FLYJACK

Paul Cini was Canadian but moved in with relatives in NJ.. he later joined the US military..

Funny, the 3 stooges was top of mind and an inside joke from Shutter's forum.. When I called them the 3 stooges R99, Georger and Meyer Louie were ganging up on me trying to get me kicked off the forum for bringing up the rubber band issue. Meyer threatened to beat me up, Georger and R99 lobbied Shutter to have me removed.. Shutter actually sent me a message telling me to shut up about the rubber bands.. Cancel culture Vortex style.. at that time they all thought each of the 3 TBAR "packets" were a random count and rubber banded but I knew that based on the evidence that didn't make sense.. they couldn't understand the difference between packets and bundles. For the record I don't actually claim they are the real three stooges.. but the rubber band issue is a never ending who is on first episode..

I am done with you guys.. such a waste of time. I have explained this so many times and you guys still don't grasp the issue, you can't even articulate a counter argument addressing the facts. You use a logical fallacy claiming Carr the authority when he was clearly wrong about randomized packet counts.. the bill count error PROVES that Carr didn't understand what the Bank guy meant. You even lied about evidence. I cannot fathom the sheer ignorance going on here and for so long over this.. why? to maintain your dredge theory? who cares.. It is so ridiculous I almost think you guys are faking it.

It isn't my view, it is the evidence that you seem to ignore. Many sources said the money was in 100's ($2000) per packet. but it makes no sense for the packets to be randomized. The FBI said the TBAR money was in the same order and packaging as given to Cooper.. The FBI had the micro which was in physical order made long before NORJAK,, If the packets were "randomized" then there is no way the order would match the micro. The packets were not randomized and in 100 bills = $2000.. If the packets were not randomized then it could only have been the bundles of several packets.. and those could only be held together with rubber bands.... the rubber bands found on the TBAR money. There is no way around this. Check Mate.

Why do I have to read this patronizing nonsense... Georger's post are incoherent enough. The Dan Cooper comic test pilot "character" was initially based on or inspired by test pilot George Cooper.. that doesn't mean the stories are about him. Everybody knows the money was circulated $20's and in random serial number order.. They were in packets of 100 bills per packet = $2000 per packet. NOT A RANDOM COUNT. The evidence indicates those packets were wrapped with paper bank bands, but rubber band frags were found on the money. Carr INCORRECTLY believed that the packets of 100 bills ($2000) were randomized in count, so there may be $500 or $1000 per packet, he claimed. THIS WAS COMPLETELY WRONG.. This false belief meant that Carr assumed they were rubber banded because the bank guy said he rubber banded the bundles into random counts. Carr screwed this up and the ignorance and confusion just won't end.. The bank guy was referring to the bundles not the packets. The rubber bands were used for the bundles not the packets. Carr was correct that the money was randomized in count but he was wrong claiming the packets were randomized. So, you might have random number 3, 4, 5 or 6 packets of 100 bills ($2000) per packet rubber banded into a single rubber banded bundle.. The bundles of several packets were randomized NOT the packets of 100 bills. How many times do we have to go through this 3 stooges whose on first skit.

WOW, found out some interesting stuff on the DAN COOPER comic,, found a list of all the editions that were printed in Mexico in Spanish for Latin America... but it looks like the fictional Canadian test pilot DAN COOPER was inspired by aka "copied" from a real US test pilot from 1945-1973 named George Cooper who was the chief test pilot at NASA. They changed the character to be Canadian to be more acceptable internationally, never published in english or officially distributed it in the US. Much more on this later... there is a nexus.. https://history.arc.nasa.gov/hist_pdfs/cooper_bio_20120724.pdf

This screed proves once again that you don't understand the issue.. Nobody is challenging the fact that the Ingrams claimed rubber band fragments were found on the money.. that is not the issue. The issue is where did they come from, the packet or the bundle. Carr talked to bank guy who said the bundles were rubber banded,, but Carr believed each packet of 100 was made random and rubber banded,,, this is false, he got packets and bundles mixed up. You are correct, you have no idea what is going on.. you don't understand the issue and the evidence. Carr, Kaye or the Ingrams can't help you.. they do not know and can't reconcile the evidence supporting paper bank bands and the rubber band frags found on the money... The only logical answer based on the evidence we have which was also confirmed by Himmelsbach is that the packets of 100 were paper bank banded and those packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles.. With no evidence you claim there were no paper bands at all and even claim that Tina's "bank style bands" means rubber bands... and Himmelsbach was wrong and Tosaw was wrong and Pringle was wrong and the 302's were wrong... but Carr who got the randomization of the bundles completely wrong is the authority on this... You have no argument, none, because you haven't got a clue what is going on. So, you still attack me personally.. but unlike the last few years,, now everybody, not just me, believes they were paper bank bands except you and Ulis.. Good luck.

Here, Pringle,, "It's all from one bundle".. (3 packets) "Cooper had been given several bundles" declined to say how many... (about 20) "There is certain information known only to us and the hijacker" (the packaging) Well, was Cooper given 100 packets or about 20 randomized bundles?? If he wasn't given 100 individual packets of 100 bills then rubber bands had to be used for the randomized bundles.

Carr was wrong, he thought the packets were randomized,, and Pat Ingram has nothing to do with this... You still don't understand the issue and never will..

Georger's ego will never allow him to understand, I have explained this to him dozens of times over the years.. Like Ulis he insists Tina's "bank type bands" means rubber bands..

Larry thought the packets of 100's were randomized. He mixed up the term bundle..

Obviously we want solid evidence that rubber bands were on the money when it was given to Cooper. There is a ton of stuff we could use... that rubber band issue has been going for over 10 years.. But you know this is the nature of Cooper case, you don't get it easy.. we even have 302 errors.. As a listener, both you guys were dismissing the information we DO have.. that is what I disagree with. The info we have is very strong. Himmelsbach. Tosaw. Agent statements during TBAR find. Money was from one bundle,, money was randomized,, money was in the same condition as given to Cooper. Larry Carr. Bundles were randomized. The fact that the money was found with rubber band frags. I always thought it was a huge deal... it changes means by which the money could arrive on TBAR.

Right, I saw Arkansas at the top of the 302 and assumed Flo..

I went through this for years... The evidence clearly indicates paper bank bands for the packets... so we agree on that.. You guys were dissing the idea that the packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles.. using unfounded arguments. Why would they do that, there is no good reason? the FBI had nothing to do with the money? Himmelsbach was influenced by the money find... etc.. We don't have a 302 stating rubber bands were used for the money.. so we can only use what we have and in total it indicates that the packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles at the bank, not by the FBI. These agents aren't going to make it up...

This is what Flo actually said... ..lower lip gave a "pouty" appearance,, Sketch B has too much flesh toward the corners of the mouth. She advised that the middle of the lower lip appears larger due to the slimness of the corners of the lower lip.. In other words the middle of the lip appeared pouty due to the corners being slim... Cooper's had a slightly protruding lower lip with slim corners..

NickyB and Ryan,, The rubber band thing is NOT new, we have gone over this for years.. the controversy goes way back to CKRET on DZ... I have always argued that the evidence supports paper bank bands on the packets. Now, you guys sloppily created a red herring.. the FBI did NOT ever say they randomized the bundles.. the FBI has stated they didn't have anything to do with the money.. The bank did it. So, if the bank randomized the bundles they had to use rubber bands. The money was pre-recorded and kept in order to match the film. It was not paper banded right before the hijacking. The typical size for a bundle would be 5 packets, that is 20 bundles. It would take very little time to randomize 20 bundles with rubber bands. Ultimately, the argument comes down to whether the bundles were randomized or not.. if they were they had rubber bands. The evidence indicates they were,, Larry Carr... Baker does not say the FBI did it.. The packaging and sequence indicate... the same as given to Cooper.. Money was the same as given to Cooper. Pringle said many times the money was from one bundle. Himmelsbach described it.. he said bank bands on the packets and rubber bands held the individual packets together (bundle). He was not influenced by the money find. It didn't match the money find, it was more detailed and precise.

Ryan, you keep spreading false information.. Hahneman's draft cards were 5' 8" and 5' 9".. witnesses had him from 5' 8" to 6' but the average was 5' 10".. Hahneman was about 5' 10" in shoes.. He did put on sunglasses early on.. A news report said 40, but the FBI had his age as 45-49 from witnesses.. I think the newspaper should have written 40's... not 40.

It isn't guessing, it is deductive reasoning.. that is the best you have without physical evidence. Tom said he looked for rubber band evidence and found nothing. I have always said TBAR won't be solved beyond theories, but you don't need TBAR to solve the case.

Huh,, no.. First, I just posted the area in the River that the money had to have landed to arrive on TBAR without sinking. That is the upstream lower left quadrant of that circle. Tom suggested the money was not exposed for months/seasons.. money landing in Columbia could have travelled along the bottom to TBAR within days or weeks. Not very long. Money has some buoyancy on the bottom of the river, it isn't as heavy as a rock so it has some suspension on the bottom. Current passing over it can lift it like a wing.. The current pushes it along the bottom and if the water level is above the money spot then that spot is essentially the bottom of the River. There was debris in the same layer as the money.. Rivers deposit debris all the time.. I read a paper that showed how the current accelerates up near the shore and pushed debris.. but the TBAR slope into the River is very gradual.. no problem. For your scenario the money had to be on land directly above TBAR where there is no real runoff.. the only way it could move down is during a receding high water event.. but you have to explain how the money got on the land above TBAR.. The most likely scenario is that the money went into the River, sank and within days or weeks was pushed along the bottom to its spot when the water level was above it.

No, I am not.. For this diagram.. I am assuming the money went into the River when the water level was at the money spot and floated on the surface to the money spot. Somebody could have tossed it in the River in Spring... or whatever.. IMO, It is far more likely the money went into the River further away and sank to the bottom.. but for the money not to sink it had to go into the River within that lower left quadrant. I am not suggesting this happened, it is a what if analysis.. beyond that circle the money would have sunk..

Just to check.. If the money floats for 7 minutes then it would travel 1/3 mile on the surface of the River before it sinks.. Using the TBAR money spot as the centre, this show a 1/3 mile circle.. for the money to arrive on TBAR before it sinks then it had to enter the River within the lower left quadrant of this circle.

Most lighter debris will be suspended on the bottom.. unlike rocks, the money would be easily moved. Here is a video starting at mile 98 moving downstream right past TBAR located at about mile 97.. The bottom is relatively smooth and sandy... suspended debris on the bottom could be easily moved along by current.. BTW.. at mile 97.3, for that entire 1 mile section on the map 200,000 cu yards of fill was dumped in 1976/77.. it is across and upstream of TBAR. The debris was clamshell dredged and barged from other areas of the Columbia River. That is a potential method to move the money upstream from the mouth of the Lewis River.. video..

If the water was well above the money find spot at the time, then the money can be pushed along the bottom to that spot.. when the money arrives the money spot is effectively the bottom of the river.

Himmelsbach was personally upset that Cooper was being viewed as some sort of hero so he pushed back with false character claims to discredit Cooper in the minds of the public.. He had no reason to present inaccurate info about the money.. but it only confirms the evidence we have..

Suction dredge was used to put material on TBAR... I don't see a suction dredge as a possibility,, a bundle of rubber banded money is too fragile.. However, there was clamshell dredging up and down the River and material was dumped upstream of TBAR,, that is a possibility for moving the money upstream from the Lewis R, but not my favourite theory. I don't like the Washougal theory either because you would need to move the flightpath/LZ East and South to reach the closest water for that basin,, but even then the route to the Columbia is a really tough one.. down a stream, across a lake, through a gate and down another stream,,, not feasible.