John_Hartley Posted 11 February , 2003 Share Posted 11 February , 2003 As, hopefully, this matter draws to a close, I think we should all acknowledge that the Campaign has, albeit belatedly, done the "decent thing" in withdrawing the article from their website. I certainly hope that this will encourage Aurel to publish his own words in Stand To. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Coulson Posted 11 February , 2003 Share Posted 11 February , 2003 I would just like to echo John's words above. Have not met Aurel but he was very helpful to me a few months back with some research I was doing. Publish your words Aurel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul guthrie Posted 11 February , 2003 Share Posted 11 February , 2003 I have been privately urging Aurel to publish in Stand To! and Ann has cleared a place for his work far earlier than the usual, so Aurel , let's get on with it! This is truly important to stuedents of the Great War. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Saunders Posted 11 February , 2003 Share Posted 11 February , 2003 I really want to hear this story - but I refuse to go to the CampaignWGC site to read it up on a point of principle - I am only prepared to hear from one man so come on Aurel, put me out of my misery and write the story how it should be told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AOK4 Posted 12 February , 2003 Share Posted 12 February , 2003 Aurel, Please publish your research, because the truth about Condon should be known. I read a paper (Het Laatste Nieuw) this morning and they tend not to believe you (of course, because the other website deleted the article, the proof of the story is nowhere to be found). They asked an author of youth books, who wrote the book called 'Age 14', and he (of course) said Condon switched identity with his brother... I guess if no one publishes all the different proof, the myth will only grow stronger and you, Aurel, will become unbelievable. So it is in your own interest to publish all the facts. Please reconsider and don't wait too long... Regards, Jan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 12 February , 2003 Author Share Posted 12 February , 2003 Jan, "Signals", Paul (x 2), Bob, John (x 2), Chris, Roy, Kyle, Myrtle, etc. You may have thought after my reply of last Saturday (4 days ago) that I had disappeared into thin air. Of course not. It's just that I thought it was time for me to make a step back, watching from a certain distance, keeping a lower profile. Also : this matter has been rather exhausting (mentally and emotionally), and most of all : has caused a pile of other work related to other commitments to grow alarmingly. Just to let you know that I am in touch with Stand To!. And that I think it is imperative for me to go to all lengths to find possible descendants or relatives of the soldier who is beneath the John Condon headstone at Poelcapelle British Cemetery. That might take some time, but I'm moving on, slowly but surely. Thanks again, to all who have supported and encouraged me. I hope to meet one day. Aurel Sercu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john w. Posted 12 February , 2003 Share Posted 12 February , 2003 Aurel we wait.... John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hill 60 Posted 12 February , 2003 Share Posted 12 February , 2003 Aurel - You know my views on this subject. I haven't checked out the 'other' site to read the story as I had hoped, as you well know, that you would publish it in your own right. I sincerely look forward to reading this intriguing research in Stand To! in due course. All the best, you deserve it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AOK4 Posted 12 February , 2003 Share Posted 12 February , 2003 In the article I mentioned before, the author was talking about the identity switch between patrick and john condon. Is there evidence that no such switch happened? Of course the CWGC mentions John's real age (almost), and doesn't mention the 'served as' but are there other things that contradict the identity switch? Jan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CROONAERT Posted 12 February , 2003 Share Posted 12 February , 2003 Aurel, Will you be publishing your findings anywhere else other than "Stand To!" ? (Such as on a website?) I'm asking this as I would very much like to read about this case, but I have no access to "Stand To!",being a non member (ex member is more accurate) of the WFA. Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ian Bowbrick Posted 12 February , 2003 Share Posted 12 February , 2003 Can I second that - I would like to read about Aurel's research and do not belong to the WFA - any chance of it being published on this website Chris? In anticipation, Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David_Bluestein Posted 13 February , 2003 Share Posted 13 February , 2003 I third that motion. Should there not be a plan in place to benifit all enthusiasts Here's hoping to one day read it, David A non member, but just as interested Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul guthrie Posted 13 February , 2003 Share Posted 13 February , 2003 This is not something that should be web published at least until after it's in Stand To! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 13 February , 2003 Author Share Posted 13 February , 2003 As to publishing the research on this website (or on my own Diggers website). Yes, of course, this can possibly be considered, but it is evident that publication (in an abridged form) can only be done after (possible) publication in Stand To! (or other magazine). Jan, as to the possible identity swap between the two brothers... Yes, I know that theory. With regard to this, the question should be asked : what has to be proven, either that there was an identity swap, or that there was no identity swap ? But actually I'd rather not go into that right now right here. (I hope you understand.) No doubt, however, is it an aspect that has to be dealt with in due time. Aurel Sercu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedley Malloch Posted 13 February , 2003 Share Posted 13 February , 2003 This is not something that should be web published at least until after it's in Stand To! Why not? Why should the WFA have first say on it? Did they fund the research? Was it done under their auspices? Was all the work carried out by WFA members? I can't see why they have exclusive property rights on this story. It is an important and interesting story with a wide appeal which will probably end up on an inside page on one of the Sundays or something like Battlefields Review or After the Battle fairly soon - in one form or another. Whether we like or not it's been in the open and it's probably sitting on some sub-editor's desk right now. And Aurel should know better than anyone else what the UK papers do to 'popular' WW1 stories when they get a hold of them. I am sure that he does not want a re-run. My advice (for what it is worth) is for Aurel to write up his account now and post it here as soon as possible. Get some help if you feel you need it; there are plenty of contributors to this site who are sympathetically disposed and some with professional authoring experience who would doubtless be pleased to help (not me I hasten to add) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul guthrie Posted 13 February , 2003 Share Posted 13 February , 2003 Well if speed is a consideration, maybe internet publishing is the thing but it has no permanence, Stand To! is a well respected journal and does have permanence. Whether of not some tabloid puts the story out first that too is not something likely to be cited by scholars in the future but a ST! article is. Further though ST! is not a mass circulation magazine, I think article will be seen by more there than here, no proof of that though. And finally , as the author of something related to WW1, I think it has a lot more prestige and satisfaction for a job well done in publishing there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenh Posted 13 February , 2003 Share Posted 13 February , 2003 Heard an interesting interview on Irish radio today with a John Condon, a nephew of the dead soldier on his visit tomorrow to Flanders. He and another relative Sonny Condon are to be received in Belgium by both the Burgermeister of Poelcapelle and Messines. They will be guest of honour at the Menin gate and will be laying a wreath. John Condon told a few stories about his Uncle. When he was 8 he first told his father that he was going to fight for his country and when he did enlist with his brother Nicholas it was with a Lancashire regiment. He served with thm for 6/7 months then returned to Clonmel where he enlisted with the Royal Irish. John Condon went on to say that after John was killed, in Ireland at the time it was not the done thing to talk about relatives in the British army. However Johns father more than anyone kept his memory alive. An interesting interview, any more details on his relatives visit to Flanders? This will be John Condon's first visit to his uncles grave and from what I gathered from listening is that he about 80 years of age. Hope I am correct in transcribing what I heard and apologise in advance if have mentioned anything which I might have picked up wrong, Not very good at shorthand!! Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 13 February , 2003 Author Share Posted 13 February , 2003 Stephen, I heard the interview on the Irish radio too. What you wrote is correct. (As far as I am concerned : nothing that I did not know yet, and many things that I feel very sceptical about.) Yes, it is true that the Condon family with a Waterford delegation will be visiting Ypres Friday and Saturday. I was informed about this 3 days ago. Aurel Sercu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conor Dodd Posted 14 February , 2003 Share Posted 14 February , 2003 I just sent you an E-Mail with a newspaper article etc. Aurel Conor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 14 February , 2003 Share Posted 14 February , 2003 Having met Aurel and The Diggers last year, and having corresponded since then, we are of the opinion that a more genuine and trustworthy person would be hard to find. As a gentleman, he recognised our interest in his field and trusted us enough to give us his personal details so we could contact him, and allowed us to observe the Diggers at work. His obvious fascination for the Great War and his expert knowledge was also shared with us. We only hope that his experience re the John Condon research has not made him lose trust in others who are genuinely interested in the past for the right reasons, and not for personal gain. Terry and Lindsay, Scotland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Clare Elliott Posted 15 February , 2003 Share Posted 15 February , 2003 Hello everyone I came to this site a while ago, and have been a silent but avid reader for some time. This thread has been really interesting, but I haven't felt compelled to post anything myself until now, not really knowing anything about the people involved. Please can I add my name to those people who want to see Aurel's work published on his website. And as soon as possible. If the Condon family are going to visit the grave, and Waterford are putting up a memorial, then Aurel's fabulous research should be out there right now, and with him taking the full credit for it. The other people who published the story (sorry, can't remember who they are) have been seriously criticised on this forum, and if they *have stolen Aurel's research, they should be, but their point that the news should be out there to stop these sort of things happening is a valid one. Please publish on your website Aurel, otherwise someone else will steal your story and *you deserve the credit. Clare Elliott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 15 February , 2003 Author Share Posted 15 February , 2003 Hello Clare (and others), I am still thinking about how, when, where ... (If in Stand To!, then not possible until next September, I was informed.) If on my or this website, then it could only be in an abridged form. And not in the near future. (Though I have come to my conclusions, some aspects have not been finished yet.) The Condon family visited the "John Condon" grave yesterday (Feb 14). I read it was a very emotional moment. Aurel Sercu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ClaudeV Posted 15 February , 2003 Share Posted 15 February , 2003 Hallo I heared this morning in Messines that Patrick Condon joined the army at 14 in place of his brother John who was 18. Claude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 16 February , 2003 Author Share Posted 16 February , 2003 Hello Claude, Yes, I know that hypothesis... Is it more than just a hypothesis ? That is (part of) the issue. Aurel Sercu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Clare Elliott Posted 16 February , 2003 Share Posted 16 February , 2003 Hello Aurel Gosh. I never expected my post would warrant a personal reply. Thankyou. I completely understand your point that every 'i' has to be dotted and every 't' crossed before you can publish something like this, I guess my concern is just that, I came to this site almost as an accident, because I was researching WW1 for coursework at college. And I guess, like so many others, I got bitten by the bug. But there must be others out there like me, who knows? TV producers or hack tabloid journalists, who are on this site for purely personal reasons, who can't resist the story. Before you know it, it will be out there, and *without your name on it. These guys who put it on their website are just the beginning. Thank goodness they took it down, but next time it might not go that way. Ok, I admit, I have a personal reason for trying to persuade you. I want to see the research. I've been following this thread for a while and want to see the details. But I also think you deserve the credit, after all you've been through. I don't understand why it would have to be in an abridged form. Can you explain? Best wishes and all my support Clare Elliott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now