Edited by author 28-05-2008 05:38 AM
In reply to Margaret Fitzsimons, post No. 150 19-05-2008 10:47 PM EST (AU)
If you are referring to me, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. If you are referring to the article I wrote on Wayne FitzSimons website,
http://www.fitzsimons.info/one-m-or-two.html, you should have taken the time to see when that article was contributed to that website. The date was August 2003. Your only post on this forum (for some unknown reason you say it is your second reminder), was Post No. 46 on 21-03-2006, where you made the dubious claim of, I am glad that someone has followed up my research into the religious cannotions of the spelling of the name. This was obviously in response to my post (Post No. 41), that was several posts before yours, regarding the Fitzsimons name.
As can be plainly seen, my writing about the Fitzsimons name on
http://www.fitzsimons.info/one-m-or-two.html, was posted almost five (5) years before the jumbled piece you posted on this forum. This date difference would have been picked up, by even the most novice of researchers. Before your posting, I had never heard of you, seen any of your research and certainly was not quoting anything that you had said, where ever you have this data posted or published, if at all.
I have been researching the Fitzsimons name for 30 years and what I wrote in one-m-or-two, is all my own research and observations, over the past 30 years. If you read it again, you will see that it bears no resemblance to the piece you penned almost 5 years later. For you to think otherwise is completely delusional.
As for the Catholic/Protestant connotation of the name, I do not claim to be the first to have noticed this and no doubt, will not be the last, as you yourself have done long after me and countless others. Having had some of my research posted on the internet by others, I know only too well how annoying and disappointing this can be. I would also not embarrass myself by presenting the work of someone else as my own. I can make enough mistakes on my own without claiming the shortcomings and poor research of others as that of mine.
I had to reply to what I felt was an unwarranted attack on my honesty and integrity and if your message was not directed at me, I apologise. If I was the intended target of your vitriol, I look forward to an apology and retraction of your statement.
To date, this has been a wonderful forum, where friendly people have discussed the Fitzsimons name and helped one another where they could. Let us hope it remains that way.
Regards,
Mick Fitzsimons.