasons (and Lord knows I don't want to kick over any of those cans of worms). Why is it that I feel more welcome and valued here with people who don't necessarily share my same outlook and love for the gang? It is a strange thing that I cannot wrap my head around.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Are you for real Sharon!!! I've spoken to the admin of NKF about you last night and he is confused and saddened about your post here. You didn't change your password along with others so you and them were made contributors as he said he would. You were a supporter of NKF having a members only areas and that all members should use their real names due to past issues and now here you are in amongst the very people who have defamed and abused other members of NKF. Unlike what people think here the admin of NKF is a very approachable person and if you had these feelings of not being welcomed you know you could go to him instead of posting it here. I remember a certain issue a while back where you also did what Bill did and were completely forgiven and even understood as to why you did. So saying you do not feel welcome is wrong you are the person who is now posting on these blogs and forums giving them the idea that they are the leading forum on Ned kelly. You do know that people who post here are also posting all that rubbish on forum jar and here you are sleeping in the same bed as them. You only have yourself to blame if you do not feel welcomed or valued at NKF as you know the abuse and defamation other members have had to endure, which I might add so have you in the past. How did that make you feel? Dee saying things like people are paranoid and prey on children and other untrue statements is not mudslinging its Defamation enough said.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why is it that the spokespeople for NKF who insist that to comment on their site you have to be a “Real Named “ person, NEVER EVER IDENTIFY THEMSELVES HERE? I couldnt care less what people call themselves, so don’t object to people being “Anonymous” but I DO OBJECT to the HYPOSCRISY of NKF members who at one moment are attacking me for being anonymous and at the next are themselves posting as “Anonymous”

      I must admit I was tempted to delete this comment from “Anonymous” because its an attempt to threaten and bully Sharon : Example: .”...here you are in amongst the very people who have defamed and abused other members of the NKF” and “people who post here are also posting all that rubbish on forum jar and here you are sleeping in the same bed as them” - WHAT may I ask have the alleged activities of other people got to do with Sharon? Is she their mother? What people do on the Internet is THEIR business, not mine or yours, and to tell her she shouldn’t post here because by doing so she is endorsing or in some way supporting things that take place on other sites unconnected to this one is just nonsense. Its bullying. And you wonder why she doesn’t feel welcome there?

      NKF is imploding as we watch, because of your paranoid preoccupation with identity and your fear of ideas and free thinking. The Kelly Legend is history.

      Delete
  28. The big difference between this place and the other place is that you personally are not going to be attacked and rubbished for having a different view of things ; instead your interest in the story and your willingness to participate and share your knowledge and perspectives is going to be valued and respected, whether we agree with what you say or not. This goes for everyone. Having been in the Kelly world for such a long time, and having such amazing knowledge of it all means you’re always going to be welcome here Sharon - its all rather new to me so I really do feel honoured to have you participating. So Thanks again.

    I phoned the publishers of this new Morrissey Book and asked them if there was going to be a Book Launch or some public signings, because I think it would be fantastic to meet and hear a little more from Doug Morrissey, and they said they didn’t have anything planned at this stage but didn’t rule out something being arranged later. I am guessing this book might be the PhD thesis adapted for a wider readership. Somehow I doubt this little Blog will have appeared on his Radar! But if it has : Hello Doug! Love your work!

    ReplyDelete
  29. I did change my password, it must not have been in the allotted time, though I could have sworn it was. One would think that the administrator could have later made a tweak in the settings instead of letting the whole world think I was intentionally demoted for some infraction (I actually assumed it was because I had privately taken up for a friend who was falsely accused of being a spy or mole because it was in that time frame, maybe it goes to show that none of us should make assumptions?). I think of a few times no one would reply to what I posted, it was like they were stepping over and around me (and other people noticed too). More I could say on that but I won't. Now I am being told that my presence on forums and blogs supposedly adds prestige! Ha! Imagine that!! Maybe I can hold myself hostage for the highest bidder? teehee
    Also, I am like Bill Denheld in that I am here to defend the gang and to answer questions or put forth ideas and have actual discussions which are fun even if the others don't think like we do. As far as FJ are concerned, they are just more in a long line of folks who talk crap about others, I tend to ignore them just like the bullies back in my school days and in other parts of the Kelly world as they are not worth my time. I will keep on doing what I like when I like and with whom I like, regardless if anyone else likes it. This whole pro Kelly and anti Kelly rift between sites and forums and people reminds me of Father O'Reilly who, back in the Kelly days didn't want to allow Constable Lonigan's body to be interred alongside Kennedy's and Scanlon's because Lonigan was a protestant and the others were catholic (even though the widows had given permission). How totally crazy is that?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Sharon you wrote- " Why is it that I feel more welcome and valued here" ?

    Me too. I do not feel threatened by any anti Ned sentiments. Glad to be here myself to contribute to genuine debate to show Ned Kelly was far more than the criminal murdering thug he can be made out to be.

    To Anonymous,
    Regarding Ned Kelly Forum NKF entry passwords, Trent should have contacted Sharon to inform her, her password had not been changed, and, even if Sharon was late or reluctant in doing so Trent should have realised Sharon was no threat to anybody and should have honoured her position. All very draconian antics by the ruler Trent who right from the start should have sat back and watched the fireworks, instead all he got was a big fizzer.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Sharon you did not change your password end of story if you were wondering why you were just a contributor then you should've just contacted the admin and all would've been sorted out. Bill talking about websites so who's website is a big fizzer yours as you cannot even contemplate the amount of hits on NKF to yours and why should people's positions be honoured when they haven't done what the admin asked. You can do what you want whenever you want Sharon no one really cares anymore as your self promoting is unbelievable now maybe just there is the reason people don't reply to your post or that your post gave all the relevant information that was needed. For whatever reason don't take that to heart maybe we all have busy lives and it doesn't just revolve around Ned kelly. Dee why shouldn't we post as anonymous as you are using a false name that's what this forum is for coward pseudonyms and trolls and all jealous of NKF which I might add is not imploding with ten times more members than this little blog. Strange how you don't aswer to the defamation of yours that's been raised recently.

    ReplyDelete
  32. NKF spokesperson Anonymous you are very welcome to Post here as Anonymous - it doesn’t matter to me as I keep saying - I just think its hypocritical to rubbish people who want to be Anonymous and then do it yourself. Actually my little Blog doesn’t have any members so yes, you’re way in front on that score. But again I ask you, if its such a terrific forum why is nothing happening there - even your Facebook Page is moribund. You ought to invite Bill and Carla back and make Sharon a Key Master (whatever that is) and then you might be able to revive your Forum. You have NOTHING to fear from these people - they are crazy for Ned! In fact, we all are, but in different ways.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I looked in my little password notebook and I see where the old NKF password was marked through and a new one written in, but I did not put a date on it, so not sure when it was, but still could swear it was recent, I even recall telling someone else that they needed to change theirs due to the breach. All water under the bridge now. Seems a bit of miscommunication somewhere. I laugh at the self-promotion bit, but, hey, at least I am not touring around the country with a little show like Kate and Jim did! :) Now that we have firmly established that I am nothing but a glory hound that no one cares about, let's move on with the discussion of Ned Kelly and the Kelly Gang. :)

    ReplyDelete
  34. Dee again your advice about NKF will never be taken by someone who does not reveal their true identity so just keep it to yourself. As you have been told numerous times Bill and Carla both broke the rules of NKF and were banned just like they have been on other forums before NKF and will never be allowed back there either. Have you seen how much likes the facebook page of NKF has received lately so another wrongful assumption again. As everyone knows all real forums go through a period of quiet but again as I've said you don't have access to the members only areasof NKF and never will so stop making wrong assumptions again. Still waiting for you to answer to your defamations that's been raised recently why do you keep dodging it.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Dee to assume is to make a ASS out of U not ME

    ReplyDelete
  36. Bill consider this, Dave H the troll that caused all the security problems for NKF is the same troll that you have had comments from on your website from this very same person. So it's best you keep your comments to yourself about NKF before you are again shown to be the most unpopular,deceptive person in the Ned kelly community for real reasons. Also what's your opinion about how certain authorities have dismissed your ideas about where the real site of SBC is. That's what happens when you only use statements,documents and evidence that proves your site instead of using it all. I just watched 2 Men on the Great Divide and they were making a mockery of you not agreeing with you and Fitzsimmons couldn't find his way to 11 mile creek and need we say more about Macfarlane.

    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.