Michael Hogan Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 What you have left out is that you were trying to coerce Nick Principe into saying he saw a hole in another vehicle, not the limo......Actually the hole was on the left side....What existing info on Greer ?.........Was someone following him around recording his movements.....? Nick knew Greer and saw him... Recent article on Greer: http://www.tyronetimes.co.uk/2617/Did-Stew...-JFK.4297701.jp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Pamela Quote : I interviewed Nick Prencipe by phone in March of 2000. From: NPRINCE9@juno.com To: pamelam@xxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 08:06:01 -0400 Subject: Re: reply Message-ID: <20000707.080612.-3697521.1.NPRINCE9@juno.com> Pam I try to be as helpful as I can, but I am a bit upset at some of the choice of words I note from time to time. When you state that you will follow up and see what makes sense, I dont follow this line of thinking. I knew the limo when I saw it, I sure saw it many times and even sat in it. There was someone else in the process of lifing the tarp from its partially lifted position, as I recall. And I did see a bullet hole, so if there was a bullet hole, or damage to another one of the cars, there is a new track to follow. I do not remember what time I got home that night, or the next morning, I have no idea what time it was. My interest in ALL available facts in this are similar to others, I weigh whatever I see, hear or read for my own judgements, something I have been doing for the most part of my 84 years. I was not aware that you were writing a book on this. so I can wait for some the queries I made. Regards NICK [/i] Thank you for posting a copy of this email from Nick. Mine were lost in a pc crash. As you can see, I was asking for details that might give an idea as to what time he went to the WHG, who was there, and facts that might be corroborated by other information. He recalled seeing Greer that evening, yet according to existing information at this point, nobody saw Greer leave Bethesda during the evening. He also recalled walking in and pulling up the tarp on the limo without anyone questioning him, whereas the SS claimed that there were people around the car all evening. He also provided me with a location of low on the left side. He later said he couldn't recall the location. When one does not have all the answers it makes more sense to provide the information available and allow others to weigh and evaluate it. Eventually, the missing pieces may appear. I was not asked to write a chapter on SS-100-X for CAR CRASH CULTURE, Palgrave, 2001, until after I had interviewed Nick. I explained when I interviewed him that I would communicate with him about using information from the interview in a research paper or anything at the level of the press. So I sent him a draft of the chapter for his input. This email was in response to that. ********************** What you have left out is that you were trying to coerce Nick Principe into saying he saw a hole in another vehicle, not the limo... ...Actually the hole was on the left side....What existing info on Greer ?.........Was someone following him around recording his movements.....? Nick knew Greer and saw him... From: NPRINCE9@juno.com To: pamel Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 07:18:41 -0400 Subject: Re: QUESTION Message-ID: <20000703.072039.-3702699.0.NPRINCE9@juno.com> Pam I will answer this in several parts First of all --If I had not been on duty--you can bet that I would have been on my way home. I was at the command post all evening and was in contact with my excort men at Andrews AFB--I was aware of every thing that was taking place--from that distance--it was only in ref to what my boys were doing. During the period that I was there--and this was not too long after the plane had brought the family back, I noticed Bill standing in the street--west executive ave--only about 50-60 feet or so from me. I went to him and we shook hands and thats when he made his statement to me. I resumed my activity and I heard the transmissions re the escort of the limo to the garage. Later--and I cant pin it down to any specific minute, I went to the garage--it was not that far away. There were still some people around and I just walked in--nobody stopped me or paid any attention to me--all those guys in the SS and State dept. etc knew me and were used to me being in many places at many times. From the best of my rec. there was someone else interested in seeing that w shield and we saw it together and there WAS a hole in it.................. Nick B... thanks for posting this B.... David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted July 24, 2008 Author Share Posted July 24, 2008 (edited) What you have left out is that you were trying to coerce Nick Principe into saying he saw a hole in another vehicle, not the limo... .. If this post is an example of your research process, it needs some tweaking, as you have fallen prey to the fallacy of false alternatives. I was asking about possible damage to another vehicle that was also in the WHG that night. Edited July 25, 2008 by Pamela McElwain-Brown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted July 27, 2008 Author Share Posted July 27, 2008 [quote name='Jack White' date='Jul 21 2008, 07:59 AM' post='150223'] Thanks for the Nick message, Bernice. Do you have any more? I have no doubt that he told it like it was...not like someone else's "interpretation." Nobody is 'interpreting'. You just want an excuse for cherrypicking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted July 30, 2008 Author Share Posted July 30, 2008 Bernice Moore' date Jul 7 2008, 10:40 PM Pamela would you publish the part of the White House Garage log showing that Arlington glass replaced the glass on November 25, as you stated in your posting and that the Ferguson memo claims. Ferguson was off by one day. The windshield was replaced on Monday, Nov. 26th, 1963. Hopefully, you're not going to try to dispute that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 (edited) Bernice Moore' date Jul 7 2008, 10:40 PM Pamela would you publish the part of the White House Garage log showing that Arlington glass replaced the glass on November 25, as you stated in your posting and that the Ferguson memo claims. Pamela :Ferguson was off by one day. The windshield was replaced on Monday, Nov. 26th, 1963. Hopefully, you're not going to try to dispute that.[/size] YES, that ridiculous assertion is disputed because Monday was the 25th, not the 26th. and the garage logs clearly show the windshield was not replaced on Monday. That one day means much due to the account of George Whitaker. How could Ferguson have been so off in such close proximity to the events. since the 26th was on Tuesday. There are hundreds of reference pointing to the dates, including that Monday (the 25th) was the day of Kennedy's funeral. http://www.montva.com/calendar.php?ViewMon...&EventType= Interestingly, almost all businesses were closed that day, except lo and behold, the Ford Motor Company was one of the few that were not..... This lines up with Whitakers account. Almost nothing conforms to Ferguson's account except that it was a poorly done deception. . The SS report is also in error...as well as Ferguson....You will notice that the report has Sat as Nov.23rd which is correct...... But then Sunday becomes the 25th..nada it was the 24 th..... Then it goes on to say, the windshield was replaced on the 26th...which was Tuesday..... Better start tweaking that research of yours Pamela.... http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=4 Pamela :If this post is an example of your research process, it needs some tweaking, as you have fallen prey to the fallacy of false alternatives. ... B.......... Edited July 31, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted July 31, 2008 Share Posted July 31, 2008 Bernice Moore' date Jul 7 2008, 10:40 PMPamela would you publish the part of the White House Garage log showing that Arlington glass replaced the glass on November 25, as you stated in your posting and that the Ferguson memo claims. Pamela :Ferguson was off by one day. The windshield was replaced on Monday, Nov. 26th, 1963. Hopefully, you're not going to try to dispute that.[/size] YES, that ridiculous assertion is disputed because Monday was the 25th, not the 26th. and the garage logs clearly show the windshield was not replaced on Monday. That one day means much due to the account of George Whitaker. How could Ferguson have been so off in such close proximity to the events. since the 26th was on Tuesday. There are hundreds of reference pointing to the dates, including that Monday (the 25th) was the day of Kennedy's funeral. http://www.montva.com/calendar.php?ViewMon...&EventType= Interestingly, almost all businesses were closed that day, except lo and behold, the Ford Motor Company was one of the few that were not..... This lines up with Whitakers account. Almost nothing conforms to Ferguson's account except that it was a poorly done deception. . The SS report is also in error...as well as Ferguson....You will notice that the report has Sat as Nov.23rd which is correct...... But then Sunday becomes the 25th..nada it was the 24 th..... Then it goes on to say, the windshield was replaced on the 26th...which was Tuesday..... Better start tweaking that research of yours Pamela.... http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=4 Pamela :If this post is an example of your research process, it needs some tweaking, as you have fallen prey to the fallacy of false alternatives. ... B.......... good job B. I suspect the show producers would like this information... they hate after-the-fact retractions.... of ANY stripe. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted August 2, 2008 Share Posted August 2, 2008 What you have left out is that you were trying to coerce Nick Principe into saying he saw a hole in another vehicle, not the limo......Actually the hole was on the left side....What existing info on Greer ?.........Was someone following him around recording his movements.....? Nick knew Greer and saw him... Recent article on Greer: http://www.tyronetimes.co.uk/2617/Did-Stew...-JFK.4297701.jp ******************** Thanks Mike, for the article......there is much on the web about the Greer did it theory, it some do put much stock into it..I do not, but then that is just mo..... But there is also something new within ever article, book, whatever, and that is always appreciated..... Quote......Nick knew Greer and saw him..... Best B...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted August 2, 2008 Author Share Posted August 2, 2008 Bernice, With your claimed expertise one might think you would resist the temptation to put the cart before the horse. You seem on a mission to blindly dissect documentation in order to find some shreds that can be twisted to fit into your theory. However, you have done nothing yet to even begin to establish that there is any connection between Whittaker and the Presidential limousine. Did he even know what it looked like? Could he distinguish between it and it's sister, built for Jackie? Why don't you share with us what objective evidence you think connects him with the limo at any time prior to this so-called limo sighting? Let's hope your idea of research is something more sophisticated than re-reading MIDP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted August 2, 2008 Share Posted August 2, 2008 Thanks for the Nick message, Bernice. Do you have any more? I haveno doubt that he told it like it was...not like someone else's "interpretation." Jack *********** Hi Jack : A few more, some just part, as I am leaving any personal etc, out...not of anyone elses interest....and not related..... nprince9@juno.com wrote: I really dont concern myself too much about what Pamala says or thinks. I have met may like her Nick nprince9@juno.com wrote: Pam I am not comfortable with what you have written in the past about what I submit. You challenge every thing I submit and the basis for it is some documentation the at you rely on more than an eye witness. To attempt to correct only brings on a further barrage of questions and more challenge. I dont need it and I dont intend to continue it. Happy Holidays Nick *********************** From: NPRINCE9@juno.com To: pamelam XXXXXXXX Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:51:14 -0500 Subject: Re: misinformation Pam The limo was covered, but the front part over the hood and fenders was not completely covering--and this is to the best of my reccollection. I cant answer the question as to the plexiglass . I have no idea whether Bill talked with anyone else and whether they would still be alive. As far as what I have read that he testified to before the WC--It surprises me !!! I dont know if Greer had anything with him, was holding anything, or how he got to the WH. All I know is that he WAS there and that I DID talk with him. Let me make this observation, you are relying on reports that leave a lot of unanswered questions and we dont really know if they are true, considering all the contoversy that continues to be posted. I am in contact with some of my old men and I am still looking for facts that may be of importance and not hearsay. I could care less about whatthe SS documents say about where Greer was at any given time, I saw him as I have related and I talked with him as I have related . Nick **************************** From: NPRINCE9@juno.com To: pamelamxxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 08:20:55 -0500 Subject: misinformation Pam I seem to be getting the idea that you think I might have been looking at the Queen Mary instead of the bubbletop-----------NO WAY I know each one when I see them--the limo was the one that I saw and when I went in, it was not completely covered--It appears some one else had been looking at it. This I know for certainty--I DID talk with Bill Greer on W. Ex. ave. and he DID say that bullets were coming from everywhere and I DID see a T and T hole in the windshield. After all there years I could be a little off as to the EXACT spot--but it WAS there. Whatever you have written down--I give you the correct version. Nick B......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted August 2, 2008 Share Posted August 2, 2008 (edited) FYI.............I have attached the HSCA documents. You will note Astericks....on the last page..... ........ It is very interesting because every one of these note every discrepancy and they ALL relate to Ferguson and in those instances the ONLY support for Ferguson's position is Ferguson himself..... The other accounts do not mention him being there. A close examination will show even more discrepancies because of Ferguson.... I now think that the HSCA could have been very suspicious of Ferguson , as there is no record they tried to resolve those discrepancies. If there is information out there, I have not been able to find such, if anyone does have anything pertaining to, please post ....and share.... Some are so obvious like the discrepancy with the Garage logs, the Feruson memo could have been a cover because he knew the limo was in Michigan on November 25 the/63.....? It would be interesting to know if there was, as Rowley noted, a December 1 st memo. There is also an AP report that the limo was back in Dearborn just before the date of December 20 th. Also note the official H & E records showing the vehicle in Cinncinnati on December 13 th. It is remarkable that Ferguson, it seems was incapable of even getting one thing correctly. The weather reports for December 19 th and 20 th suggest there is no possible way the limo was driven from D.C. IMO......The member J.William King, on the forum was correct. It was the most distinct and easily recognized vehicle in the world by that date. Note: that the Ferguson memo actually adds nothing to the evidence of conspiracy.....not a hint, not one iota.........now that was his choice...and..... IMO this apparently is like Pamela. She has criticized Posner and da Bug , in everything I have been able to read by her, but she does not present any evidence of conspiracy.......and that is also her choice...... Also again, note that this document refers to Ferguson's testimony. There has been NO evidence that Ferguson testified at anytime or anywhere...... B...... Edited August 2, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted August 2, 2008 Share Posted August 2, 2008 (edited) ""The member J.William King, on the forum was correct. It was the most distinct and easily recognized vehicle in the world by that date. "" B...... Edited August 2, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted August 2, 2008 Author Share Posted August 2, 2008 FYI.............I have attached the HSCA documents. Let's try this again. Why do you attempt to misrepresent documentation when there is no reason to? You have not demonstrated that a man in Michigan had any connection to the limousine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted August 2, 2008 Author Share Posted August 2, 2008 ""The member J.William King, on the forum was correct. It was the most distinct and easily recognized vehicle in the world by that date. "" By that 'logic' anybody in the world could have claimed to see the limo in their shop after the assassination. Are you really satisfied with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted August 2, 2008 Share Posted August 2, 2008 (edited) FYI.............I have attached the HSCA documents. Palemla :Let's try this again. Why do you attempt to misrepresent documentation when there is no reason to? B........The HSCA and other Documentation speaks for itself , and does not misrepresent itself, that dog doesn't hunt........ Since you alone, it would appear, have put so much faith into only one, that being Ferguson's un-numbered , error filled recall... That was sent accidentally to you, according to one of your very first posts on such, some years back......which if you wish can be provided. Should you and others perhaps not by now, be paying more attention to other documents........or is Ferguson's the only one allowed.... .within your logic....? ************************ Pamela: "You have not demonstrated that a man in Michigan had any connection to the limousine."... Pamela : ""The member J.William King, on the forum was correct. It was the most distinct and easily recognized vehicle in the world by that date. "" Pamela : By that 'logic' anybody in the world could have claimed to see the limo in their shop after the assassination. Are you really satisfied with that? B.......Why do you alone it would seem, and continually and deliberately ignore all other documentation and witnesses, and continually try to divert the thread, with one man's name that being Whitaker...and why woud you ever seemingly question anyones right to their opinion...and continually do so.? .......The man on your site that you refer to only, and that it is so odd, your being so critical of his name not being revealed, that he is only referred to as a "man from Michigan." When his name was revealed in 2003....some 5 years ago...........and on this EF, you have promised, to correct such....a few years back.....? Would you like to read the link? Where is your so called logic....a subject that you have raised...? Only one man George Whitaker made that claim, a man who was not aware that people like Richard Dudman. Stavis Ellis, Nick Prencipe, Dr. Evalea Glanges, H. R. Freeman, Charles Taylor, Jr., and other witnesses, from all across the U.S.......and not knowing they would and did corrobrate his account, and that the White House Garage logs would be consistent with Whitaker's account. Ferguson created a deception that was not consistent with anything and claims to have driven the vehicle when the weather conditions alone would not have permitted such..... That IMO was and is pure misinformation....and it is now up tp you to prove that it was and is not.. Or would you prefer to continue, I shall accomodate......if that is your wish....there is much more within your information that is very revealing..... B....... Edited August 2, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now