FLYJACK

Most people fail to understand the context of the book.. and dismiss it because of the errors.. The book is not a true account of the hijacking.. he admits he is just telling Clara's story told to him.. It is so obviously false Gunther wouldn't make it up. The plot or narrative is what he experienced, he never claimed it was true.. Clara's story is obviously not true.. IMO, Clara was just conveying a made up story,, her motivation was to publicize Cooper's death via Gunther which probably wasn't true and characterize him as a good guy.. What other motive would Clara have.. she was real..

Gunther was contacted by a "Clara".. "Clara" confirms the first "Cooper" existed. Therefore,, Gunther was contacted by two people, one claiming to be Cooper.. How do we prove it was or wasn't Cooper?? Since Clara's story contains fabrications, we can't dismiss "Cooper" because of those.. I seems Clara's motive wasn't money but to publicize that Cooper was dead and was a really a good guy... that is not the motivation of a scammer.

Angle would have very little impact. Before Cooper jumped they had sped up to about 170k at 8:00,, so the earlier slowdown had no impact.

I just think the two lights is most likely accurate. It fits with Cooper struggling with stairs at a relatively low speed vs Mac.. If he operated them correctly the first time they should have dropped some.. if he tried again the speed would not have had a material effect on the drop.. the only variable is Cooper.. and his operation of the lever.

The fact is she said see saw the light come on after the call from Cooper.. That trumps her time estimation.. and makes it irrelevant. Your argument is the equivalent of.. A women said it took her 15 minutes to drive her red car to work.. it actually took 25 minutes therefore she didn't actually drive a red car to work.. Fact is she said she saw the red light come on after the crew had reported it being on.. no way around that.. I thought she could have possibly mistaken another light coming on.. but who knows. It makes sense in the context of Cooper struggling with the airstairs.

The red/amber "aft airstair" light does not mean the stairs are opened.. The crew saw the red light on about 7:42.. Tina saw the red light come on just after 8:00.. The red light came on twice. The red light comes on when the lever is moved from the uplock detent,, it goes out when the lever is returned to the uplock detent. It does not indicate the lever is pushed forward or the stairs are open. The green "aft airstair" light comes on when the stairs are fully down and locked.. this never happened in NORJAK. For the red light to come on twice Cooper must have moved the lever from the uplock position about 7:42 then returned to the uplock and then moved again about 8:00... The red light above it is the rear cabin door indicator which was open..

very large bills.. a combination to include 1000's ,, he got lower bills,, it wasn't his error they didn't give him what he demanded. But that is irrelevant because he said that wasn't the real reason he returned.. As for motive,, that isn't clear, there is some evidence for political and for personal.. maybe both.. but it has not been confirmed.

Not much, I see them but none are compelling,,, I am focussing on Hahneman as far as suspects and looking at other case evidence..

This s great example for why I avoid discussing Hahneman.. You have an opinion and are now searching for confirmation using assumptions.. No, he did not get the denominations mixed up,, they gave him the wrong denominations but he said he really returned to delay the flight to ensure a night jump. and the FBI was messing with him,, that didn't happen to Cooper,, circumstances were different, there are also some false reports in the news.. Tina said about Cooper.. he was not nervous he was rather nice other than he wanted certain things to be done he never tried to harm myself and although he was impatient a few times he was never cruel or nasty or impolite.. Rogers,, (Hahneman's stew) said Behaviour sounds very similar...

Witnesses saw a composite sketch... that sketch looks nothing like his image I posted comparing to Cooper's sketch A.. His sketch was good around the eyes, the very thing Cooper witnesses are weak on. Nose bad, hair bad.. That image of H comparing to sketch A doesn't make him Cooper but it shows that sketches and images are not as reliable as people assume they are.. Look at Cooper,, we have 3 completely different sketches and a 4th different image.. which one is Cooper?? Nobody knows.. He did go to prison.. cut a last minute deal.. a legit criticism but it doesn't eliminate him. If I assumed he can't be Cooper like everyone else and not pursued him then I would never have uncovered all the stuff I have.. like a huge error by the FBI. There is no arguing on teeth, Ryan lied and spread misinformation to support his opinion. He was missing two upper bicuspids, very difficult to see and very common for people who get braces.. NOT DISPOSITIVE.. So, people have eliminated him based on assumptions or misinformation from Ryan.. not facts. The correct position for others is to be skeptical, not to accept him as Cooper but do not eliminate based on assumptions.

Why do you say he isn't Cooper,, what evidence demonstrates that.

So, you have a false premise... people should be skeptical, I am one of the most skeptical people around.. question everything. Skeptical is the correct position.... When I started researching H I tried to find a reason to 100% eliminate him,, facts, not opinions. I still haven't found it.. and I did find a massive error by the FBI. Skepticism is not the issue,, the issue is guys like Ryan and now Nicky who harass and attack me personally for not accepting their positions.. as if they are some arbiter if truth... they just lie to discredit me to justify their own opinions, not facts. I have seen a lot in this case but the lies and personal attacks from Ryan are off the charts.. if I said here what I really think of him I would get banned. Ryan is suffering from a cognitive dissonance.. He knows I am a very good researcher but he has eliminated Hahneman.. those things are incompatible. To resolve this internal conflict he has decided that I have "psychological defect", "won't admit I am wrong", "have a confirmation bias" etc... He must destroy me to justify his own position. Ryan doesn't even consider that he may be wrong. Why does he care what I think,, because he is not confident in his own position and I am a threat. He doesn't attack others who actively push suspects that aren't Cooper.. Ryan doesn't attack Limbach for Skip,, even though Skip has severe forehead lines and facial lumps,, and the claim he is wearing Cooper's Towncraft tie in a pic is debunked.. way too short. Now Ryan finds himself in another dilemma... he claims sketch A is best (B is best) and I posted a pic of H that matches A very well.. but he has trashed H saying he is the worst match in the world.. He trashed me saying I am only biased for sketch B because of H,, Now, the cognitive dissonance will be off the charts.. Ryan will ignore it, manufacture some incoherent excuse or just attack me more.. So no, skepticism isn't the problem,, absolutism is,, it a cancer in this case. Absolutists are low level thinkers... they are detrimental to the advancement of this case.

You still didn't answer the question.. Have you eliminated him? not that you think he is Cooper.. but you know he isn't.

You didn't answer the question.. FWW,, I am not making the case here or now... maybe tomorrow I find something that eliminates him 100%..

Not sure what you are saying.. You think that eliminates him?

Not sure what you mean exactly... I have lots of pics of Hahneman and he looks like three entirely different people,, His sketch looks like one of his pics that is really poor and AI enhanced.. Like the Cooper sketch, witness liked parts of his sketch and disliked other parts.. One didn't like it at all. He has a forgettable look,, changes his hair style, weight fluctuated in his face and complexion went from white to very dark if in sun.. Some witnesses were shown his actual pic and they said definitely not him... The Cooper sketch was produced by very few witnesses,, Hahneman had close to 50 witnesses... I know Ryan and Nicky will blow a gasket but I have an undisclosed Cooper image that matches Hahneman maybe 90%... It is just a fact they can't deal with. Hahneman also looks like Murphy who witnesses said was the best match in hundreds.. So, sketches are just for generating leads,, even the two Cooper sketches look like two different people. Three if you count Flo's later sketch. Cooper has four completely different images... which one is Cooper? My view is this case is unique in that it remained unsolved so you can't treat it like a typical crime case.. you have to be more open and not an absolutist because there reasons the case was not solved using standard investigative techniques,, that is where most people go wrong in this case. "Cooper was not under 5-10" "Cooper has a tiny nose"... "Using the front stairs is better than using the rear".. "H is not Cooper because he demanded Benson and Hedges" "H is not Cooper because he was missing two upper bicuspids"."H is not Cooper because he is the worst match to the sketch on the world" "Skip has extreme forehead lines and lumps on his face, Cooper has forehead lines".... this is complete nonsense, confirmation bias. The irony is that I know Ryan has that same Hahneman image I posted above that looks like sketch A, he claims A is the best Cooper but he still claims Hahneman is the worst match in the world.. that proves how dishonest Ryan is... Ryan knew that pic looked like A and still trashed Hahneman for not matching the sketch. NEVER, EVER trust this guy... He wants to own the Cooper narrative and lies to achieve it.

What do you mean..

Yes he is,, Convenient, you can never be wrong if you accuse anyone who disagrees with your opinion of being biased.. the FBI must be biased as well. It is dishonest,, Of course it isn't true.. Ryan is a desperate liar.. Here is a pic of Hahneman and sketch A,,, the hair is the same, closer than any suspect.. the red frame is exactly the same so the position of features is identical,,, the only real difference is his nose is slightly wider. So, If I was biased I would claim sketch A was better to match this pic of Hahneman, but that is not what the evidence shows.. This proves I am not biased and Ryan is a liar... and Ryan's sleazy lawyer tactics are undermining the advancement of this case. Take the L, Ryan..

It is a bit confusing but Ryan and I have them sorted.. Ryan did find an attribution error in the files, but jumped on it thinking that was the reason B was made,, it was not and that is clear in the files. Sketches are not created to eliminate potential suspects per se but to stimulate tips.. Sketch A was too young and clean cut looking causing too many poor tips and wasting agents time. Sketch B was created to produce better tips.. Ryan thinks A was better, it wasn't, the FBI even admitted B was better in the files. Ryan has no argument whatsoever. He is too stubborn to take the L.. Apparently claiming I am biased means he is right the FBI is wrong and Cooper had a small nose, that is his insane logic. KK5-1 was picked out for A and then used as a basis for B... Flo also gave adjustments to KK5-1 but not his big nose.. In the end these sketches are not meant to represent Cooper exactly but to elicit tips..

Sure, you use hyperbole, you are being facetious when you try to make an argument.. You always claim I am bias to discredit the messenger and distract from the facts... you have no argument. When I agree with the FBI you claim I am biased because you are projecting. I don't have a problem with your opinion that Cooper was closer to 6' feet, I do have a problem with your assertion that he can't be under 5-10'... see you twist my position to fit your own narrative. Hahneman was at least 5-9 in shoes.. not 5-8. You keep making him shorter than he was.. How do I know Alice was wrong,, it is called evidence.. sketch B.. suspects that were liked.. other witnesses... how do you know she was wrong about the prescription sunglasses,, there is no contradicting evidence. NONE Small nose is subjective... sketch B was wider than A.. it required a wider nose. You are one of the most dishonest people I have ever run across in the Vortex... Your bias is to be right so you just make up unfounded accusations. If I don't agree with your crazy ideas it is because I am biased, not the actual evidence. Is the FBI biased too... The FBI said sketch B is the best.. The FBI used 5-8- 6' for suspect elimination.. Anybody who disagrees with you is biased. Do you even realize how insane that is.. it is a self serving lie..

Sorry man, but mockery just isn't an actual argument. Desperate yes. effective no. Facts are facts.. Alice,, only one who said "nose small". Tina,, said she never saw Cooper's face. Flo,, picked out KK5-1 with a large nose, never mentioned it. Later said none of the sketches really looked like him.. Time to take the L, Ryan,, your arguments are all juvenile fallacies..

Wow, so if a person has one thing off then they have everything off,, Is that your assertion councillor.. That is the worst argument from you yet... As a lawyer you know better. You know people can get things right and wrong.. in fact it would rare be for a witness to everything right. Reading the research, witnesses have a hard time with details,,

Flo never said anything about KK5-1's large nose,,, she made other suggestions.. Why leave out the nose... because she didn't think he had a small nose when she picked out KK5-1.. Your small nose argument is bogus.. You claimed the only reason for sketch B was the attribution error. FALSE, it was incidental. You claimed that a witness memory is better close to the event, TRUE generally,, but only if the conditions are all the same. You are using a generalization fallacy.

Why would prescription sunglasses be dead?? either they are or aren't. Are you claiming that if Cooper had a small nose he also had prescription sunglasses,, your logic is a twisted. The rest of your comment is made up nonsense. You always manufacture a derogatory characterization of others to support your own delusional opinion.. Is that how they roll in Mississippi... you just smear people who don't agree with your nonsense.

An inspection card.. 10 day?? https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vietnam-war-10-paratrooper-parachute-4567660426