Bob,
You got em' going now, fur and body parts will be flying soon..
Both of us will be Blacklisted soon, modern day McCarthy'ism.. Naahh they
will get over it.
Or better yet they may listen...after all we have as they say" double as
much to listen with than to speak with" but when it comes to a key board we
have 10 chances.....
Bad Boy Harde.... One of the Very Very BAAAAD non certified guys who looked
at that Mark 2 to help a Tiger guy out, I think all the Bonafied Certified
and licensed Inspectors were out of town that week, so I was what was left
over.... SOOOOORRRYYY!!!
(there has been many besides me, and it will only take you about 4 min and
12 sec to see, after all a few welds, certain cuts, dimples, bracket cuts,
lack of brackets, half brackets, under dash supports, trunk holes, frame
mods from Alpine, battery box mods, etc..etc.. I had the bonus of spending
some time with a wonderful old man, who was trained on the assembly line in
England, he is old now, but his mind is sharp, boy he had some stories, and
he remembered every weld, and weird change as if yesterday, he said that
Lord Rootes was a hoot, and he remembers the very beginning of the project.
Have a SUPER week to Ya' all...
Jan....
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu>
To: Frank Marrone <marrone@wco.com>; 'tigers@autox.team.net'
<tigers@autox.team.net>
Date: Sunday, August 23, 1998 3:32 PM
Subject: RE: Fraud?
>Frank, et Listers,
>
>I hope the meaning of what I wrote was clearer to most of you than it
>apparently was to Frank.
>
>At 09:27 PM 8/23/98 -0700, Frank Marrone wrote:
>>Mr. Palmer wrote...
>>
>>>And equally important is the need for the TAC Committee members, and
>>>Mr Reisentz in particular, to know when to keep quiet.
>>
>>I may not understand the nuances of your statement above but I don't think
>you have the right to tell anyone what they may or may not discuss in this
>forum.
>>
>I am not discouraging Paul or anyone else from posting whatever the wish in
>this forum. Let the fur fly, I say. Of course, be prepared to take your
>knocks as well. The need for Paul and other TAC people to keep quiet is,
>and please other TAC members correct me if I'm wrong here, or at least
>should be required as part of their membership in TAC. What would it be
>like if every Monday morning, some member of TAC downloaded the latest list
>of Algers that had been discovered during the TACing process over the
>weekend?? Is this how we want it to work? How about an a' TAC Vigilante
>Committee that shows up unannounced in the middle of the night and pulls
>surprise inspections, towing off cars that fail the three-of-three vote and
>taking them to be crushed?? Now that's what I call real freedom of
>expression!!
>
>>Sounds to me like Paul and Norm may have a disagreement, I'd like to hear
>their respective arguments. It does no good (and it is far less
>entertaining) for others to argue as their proxy.
>>
>You are probably right; but then who hasn't had a disagreement with either
>Paul or Norm?? I'm sure any discussion between these two gentlemen would be
>interesting; at least for awhile. I certainly wouldn't pretend to be able
>to speak for either of them in any case, nor do want to. But I do think the
>rest of us are also entitled to opinions and the opportunity to express
>them here, a point I believe you also support. One of my opinions is that
>we shouldn't support TAC as an organization whose primary aim is to run all
>the Algers out of existence, or even to brand them all with the scarlet "A"
>as someone so cleverly stated. If they are really serious about this, then
>this includes NOT dropping little hints, or clues, or secret signs, or
>whatever else to signal the frauds.
>
>Now, frankly, I have no idea why Paul posted his latest comments. It's like
>he had to say something, but then he couldn't say anything, and I think he
>actually succeeded - at saying nothing that is. It sounded to me like: "I
>don't know anything, but if I did know anything I wouldn't tell you." Why
>bother?? Hey let's not loose the thread here. This started out as a
>question as to whether the MK!! #523 is a real Tiger or not. Anybody
>besides Norm or me have any real information to share? Some TAC member want
>to spill the beans? Anybody have any reason to believe the car is genuine?
>Hey, all contributions are welcome as far as I'm concerned. Who knows
>what's eventually going to happen with that car. Could be the State of
>Calif. will just confiscate it and have it crushed while the rest of us are
>still just sitting at our computers bickering.
>
>Bob
>Robert L. Palmer
>Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego
>rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu
>rpalmer@cts.com
>
|