In response to a Facebook post of mine, John Coulter wrote:
My mum grew up in Thunderbolt country and stories abound. She saw a man come running out of hotel then another man shot him dead from the hotel then the dynamite in the hotel blew up.
This is you challenge, should you care to accept it. How do we turn John's comment into a short story? What do you think actually happened?
Postscript
To continue the meme, here are two comments.
kvd wrote:
The man running from the pub knew about the dynamite; the publican shot him in accordance with his published policy of "you must pay before exiting or I will shoot you".
As a small business owner, I sympathise with the publican.
Secondly, (and if I were me, I wouldn't raise this, however...)John's mum hanging about outside pubs is a bit of a worry, except of course if she was pursuing her normal means of gainful employment - which I would always encourage, provided she pays the appropriate GST and abides by all health regulations.
Sorry to be so short; needs several dozen vaguely related pictures to round it out.
Now John's mum is clearly not in that game. But you could meld it into the story. And I have a vision of the shot gun hanging behind the door of kvd's premises. Might be useful, too, in handling the borders - in this case cats and dogs.
Evan wrote:
So many possibilities.
John's mum masterminded the explosion in revenge for . . . and it was her son who was shot.
John's mum was the publican's wife and was having an affair with the man shot; they'd plotted to blow up the hotel to kill the publican and live off the insurance.
There would need to be scene setting.
The man running out of the hotel was the only person who had done a good turn for the person who planted the dynamite who planned to blow up himself and others.
Again, we need to keep John' mum out of it. But Evan has added to possible threads. Keep the threads, change the name.
14 comments:
The man running from the pub knew about the dynamite; the publican shot him in accordance with his published policy of "you must pay before exiting or I will shoot you".
As a small business owner, I sympathise with the publican.
Secondly, (and if I were me, I wouldn't raise this, however...)John's mum hanging about outside pubs is a bit of a worry, except of course if she was pursuing her normal means of gainful employment - which I would always encourage, provided she pays the appropriate GST and abides by all health regulations.
Sorry to be so short; needs several dozen vaguely related pictures to round it out.
kvd
My mum grew up in Thunderbolt country and stories abound. She saw a man come running out of hotel then another man shot him dead from the hotel then the dynamite in the hotel blew up.
So many possibilities.
John's mum masterminded the explosion in revenge for . . . and it was her son who was shot.
John's mum was the publican's wife and was having an affair with the man shot; they'd plotted to blow up the hotel to kill the publican and live off the insurance.
There would need to be scene setting.
The man running out of the hotel was the only person who had done a good turn for the person who planted the dynamite who planned to blow up himself and others.
Hi both. For fun, I am going to bring both your comments up in the post. Actually, kvd, you are closer than you realise on the first sentence, but there is a little more to it than that!
"we need to keep John's mum out of it". For why? I smell a cover up, by either John - or yourself.
"Thunderbolt country" provides geography, but not time. This could well be recent. Was this an Obeid hotel, or is "John's mum" the lay secretary to Cardinal Pell, who was residing in the hotel at that time?
I think you should be more aware Jim of the potential penalties attaching to the suppression of evidence, and/or interference with witnesses.
But otherwise, she (who must not be mentioned, but we are lead to believe - without proof, I might add - has a son called John) sounds interesting.
Does she have a blog I can follow?
kvd
So, now we approach the truth of the matter, and I'm grateful to the Sydney Daily Telegraph for the following summary:
"His Eminence Cardinal Pell suffered multiple wounds to his posterior whilst exiting the Obeid-owned hotel in Thunderbolt country, having misheard his secretary (John's mum who had been walking the streets at the time, pursuing her well known interest in streetscapes) that if his eminent presence in this particular hotel ever got out "it would be political dynamite".
The overworked and severely underpaid lessee of the hotel was merely insisting (in his usual and well publicised forthright manner) upon payment for an after dinner port for which the unfortunate Cardinal had neglected to pay prior to his understandably rapid exit.
All further enquiries should be directed to Jim Belshaw, arbiter of what should be released when, and only if, all else fails.
kvd
-grainy, jerky iphone video to follow, shot by our informant "John" which is a pseudonym to protect an innocent man, or so we presently believe
How about such a story: A man running out of the hotel left the dynamite there which was connected to a Thunderbolt controller (motherboard) which he carried. The man who shot him dead knew about the dynamite but did not know that shooting the man will trigger off the explosion as the collapsing body pressed the Thunderbolt switch. A bit too technical explanation perhaps, but links all elements of the question.
AC
Definitely a modern, James Bond, style interpretation AC. Bond would, of course, be wearing body army under his suit.
kvd, we can place the story at any time and with any interpretation you wish (AC went modern). And I am aware of the penalties of evidence suppression! I fear, however, bringing your latest epistle into full gaze in the main post, funny though it was.
Did you know (I think I mentioned it previously) or was it a lucky guess that a hotel in Thunderbolt country has a probably indirect and coincidental connection with the Obeid matter(s)?
No inside or prior knowledge Jim - just picking names that float to the top of mind when matters scandalous arise, justified or otherwise. Though I must say that your use of 'coincidence' and 'Obeid' in the one sentence seems at odds with his present notoriety.
It seems as far as the press is concerned he is a dartboard with seventeen bullseyes, and I wonder sometimes how he puts up with the pricks. And you may take that as you will ;)
kvd
Bit more than that, kvd, in regard to Obeid if by accident. You picked an area, Thunderbolt country. Then you mentioned the pub in connection with Obeid. While not directly connected, the sale of Tattersall's Hotel has been referred to ICAC as part of the Torbay fall out.
No Jim - you (or rather friend John) picked Thunderbolt country, and also a pub. I merely allowed that to trickle past my concern for the poor publican/lessee being dudded.
And as soon as I termed him a tenant, it brought to mind the present Circular Quay leases, and hence onwards to Mr Obeid. My mind may work in mysterious ways, but as I said earlier - there are way too many bullseyes.
ps having now looked up your Tattersalls/Torbay reference, what is it about the Country Party / Nats? I don't suggest they are any more dishonest than others, but they and their mates could certainly do with a remedial or two on how to go about things to preserve some semblence of honour.
kvd
Here's another example:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2006/07/04/john-sharp-from-rorting-minister-to-multi-millionaire/
- about someone who at one stage I thought might have been foreman material. I drive past his 'lovely mansion on his farming property' four or five times a week, which is now up for sale.
So perhaps I should lay off Mr Truss? He doesn't seem to have what it takes, to do what most of them do - and maybe that's a good thing for the rest of us.
kvd
Hi kvd. I have been tracking the Torbay material. We will wait and see on that one.
On John, I have been following his activities since I'm still interested in aviation. I read the Mayne piece very carefully. What exactly is John alleged to have done since leaving Parliament? There is an imputation of misuse of influence, but where exactly does the misuse come in?
Hello Jim. I linked to the Crikey piece simply because it was the first hit (except for his brief wiki entry) on a Google search for 'John Sharp travel rorts'.
Note that it is a very old story (2006) and I've no idea why the writer was seekeing to dump on Mr Sharp so many years after the initial 'travel rort'. I rarely read Crikey, finding its political take (or the take of the various contributors) depressingly predictable, so maybe it's just more of the same?
But I can report his 'mansion' as referred to is in fact the result of a very well handled restoration of a run down farming property. The house probably is more credit to his wife, but the rejuvenation and stewardship of the farm would I suspect be entirely his work. Yet another reason for my lingering disappointment at his failure to eventually take over as leader of his party: he appears to be a very good manager with his heart still in the land.
kvd
I misread your comment kvd and in my quick skim of the article didn't realise the date. I have a high opinion of him too.
Post a Comment