Pamela Brown Posted August 2, 2008 Author Share Posted August 2, 2008 By your own admission you have no evidence tying a man in Michigan to the Presidential Limousine. Any discussion of documentation that you intend to try to make relative to this man first needs to be preceded by documentation of a connection. Surely you can see that? Otherwise, you're just tilting at windmills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted August 3, 2008 Author Share Posted August 3, 2008 Although I explained the research process I use to Nick before interviewing him, he apparently did not understand it. I don't 'believe' or 'disbelieve' witnesses, as many others tend to. I do what I can to present the information they give. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 (edited) Pamela: Quote : By your own admission you have no evidence tying a man in Michigan to the Presidential Limousine. Any discussion of documentation that you intend to try to make relative to this man first needs to be preceded by documentation of a connection. Surely you can see that? Otherwise, you're just tilting at windmills. See below Pamela: Quote : Although I explained the research process I use to Nick before interviewing him, he apparently did not understand it. I don't 'believe' or 'disbelieve' witnesses, as many others tend to. I do what I can to present the information Pamela : Quote: I don't 'believe' or 'disbelieve' witnesses, as many others tend to. ..........No you did not, you did not believe Nick, nor do you Whitaker ...and If this was true ? Why have you stated in this discussion that Nick "thought he saw a hole" and then tried to persuade him he was mistaken by what vehicle he saw it in. Which is obvious in Nick's posted emails.....You did try to disrespect him as per an e-mail in which he scolds you from trying to demean the U.S. Park Police and then suggests he was not working that evening. see below.....Then oddly you later admitted that you simply could not verify that he was working, so thus suggested he was not. ?? Pamela : I do what I can to present the information.. No you do not...... Why, if you are simply presenting information, and what is the reason it has been so difficult about correcting your website, for the past five years........ which still suggests that Whitaker is an unnamed man to so many unsuspecting readers........It is so odd that you are so critical of Whitaker's name not being revealed and now you can only refer to him as a "man from Michigan." George Whitaker, was a mid level manager and was in charge of the glass plant lab, he later became head of power services for the entire five plants and worked for Ford for over 30 years.....as he states in his interview on TMWKK.....It is easy to verify that and I am Pamela has.. George Whitaker is documented, as he left a letter as a testament because as much as he was afraid of what he knew ,he did not want the information to die with him,see TMWKK.... Limo to Detroit...part 2.........George Whitaker ..........BTW.....Pamela.........I have checked and nothing of your information was used within TMWKK I believe, for now, the Ferguson memo was legitimate and written by a "company man" as Willard Hess, one of the owners of the Hess & Eisenhardt Co. who built the ss 100 XP and did the rebuild...... described Ferguson who would do anything he was told to do and he was helping to create a deception between the Ford Motor Company and Secret Service to hide their involvement in the conspiracy, a deception that on its face would be embarassing to anyone examining the evidence...Mr.Hess also recalls that he was only contacted once by the W/C and asked a none important question..... Why would this Ferguson memo be kept secret ?....... It contains nothing dramatic or that suggests conspiracy but it raises eyebrows only because it is such a poor deception, and contains five errors within, that were pointed out by the HSCA Com....which is and has been presented is either disinformation, or deliberate misinformation and does not in anyway even remotely suggest a conspiracy....to the conspiracy research community.... You had the opportunity to talk to Ellis, (you now say in one post you did have a phone interview with him ) Glanges, and the man who knew more than anyone in the world about the limo, Willard Hess, but oddly never did so. All were easily accessable. I am not saying anyone should believe George Whitaker, I am saying, they should believe it to a high probability because 6 other witnesses, Richard Dudman. Stavis Ellis, Nick Prencipe, Dr. Evalea Glanges, H. R. Freeman, Charles Taylor, Jr., as well as others......agreed with his information given, and they were un-beknownst to him , and he to them, those witness being spread all across the U.S....... Ferguson's given information I am saying should Not be believed to a high degree of probability ,because it does not correspond with the SS Limo reports, and the HSCA official findings, found the SS Limo report in error ....in five places and all are errors pertaining to Ferguson's information.... and as far as is known, that information was not dealt with and was simply buried, as so much was within, when it simply did not agree basically with the W/C Gov findings..also his supposed testimony is not found within... and as Willard Hess describes Ferguson as a man who would do anything he was told to do and he was helping to create a deception between the Ford Motor Company and Secret Service to hide their involvement in the conspiracy.. The Limo Windshield, Bullet from Front Limo to Detroit, Part I TMWKK, The Final Chapter, ep.1 The Smoking Gun, seg.3 http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f JFK Assassination, Presidential limo SS-100-X, part 5 Limo information begins with Dr.2 minutes ..Dr.Galanges......54 seconds into the video.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAW-bxxZfcM Limo to Detroit...part 2.........George Whitaker nprince9@juno.com wrote: Pam I have been going over some of the writings you have sent me, or posted in various areas, for others to see. I am rather surprised at some of the information you post, knowing your penchant for checking everything out to see if you agree with it, or if it has been verified in research.. You have posted that "the DC park police escorted the limo from Andrews AFB" There is no such organization as the DC Park Police. The law enforcement agency you are referring to is the United States Park Police. This is a federal police dept., not a municipal one. It is the senior law enforcement agency that was provided by the Congress, for the Federal city. It is a proud and elite group and shouild be entitled to proper addression by you and anyone else. Whenever we had the President under our escort security, we were not obliged to stop at the district line, but continued to whatever destination we were instructed to by the SS. If we had metropolitan police along, the juresdictional problem was covered. Our motorcycles had U S Govt. tags on them--Mine was US GOVT 1 MPD tags bore the DC insignia. Please make necessary corrections in your records and postings. If I can be of further assistance to you, I will do my best to assist you Have a nice day Nick Prencipe nprince9@juno.com wrote: Pam Been away for two weeks and had over 100 E mails on return. Snip......... With regards to the time element that apparently concerns you--you can be assured of one thing and I would testify before God as to its veracity. I DID SEE GREER AT THE WHITE HOUSE--WEST EXECUTIVE AVE. AND I DID HAVE CONVERSATION WITH HIM AS I HAVE STATED. As far as what is called evening --late evening or whatever--We put in a long day and night also and I was not checking my watch, nor did I have any reason to document my movements. I have been in both the secret service garage and the white house garage many times. I have never signed in or out in either place , any number of my men and have visited there many times and did not sign in either. The visit that evening was based on what Bill had described and all the little details you seem sure of are correct or incorrect--who knows--and who said what--based on what. I WAS THERE. So I wont push it any further, other than to verify what I have stated before Good luck to you Nick nprince9@juno.com wrote: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX I am sure that Pam will convince those who are of the same theory, > to begin with. I note that she takes things out of contex in that she keeps saying that I talked to Greer early in the evening. I never said that and incidentally, the evening runs to midnight. I dont really know exactly what time it was. If I looked at my watch that night, I knew the time, but that was a long time ago. I will also say, I have been in theW.H. many times and in the SS and WH garages many times and NEVER was I EVER asked to log in. She just cant believe that I guess. She seems to get more and more frustrated with time. Bill Greer, as I remember reading, did change his story, and eventually came up with all the shots coming from the rear--probably to keek in line with the Warren commission procedure. Who knows what went thru his head then--and later. I wont change my story, some of the facts are dimmed a bit, but basic facts are still the same. I will keep you advised of anything new I turn up. Have a great holiday. Regards Nick Commission Document 80 - Secret Service Report of 06 Jan 1964 re: Presidential Car ****************......SMALL HOLE JUST TO THE LEFT OF CENTRE.....************************* http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=14 Record Number 180-10099-10390 Agency File Number 002528 Originator-WC From: Taylor, Charles E. To: Date: 11/27/63 Pages: 4 Subjects: Kennedy, John, Autopsy Evidence, Medical Wound Ballistics USSS Date of release: 12/16/93 Contents: Secret Service Report dated 11/27/63 by Agents Charles E. Taylor, Jr. and Harry W. Geiglein on investigation of clues found in the Presidential limousine. Document follows in full. ORIGIN: White House Detail OFFICE: Washington, D.C. FILE NO.: CO-2-34,030 TYPE OF CASE: Protective Research STATUS: Closed INVESTIGATION MADE AT: Washington, D.C. PERIOD COVERED: November 22-23, 1963 INVESTIGATION MADE BY: SAIC Harry W. Geiglein SA Charles E. Taylor, Jr. TITLE OR CAPTION: Assassination of President John F. Kennedy SYNOPSIS This report relates to the measures employed to effect security of the President's car, 100-X, and the follow-up car, 679-X, on return from Dallas, Texas, following the assassination of President Kennedy. DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION This investigation was initiated on November 22, 1963, following receipt of instructions from ASAIC Floyd M. Boring, White House Detail, that steps be taken to effect security of the President's car (100-X) and the follow-up car (679-X) on their return from Dallas, Texas. President John F. Kennedy occupied the rear seat of SS-100-X when he was assassinated, and SS-679-X was directly behind the Presidential limousine at the time of the assassination. There two vehicles were driven to Love Field, Dallas, Texas, for immediate transportation to Andrews Air Force Base, Washington, D.C. Following the arrival of President Lyndon B. Johnson and the remains of President Kennedy at Andrews Air Force Base, the reporting Special Agents conferred with Captain Milton B. Hartenblower, Duty Operations Officer, and Lt. Colonel Robert Best, Provost Marshal, Andrews Air Force Base, to arrange for landing instruction of the Air Force cargo plane transporting the subject vehicles and to escort these vehicles from Andrews Air Force Base. Also, arrangements were made with the U.S. Park Police for motorcycle escort of these automobiles to the White House Garage. DISTRIBUTION: Chief Washington COPIES: Orig. & 2 cc 2 cc REPORT MADE BY: /s/ Charles E. Taylor, Jr. DATE: 11/27/63 Charles E. Taylor, Jr. APPROVED: /s/ Harry W. Geiglein DATE: 11/27/63 Harry W. Geiglein SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE: Harry W. Geiglein CO-2-34,030 Page 2 At 8:00 P.M. on November 22, 1963, SS-100-X and SS-679-X arrived at Andrews Air Force Base on Air Force Cargo Plane No. 612373 (C-130-E), which plane was assigned to the 78th Air Transport Squadron from Charleston Air Force Base and piloted by Captain Thomason. The plane was taxied to a point just off of Runway 1028, approximately 100 yards from the Control Tower at Andrews AFB, and a security cordon was placed around the aircraft while these vehicles were being unloaded. On the plane accompanying these vehicles were Special Agents Kinney and Hickey. The Presidential vehicles were driven under escort to the White House Garage at 22nd and M Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C., arriving at approximately 9:00 P.M. SS-100-X was driven by SA Kinney, accompanied by SA Taylor, and SS-679-x was driven by SA Hickey, accompanied by Special Agents Keiser and Brett. On arrival, SS-100-X was backed into the designated parking bin and SS-679-X was parked a few feet away. A plastic cover was placed over SS-100-X and it was secured. The follow-up car, SS-679-X, was locked and secured. Special Agents Keiser, Brett, and the reporting Special Agent effected security, assisted by White House Policemen Snyder and Rubenstal. At 10:10 P.M., Deputy Chief Paterni, ASAIC Boring, and representatives from Dr. Burkley's office at the White House, William Martinell and Thomas Mills, inspected SS-100-X. At 12:01 A.M., November 23, 1963, the security detail was relieved by Special Agents Paraschos and Kennedy and White House Policeman J. W. Edwards. At 1:00 A.M., as per arrangements by Deputy Chief Paterni, a team of FBI Agents examined the Presidential limousine. This team was comprised of Orrin H. Bartlett, Charles L. Killian, Cortlandt Cunningham, Robert A. Frazier, and Walter E. Thomas . Mr. Orin Bartlett drove the Presidential vehicle out of the bin. The team of FBI Agents, assisted by the Secret Service Agents on duty, removed the leatherette convertible top and the plexi-glass bubbletop; also the molding strips that secure the floor matting, and the rear seat. What appeared to be bullet fragments were removed from the windshield and the floor rug in the rear of the car. CO-2-34,030 Page 3 The two blankets on the left and right rear doors were removed, inspected, and returned to the vehicle. The trunk of the vehicle was opened and the contents examined, and nothing was removed. A meticulous examination was made of the back seat to the car and the floor rug, and no evidence was found. ******In addition, of particular note was the small hole just to the left of center (Repeat : THE SMALL HOLE JUST TO THE LEFT OF CENTER ..B..)in the windshield from which what appeared to be bullet fragments were removed. ********* The team of agents also noted that the chrome molding strip above the windshield, inside the car, just right of center, was dented. The FBI Agents stated that this dent was made by the bullet fragment which was found imbedded in the front cushion. During the course of this examination, a number of color photos were taken by this FBI <"FBI" inserted in longhand with an arrow> search team. They concluded their examination at 4:30 A.M. and the President's car was reassembled and put back in the storage bin. At 8:00 A.M. on November 23, the security detail was relieved by Special Agents Hancock and Davis and White House Policeman J. C. Rowe. SA Gonzalez relieved SA Hancock at Noon and at 4:00 P.M., Messrs, Fox and Norton, Protective Research Section, photographed the Presidential limousine. At 4:30 P.M., SA Gonzalez contacted SAIC Bouck and Deputy Chief Paterni and, at their request, the flowers, torn pieces of paper, and other miscellaneous debris were removed from the floor of the car (SS-100-X) and taken to the Washington Field Office. At that time, the special detail securing the Presidential limousine and the follow-up car was discontinued. DISPOSITION This case is closed with the submission of this report. CET:mkd B........... Edited August 4, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted August 4, 2008 Author Share Posted August 4, 2008 Bernice, Now you seem to be trying to cobble together information about Nick and the Michigan man, again without any foundation for a connection. Instead of tossing out unconnected documentation and attempting to criticize me in the process, who don't you share a copy of the first version of the at that time mystery witness statement. This is the version from the taped interview, prior to the subsequent cherrypicking/sanitizing in MIDP and in "Smoking Guns". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 (edited) Pamela : Quote : Now you seem to be trying to cobble together information about Nick and the Michigan man, again without any foundation for a connection. Aw I see, the old much-used tactic: ignore it, or finesse it, and eventually it will go away, you hope.You have tried many times to divert the information within this thread, by your whatever meaningless comments, that do not pertain to what was previously posted..no use, much more information is out there, now, and will remain so.. Also seeing what you have posted above imo makes no sense.........and is another windmill, to try to confuse the readers with your minutiae ? and making sure that all aware, I will clarify for you, one more time....seeing you pretend to not get it.. The one connection, as you are extremely aware of, unless?? that does connect all these people, and has been stated in this thread several times now, and that you have deliberately ignored, is that Nick Principe, Richard Dudman. Stavis Ellis, Dr. Evalea Glanges, H. R. Freeman, Charles Taylor, Jr., as well as others......agreed in their information given, with George Whitaker's information given, and they were un-beknownst to him , and he to them, those witnesses being spread all across the U.S......Now posted for the upteenth time, I do hope that is finally clear...to you ?? See and read Also.. Repeat : THE SMALL HOLE JUST TO THE LEFT OF CENTER .. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=14 As the documentation above is from within the SS Gov, report and does state the above information, and that is after all where Ferguson is also mentioned within..And you have seemingly bought into and believe every word of the Ferguson information within said docs...including all five errors found within it, by the HSCA. ..So why would you take just such heed of Ferguson's information and not all the rest ????? What the Ferguson document shows and points out within the other information of the SS, FBI Limo reports, is that that there is an untrustworthy, fragmented, papertrail.....leading to conspiracy into which some have delved further, and uncovered new information within....and have put it out there for any and all.....and they continue to do so...they do not sit back on their supposed laurels, nor do they seeminlgy quit...some do carry on....they appear to be very aware the search in not over...the W/C was a cover-up and the Gov was behind it and all was a farce.. Why you have continually tried to pretend you have not read the information, nor comprehended, nor reply to it, but continually have picked at straws, or cherry picked as you have accused others of doing, in this thread.....and that is known as a diversionary pretence that simply does not and has not worked...and will not...and is of no credit to you...is known only to you... Pamela: Quote : "Instead of tossing out unconnected documentation and attempting to criticize me in the process I have not attempted to criticize you or your none information ...there has been no need to...your Ferguson document and it's information within, is extremely questionable.........I have posted much information, which you have and continue to ignore, I have asked many questions pertaining to such, you also have continually ignored. which has become your usual stance...and continually try the ole windmill tactics, that one more time, that has worn itself out........Why have you not answered any questions.......?? You and others have touted yourself as being the Limo Expert...within the research community, if you do not have the answers ,is it because you have been ignoring all the information that does not fit in with your theory re Ferguson all these years, by choosing only agree to that which fits within with the Govs....as does Ferguson's.......or did you simply not know of it.....?? and yet that does not fly, as you have made remarks against those that have released such. ....Why have you not kept up with the new studies?, it would appear that you have pretended that it does not exist...and make snide remarks at others who have done so, that never works, it only creates interest.....eventually it all does come out, you cannot stop it, no one can, the Gov have tried to but they have not been able to keep those that wish to know all the truth, blocked out....not completely...........the work goes on.. Why does it appear that your information only appears to back up the findings of the W/C....no conspiracy...imo.. I have posted some substantial evidence within this thread....which does support the statements made....which you have continually chosen to ignore.. You really have been presenting yourself as having a comprehension problem, and are admitting and selling yourself short by that ploy......imo.. Pamela , you have named called and criticized from the very beginning of this thread, and seeminlgy brushed aside others, would you really like me to list them all for you....?? to refresh your memory, ?? ...there are many...or could it be that you do not like the taste of your own medicine?? Pamela : Quote ""who don't you share a copy of the first version of the at that time mystery witness statement. This is the version from the taped interview, prior to the subsequent cherrypicking/sanitizing in MIDP and in "Smoking Guns". "" This is another windmill, trying to divert, the thread, it has gotten so old, and so worn out now....give it up....... Most of the interview was in MIDP........ Nigel Turner had the full tape and took out what he wanted. Nothing substantive was deleted. ........So contact Nigel......and ask him......rather that take any-ones word on such........and do post his reply..... Why did you never interview these people, like Hess, the workers ,or Ellis, Glanges?. Which also has been asked in the past of you.....and you have continually ignored....and diverted from.....? .......You did interview Nick, there is a tape . The many e-mails that have been posted demonstrate exactly what Nick thought of what you call your "interviewing technique." You have suggested, you did interview Ferguson....why do you not share a copy of that discussion?? A wise person once said that if the facts are on your side, you pound the facts, but if the facts are not on your side you pound the law. But if neither is on your side, you pound the table. Is your table dented yet.....?... Cheers.. .B........ Edited August 6, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted August 6, 2008 Author Share Posted August 6, 2008 Guess the research approach being used now can be called tossing a bunch of things up and hoping something will stick. You have yet to establish any foundation for the man from Michigan ever having set eyes on the Presidential Limousine, much less having had any connection to it prior to his 'sighting' of it at the Rouge -- hopefully someone has a copy of the original interview (mine went down in the pc crash). That would give a better orientation than the sanitized snippets in MIDP, and maybe give you a better chance to do some independent thinking. What he said he saw saw was a "Ford" "convertible". As far as Nick's statements are concerned, he and the Michigan man did not even agree on the location of the hole they believe they saw. So which one are you going to 'believe'? In addition, the FBI photos, Ferguson Memo, and windshield currently at NARA support the fact that the windshield in the car at the time of the FBI exam was the same one kicked out by the Arlington Glass men on Monday, Nov. 25, 1963. So Nick's statements would be relevant only if the windshield was replace between the time he saw the limo and when Robert Frazier's team photographed it. Hopefully a reasonable discussion of this documentation will evolve once the foundation issues are fully defined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 Guess the research approach being used now can be called tossing a bunch of things up and hoping something will stick. You have yet to establish any foundation for the man from Michigan ever having set eyes on the Presidential Limousine, much less having had any connection to it prior to his 'sighting' of it at the Rouge -- hopefully someone has a copy of the original interview (mine went down in the pc crash). That would give a better orientation than the sanitized snippets in MIDP, and maybe give you a better chance to do some independent thinking. What he said he saw saw was a "Ford" "convertible". As far as Nick's statements are concerned, he and the Michigan man did not even agree on the location of the hole they believe they saw. So which one are you going to 'believe'? In addition, the FBI photos, Ferguson Memo, and windshield currently at NARA support the fact that the windshield in the car at the time of the FBI exam was the same one kicked out by the Arlington Glass men on Monday, Nov. 25, 1963. So Nick's statements would be relevant only if the windshield was replace between the time he saw the limo and when Robert Frazier's team photographed it. Hopefully a reasonable discussion of this documentation will evolve once the foundation issues are fully defined. Pamela, there are a few folks on this board who knew and spoke to Nick on many occasions... We (at least I) understand what changing television scripts entails, especially, ESPECIALLY during the "POST" production (editing) phase of a project. Very expensive proposition, changing promo's, conflicting personal schedules. re-budgeting, not to mention time consuming... But as with so many docu's, its the truth we're seeking, right? The bugga-boo of a Producer <sigh> Now, when it comes to establishing "foundation" concerning Limo issues, well, Doug Weldon would be my bet. Unless of course you (as he, Doug) are you an attorney? Correct me if I'm wrong but I do believe Mr. Weldon worked in a DA's office at one time, as a Prosecutor, yes? Not to mention a competent JFK assassination researcher... Perhaps you can tell us in your own words (50 words or less), just what your documentary(s) concerning the limo are about and the message your relating... frankly I've not seen any of the productions you've worked in.... Doug and his work, I'm quite familiar with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 (edited) 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.Below is the Ferguson statement where he does relate that date...... .""Error Correction "" The SS W/H Garge Log, are to be read side by side.......as seen below.... See below......also... http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/....do?docId=10482 B..... Edited, for spelling. ***************************************** From Post # 72... Pamela : In addition, the FBI photos, Ferguson Memo, and windshield currently at NARA support the fact that the windshield in the car at the time of the FBI exam was the same one kicked out by the Arlington Glass men on Monday, Nov. 25, 1963. So Nick's statements would be relevant only if the windshield was replace between the time he saw the limo and when Robert Frazier's team photographed it. No not on November 25th......November 26th........see below...... B..... Edited August 7, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 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 Neither the Queen Mary nor the "Sheik" Jackie's smaller limo, had a "Continental" on the back, there was no mistaking the 100 XP...... ""The Second Kennedy Lincoln Limousine Perhaps because the Presidential Limousine Ford and Hess and Eisenhardt developed for President Kennedy was so well-received, and its presence gave Ford a place of prestige, soon after the delivery of SS-100-X, a second, shorter version was designed. This car became one of two used by Jackie Kennedy (the other was a 1961 Crown Imperial Ghia, built by Chrysler and the Italian coachbuilder Ghia). The custom-built 1962 Lincoln Continental Town Limousine was also developed in conjunction with Hess and Eisenhardt, and one was of only three such coversions they did; one of those was assigned to Mrs. Edsel B. Ford, and the second was placed in Ford’s New York office for use transporting VIPs. The Secret Service designation for the second Lincoln was SS-297-X. 297-X had a 123-inch wheel base, as opposed to the 156-inch wheel base of 100-X. It was not armored. It had a plexiglass and metal top and a permanent privacy window. There was also a black vinyl top stored in the trunk, that could be used when a private car was desired. 297-X was the only one of the three Lincolns that had a bubbletop, and because of that was referred to as the “small bubbletop”. The interior of 297-X was black in the front and light blue on the back. It was fitted with an intercom system, a permanent glass privacy window, two-way radios, a siren and custom red lights built into the front bumper guards. 297-X bore a striking resemblance to 100-X from the front (see photo 1). However, it did not have the Continental tire on the trunk, so the two cars looked quite different from the back. (see photo 2). 297-X is also discussed in Ford Company documents; most of the mystery of this car will come from those documents, the presentation of which belongs to the researcher who first brought them to my attention, Mike Johnson. The information I am presenting comes from the book Presidential Cars and Transportation by William Siuru and Andrea Stuart, Kause Publications, Iola, WI, 1995. According to Siuru, 297-X was ultimately sold at auction and since 1985 has been on display at the Imperial Palace Auto Collection in Las Vegas, Nevada. "" B...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 (edited) A couple of more errors within Pamela's information... From Post # 24 Jul 2 2008 Quote Peter Lemkin: " It seems hard for me to believe people would say they saw a hole [as oppossed to a crack] had they not seen one. The fact that people put it in slightly different places is not surprising. Perhaps there was even both a crack and a hole. Quote Pamela McElwain: There was a lot of confusion at PH at that time. The limo was only there for about 1/2 hour. During some of that time it was cordoned off. The witnessess were communicating what they believed they saw. What they actually did see may be something different." About a 1/2 an hour. Not..... Commission Document 80 - Secret Service Report of 06 Jan 1964 re: Presidential Car After the official party left the hospital , SS 100-X was driven to Love Air Field .................see below.... http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/....do?docId=10482 Ira David Wood Chronology.......... 12.43 pm...The motorcade arrives at Parkland Hospital..... 1.26 pm .........With heavy guard, Police Chief drives Lyndon Johson to Love Field, where he boards Air Force One.. 2.04 pm The presidential limo leaves Parkland Hospital, driven by SSA GeorgeW.Hickey, Jr. and a Dallas police officer. 2.08 pm..After a heated argument between Dallas officials and Secret Service men , the body of JFK is removed from Parkland Hospital almost at gun point... The JFK Assassination Chronology: 22 November 1963 http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v2n1/chrono2.pdf The JFK Assassination Chronology: 19 January 1961 to 21 November 1963 http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v2n1/chrono1.pdf Quote Pamela McElwain: There was a lot of confusion at PH at that time. The limo was only there for about 1/2 hour. During some of that time it was cordoned off. The witnessess were communicating what they believed they saw. What they actually did see may be something different." I would like someone, Pamela ?? anyone to post one photo where the Limo was cordoned off at Parkland.......One..? I can show your numerous photos of the Limo at Parkland, around the limo there was no tape...it was never cordoned off..... There was further out towards the street area ....but not around the limo.... From Post # 24 Jul 2 2008 Quote Peter Lemkin: " It seems hard for me to believe people would say they saw a hole [as oppossed to a crack] had they not seen one. The fact that people put it in slightly different places is not surprising. Perhaps there was even both a crack and a hole. Quote Pamela McElwain: There was a lot of confusion at PH at that time. The limo was only there for about 1/2 hour. During some of that time it was cordoned off. The witnessess were communicating what they believed they saw. What they actually did see may be something different." Lordy your just like the rest of them thar kind.........The witnesses were always in error........Not... B...... ... Edited August 7, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 David, 40 words? Read my bio. Check out my website. Try to keep up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 (edited) David,40 words? Read my bio. Check out my website. Try to keep up. I've no interest in what 'program' producers, networks have to say, they sell time and promote themselves, nor your website (the same).... After all, I've been at the TV thingy for over 40 years. So I'll ask you again... if ya can't tell us in 40 or 50 words, you simply don't know your content! Seeing that I caught you off guard, 60 words, okay? You surely may refuse, as is your right (certainly noticed ) "Try to keep up"? You are a broadcasting newbie, aren't ya? Edited August 8, 2008 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 Bernice said: Lordy your just like the rest of them thar kind.........The witnesses were always in error........Not... Looks like your research process is to 'believe' all the witnesses. That's your choice. Weighing and evaluating the statements seems to be too much of a stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted August 9, 2008 Author Share Posted August 9, 2008 [quote name='David G. Healy' date='Aug 8 2008, 05:24 AM' post='151524' "Try to keep up"? You are a broadcasting newbie, aren't ya? You must be a newbie yourself, if you don't know how to read a bio or check out a website. Why should others do your homework for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted November 28, 2008 Author Share Posted November 28, 2008 Bill, any evidentiary value of the mobile crime scene better known as SS-100-X was lost on Monday, November 25, 1963 when the limo was taken to Hess & Eisenhardt in Cincinnati and was essentially stripped. So while it IS a crime scene, it is one in name only since that date.Kinda like Elm Street in Dallas after repaving and curb restriping. Agreed. But wonder if any of the men who worked on refurbishing it are still alive to bear witness to what they saw and had to 'repair'?! I'd almost be willing to bet they had to take secrecy oaths or have been just plain threatened to keep their mouths shut....but one never knows...after all this time.... for more info concerning the Limo see: Murder in Dealey Plaza, Part II, The Kennedy Limousine pgs. 120-159, by Douglas Weldon, J.S. While Pamela relies on "official documents", Doug Weldon interviewed actual persons in Michigan who worked on the actual limo...far more reliable than self-serving documents by the SS and FBI. Jack Weldon relied on a man who cobbled together information obtained from Vaughn Ferguson, who was with the limo after the assassination. Others in Dearborn played golf with Vaughn Ferguson when he was in town and have made statements similar to Mr. Whitaker's -- but they claimed they saw the limo where it actually would have been were it at Dearborn -- at the Experimental Garage, not at the Rouge. The SPEED channel documentary at the link below provides an interview with Ferguson's widow. 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