georger

Pricelss Farflung. Our gullibility and the technique to maintain it is fully exposed. Have you noticed how many frauds claim to have been fighter pilots? Never transports. I outed an imposter-poser who had wormed his way into a VP position at a small company that a friend was CEO of. They guy claimed to have been a USN F 4 pilot in Viet Nam. He had obviously read a lot and knew the plane, squadrons, carriers, CAGs, combat history etc. I was skeptical. I asked him about air refueling and led him into saying that he had refueled from USAF KC 97s a few times in Viet Nam. Bingo, fraud. His resume' turned out to be completely phony too. 377 We had a guy here, Stephen Blumberg - notorious rare book thief - who faked credentials and snagged a teaching position at Yale?, then worked his way west to UIowa, then retired, as it were. He began selling rare documents - which he had aquired from libraries at every university or college from the east coast, west. When the FBi went to his residence in Ottumwa they were aghast at what Blumberg had. It literally took document and rare book experts years to unravel it all ... and only an expert would have known what to steal and where to find it, in the first place. His catalog alone rivaled catalogs found at the Smithsonian! And if Im not mistaken, the Smithsonian asked for a copy of his catalog to add to their collection. I told Larry Carr once I would like to see some of the Cooper money go to the Smithsonian. I will make the pitch again.

No, I can't prove the money is from the hijacking My point would be, you cant link it to Kenny either. It's just money that was fund on the property - apparently. I admit its sort of unusual. Something explains it. But the tendency to link it to Kenny, a suspect, is strong. That amounts to a bias. Prr to Lyle had anyone really raised any serious suspicions about Kenny at all. You would say yes based on your interviews of people who apparently knew him. On the other side are there people who would give positive testimony about Kenny, to balance things out?Im guessing you would say no, maybe? Would a random survey even show a correlation toward the negative? I have no idea. You say no, I suspect. Did anyone who found the money report rubber bands in the plastic bag with the alleged $20s? What condition was the money in? Who precisely found the money and what did they do with it? What was the date the money was found? At some point you have to find something which is hard in nature vs conjecture, opinion, allegory. Thats my whole point.

Lyle is not the only one who linked KC's possible involvement in the Cooper case. He was only the one who brought it up first. There are all those witnesses, especially Helen Jones and Dawn J, and their testimonies. Also, Bernie's ex-wife who called her husband a crook and freely admitted she was sure of his involvement. Some of this stuff is difficult to just explain away. The way all three of them just started pointing fingers was amazing. It wasn't the actions of people who know nothing. They should have kicked me right out the door, or called me crazy. Jones, especially, was a key witness. She put KC and Bernie together in the trailer on the weekend of the hijacking. She knew the brand KC smoked. She and her daughter were both witnesses, although the daughter is not mentioned in the book. What makes it more amazing is that Jones did not believe KC was the guy. But she eventually did, and it upset her. Like everyone else, she liked Kenny and did NOT like it when she realized that he and Bernie probably pulled off the crime. She told me later that it explained a lot of things about KC that happened over the next two years after the hijacking. His sudden, unexplained change in fortune for one. KC was going around making a point with everybody he knew that he was now making good money with the airline. (except his co-employees) That's how he explained it all away. Problem: We checked that. He was lying. True, most of the case against KC is circumstantial. But there is so MUCH of it, and a lot of it relies on direct witness testimony from people who have little or nothing to gain by lying, but who stand to be highly embarrassed. put in a 5c nickle and it plays the same song, over and over and . . . I posted about the money ?

How do you know that? Who is "we"? What inclines one to think he hid Cooper money, as opposed to say "meth sales" money, as opposed to say 'somebody else hid money on the property'? Well...two different witnesses who do not know each other testified to it. Sure, someone else could have hidden that money. Maybe it came from meth sales. Maybe leprechauns left it there. I never said I knew for sure it was money from the ransom. I only tried to establish that it existed, and unlike some others around here, I provided names, locations and circumstances. I even contacted Treasury about it. You ask a question, or want confirmation, then I will try to answer. Carolyn Tyner of Boulder, CO confirmed on the money. So did Rattenbury. Both gave the same story, even though they have never met and do not know each other. Either they're both lying or something was there. Tyner and her ex-husband Robin Powell were left the house, but not the lot out back. That went to Ken ('Mac') McWilliams, who sold it within weeks of getting his hot little hands on the paperwork. He interviewed with Geoff Grey in 2007 and has been dodging interviews ever since. That's all I know. If that site had never been linked to Kenny and Kenny linked to the Cooper case by Lyle, that money would never have been linked by you or anyone else, to the Cooper case. It would be just money someone found like in a billion other such instances of money being found... For all we know Lyle put the money there! He has far more proven motive than Kenny is DB Cooper.

We know Kenny probably hid one bundle of the money on his property, How do you know that? Who is "we"? What inclines one to think he hid Cooper money, as opposed to say "meth sales" money, as opposed to say 'somebody else hid money on the property'?

Call me tonight, late ... I should be up.

I will offer $35 an ounce. ! Severe weather has finally broken here. Its in the 40s! 50s by Thursday they say. The break is very welcome. Time to plant snow peas.

[/reply glaring errors of fact as always. "Weber, a con man and small-time crook, visited the Northwest occasionally" Are you aware Weber was incarcerated in the State of Washington for a period of time? I guess that qualifies as a visit . . . The point is: I think you have failed to capture the "essence" of Mr. Weber ... and the essence of his widow's practisement all these years.

Nope, never heard of a Tena Bar in Camas, but I'm pretty much a tourist in those parts.... I think its nonsense. I thought that when I heard it. Until someone offers something better I think TENA came straight out of the Seattle PI, and nowhere else. Early in this thread I was using Tena. Some guy jumped me saying "its Tina". He never explained. I started using Tina then and still do. Im a a tourist in this whole Cooper thing!

The sign on the gate reads TINA BAR - MEMBERS ONLY. But when the money was found the Seattle PI published a map reading TENA BAR. But the PI location is in the wrong place. I asked my grandmother years ago (she knew the Fazios) and she gave the same story you do - named for the old owners daughter, and she spelled it TINA. I asked old Bob T former head of Dairy Science at the UWash - he knows the Fazios. He gave the same story you and my grandmother gave and he thought it was spelled TINA, also. This TENA stuff may have been started when the Seattle PI used the name TENA on their map. A lot of people saw that and used TENA thereafter. Then to complicate things further... a long time resident at Portland whose name some would know said: "The PI map was right. There are two sandbars. The PI showed Tena's Bar in the correct location, but thats not where the money was found. There is a Tina bar up at the Fazio's and a Tena Bar near Camas. The money came from the Fazio property and that place is Tina's Bar - its right on the gate. Maybe we need to send Bruce on a paid expedition to straighten this out? 300k max change file type maybe, ... to jpeg ?? would love to see what youve got in photos of the bar etc... Ever heard of a Tena Bar down by Camas??? Nothing through Google that I could ever find ?

The sign on the gate reads TINA BAR - MEMBERS ONLY. But when the money was found the Seattle PI published a map reading TENA BAR. But the PI location is in the wrong place. I asked my grandmother years ago (she knew the Fazios) and she gave the same story you do - named for the old owners daughter, and she spelled it TINA. I asked old Bob T former head of Dairy Science at the UWash - he knows the Fazios. He gave the same story you and my grandmother gave and he thought it was spelled TINA, also. This TENA stuff may have been started when the Seattle PI used the name TENA on their map. A lot of people saw that and used TENA thereafter. Then to complicate things further... a long time resident at Portland whose name some would know said: "The PI map was right. There are two sandbars. The PI showed Tena's Bar in the correct location, but thats not where the money was found. There is a Tina bar up at the Fazio's and a Tena Bar near Camas. The money came from the Fazio property and that place is Tina's Bar - its right on the gate. Maybe we need to send Bruce on a paid expedition to straighten this out?

Nice opening page, nice photo ... I wish you the best of success Bruce. Make it work. G.

Good news Vicki - hopfully you will get some answers and resolution. You have done well with this. Congrats and our best!

REPEAT: Let's discuss Lyle's letter from Kenny asking to be a strawman Cooper. Rataczak told me about it before you started your book. If you are so honest and diligent, you should be able to clear up this matter in short order. You have me mistaken for somebody else! Post the letter. Lets see what it says. How can we discuss a letter nobody but you and Blevins have ever seen.

It's just a local TV show. I never said it was anything else. . There we go! Thanks for the timely correction. Jo may lose interest now that we have established this a neighborhood swap meet and no Oscar is involved. As for Jerry: I seriously think Jerry is laughing his ass off. I could be wrong. But as you so ably said last night: Prove it, or forever hold your peace.

COULDA SHOULDA WOULDA Janet made a report to the FBI. McCoy called on her. She was scared. She talked to Cook. Her information is consistent with the balance of information confirmed by Nicholson, Rataczak, McCoy, Jo Weber, Himmelsbach, and perhaps others. Sorry, dude. You can coulda shoulda woulda til you are blue in the face. Facts are facts and Janet is an indisputable fact. Every detail of her story does not have to be proven to be critical. She saw the frickin' plane where it really was and THAT is all that I care about. It PROVES the proposition that the Victor 23 path was erroneous and the flight path was really 15-20 miles West of where the Air Force plotted based on mis-information. I don't know how, but I do know they did it. Ask Nicholson how it was done. He appears more qualified to resolve the how. I can verify the words that were uttered, that's it. Sorry, dude. You can't put this story together by intimidation and logic. It was built on dyslexic reversals and illogical actions. That is what made it work, along with lengthy detailed planning by knowledgeable PILOTS. Even the best laid plans of mice and men can go astray. No secrets last forever. Time is up on this one. "Knuckle dragging Neanderthals...." Always enjoyed that phrase. Aperpos to be sure. If it fits, wear it.~ Forrest Gump. Next time just quote me. Skip making up your own version of what I said. Just quote me. Otherwise you are quoting and then replying to ... yourself! KEEP IT HONEST BOB KNOSS ?

You can stop with the BS Blevins. Dont make it any bigger than it is! The President hasnt invited you to dinner . . Dont you mean Spencer Stephens at: Spencer Stephens Title Producer at Comcast Sportsnet Northwest Demographic info Greater Seattle Area | Broadcast Media Current: Producer at Comcast Sportsnet Northwest Past: Producer at Screaming Flea Productions, Producer/Writer at Spencer Stephens, Producer at Screaming Flea Productions, Producer at FSN, Producer at...Education: Washington State University, Washington State University Comcast SportsNet Northwest (CSN Northwest) is a "member" of the Comcast SportsNet network of sponsored regional sports networks, an independent associate of Comcast Corporation Inc. Casey Waage, Director of Sponsorships (503) 736-5146 cwaage@comcastsportsnet.com Comcast hasnt invited you to anything. Spencer Sephens has ... maybe after you lobbied to get the part? You will deny of course. You have had a denial and a major correction almost every day since you came here?

I don't doubt your burning barn story Bob. I doubt Janet's alleged story. One appears to defy physics, the other doesn't. 377 377, Im going to come back to this but later tonight. I will try to give a bit more formal exposition but based on the best report I have of Janet's observation, which must occur at around 8:12pm pst ... they are backing out of the drive at that very time. BTW her account places her point of observartion as inside the car, not outside. Her account says nothing about her husband seeing the 'prolonged' observation, or the husband stopping the car so they could look, or the children seeing the event, just Janet from the passenger seat of the car. Time to back out of drive is what? Time Janet says she witnessed this is what? Did her husband slow the car so she could watch the full event? .......... lots of questions. Its worth examining a bit more. BTW Galen picked up on the wind issue. He says (only) Bohan's version of the winds at PDX agrees with the direction of travel Janet describes, so Galen and I are on the same page with that. Lets pick this apart more -

Georger knows a lot more about optics than I do and can explain the spatial resolution stuff more clearly. What Janet claims is simply unbelievable. 377 You are spot-on with the concepts (or laws of physics) at stake. In order to have Janet's witness apply you must reduce the altitude for a ground observer to something under 3000 feet and since the object is in motion that adds a complicating factor to her "high-res" observation. Cloud transparency must be favorable. But there is a third ingredient not discussed - direction of travel. Her reported direction of travel is east-to-west, which does not seem compatable with the winds reported at the time? If the origin of the flare was at 10,000 feet, then the flare may conceivably fall through 3 or more air layers, each perhaps with its own wind direction. This means the flare could conceivably change its direction of travel as it falls. Janet reported one constant direction of travel, east to west at an angle relative to her position. This implies all air layers had the same direction of flow, or the flare originated at something less than 10,000 feet. Moreover, wind records for the time supposedly support a SW to NE direction of travel at 225-235* which is almost the opposite of what Janet reports? Janet's direction of travel is very clear but is not supported for the surface wind data at the time. Janet's observation might be supported by the idea of a 'flare shot from a gun' whose direction of travel is independent of wind flow for some period of time. At no time was Himmelsbach's helicopter ever at 10,000 feet but much lower, trying to catch up from behind, and looking forward and up for a glimpse of a parachute falling. I seriously doubt the helicopter pilot ever knew precisely how far behind 305 he was unless someone at ATC had both objects on radar and fed the pilot that info ... and I have reason to doubt that happened. Ralph in his helicopter was just not a large priority at the time ... 305 and other aircraft were the priority. I share 377's concern about Janet being a sole witness. I think that is unlikely if the event was as bright as Janet describes and generally accessable by its own nature. The specifics of Janet's report matter. Did she see this outside of the car or was her whole observation through the car windshield? Was Janet seeing the object directly or was she seeing a refracted/reflected inversion of the object which could mean the object itself was in a different position or direction from what Janet thought? As for her being visited by 'black suits' who told her to 'shut the fuck up', was her husband there and witnessed that? Something tells me there is more to that story. That could be a mixed message Janet missunderstood. It could also mean Janet (and others) saw something somebody wanted kept out of the media. The manner of the visitors only enlarges the problem at hand. Frankly, had the FBI wanted Janetand her husband bound to confidentiality the FBI would have politely asked Janet and her husband in (at Vancouver or Portland) taken their testimony, told them what they had witnessed was potentially *very important* (in Court) and sworn them to secrecy under penalty of law as witnesses. You dont piss people off and ask them to keep quiet - that is almost guaranteed to fail. You take a "formal" approach. That is my experience. Moreover, there are actual RULES & LAWS which apply in such matters. That is the whole foundation on which the system works.

No, my information is documented from many years ago and has not changed much at all. Ask Bill. Ask Mac. You and Jo have an adgenda that is inconsistent with what I know to be the truth. Why is that? I'm more than willing to listen to logic as I've stated hundreds of times, but all you come up with is crap that is not true. Tell me some truth and we can build your credibility from there. So far, you have none with me. Jo has a little, but she keeps burning the truth and building the crap. Why do you perpetuate this continual line of hogwash? What is so wrong with telling the truth? This joke is costing the Government a fortune over the years to perpetuate. What's the purpose? Explain it? PLEASE? "If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, it is possible you don't understand the situation." So, I'm missing something basic here. If the Norjak guys didn't want me to know all this stuff, they shouldn't have laid it on me! Norjak did it, not me. Bob. You have sprung a leak. You are not talking like the RECORDER, or the POSTMAN either. You need to put your cheeseballs back in your cup and stop begging. Get on with life? Jo will show you how. Have a happy ending.

I did not say Ralph threw anything. Usually flares are shot, right? I didn't say who launched the flare(s). I do not have to prove anything to you. My name is known and I've been recognized, they just don't want my input. I'm going to tell the truth anyway, because I HATE lies!! Either the truth or nothing at all. As long as there are lies being thrown out I will counter with the truth. Those who really count know what I am saying is correct. Some who are beginning to cut through the crap are catching on. You can not bury this stuff when it just keeps surfacing in new locations. It is like trying to sandbag the whole Mississippi, Missouri and Ohio water shed. It just doesn't happen. Too many people know. To much is getting out. Too many similar situations. It's a "Tricky Dicky," "Dirty Edgar," FAA/FBI solution to airline lobbying power to avoid new legislation dictating safety directives for the airline industry. It allowed Nixon by Executive Order to do what the pilots unions couldn't do by themselves. Blow it out your ass, Washingmachine guy. "My name is known and I've been recognized, they just don't want my input. " ?? - what in hell does that mean? I thought you were the RECORDER? You dont need to beg for a job? You were the RECORDER! Itis YOU who provides the FBI details, not the reverese. You were the RECORDER. ..... REMEMBER? All you are is another bottom feeder feeding off the Cooper case. Go feed your pidgeons.

First, you make a couple assumptions which I hold in question. I just don't know for sure what the actual altitude of the aircraft really was. I believe most of the flight data was intentionally faulty. I understood that with the opposing wind the actual forward speed of the plane was well less than the 200 speed and was even well below a 175 stall. The misreported flight path is substantiated by the fact that 'Janet' saw the plane on a flight path other than what was reported. If you assume for the purposes of discussion, that 'Janet' is correct, you must move the entire flight path 15 miles to the West of vector 23. This is consistent with my other claims based on other relative data, the pump house, oil pipeline, referenced mountain locations, the freeway, etc. All supporting the flight to be consistent with Janet's location at the time of her reported sighting. All supporting of the co-pilot's discussion with Himmelsbach, and myself. I was told by Richard Floyd McCoy, who was my supervisor in Project Norjak, that he, McCoy, made a visit to see 'Janet', and described to me exactly as 'Janet' described to Cook, his call in a black suit, identifying himself as an FBI Special Agent, and told her to, "Keep your fucking mouth shut!" Show Janet the picture of the McCoy stand in for the FBI training film I posted here. She might be able to ID 'Mac'. The reason this was done was because a lot of effort went into trying to place the flight path further East, confusing the drop zone from a clear landing location to a heavily wooded and treacherous area that a jumper could have perished in. Allowing her to continue her report would open a door that the small group of conspirators involved did not want opened. Robert Nicholson has posted information that supports this truth with deleted transcripts and telltale information. It would have been impossible to alter the true flight path from the record but the east-west positioning of the path was easy to alter. So, the flight path is correct, just not displayed on the map correctly. Move the flight path 15-20 miles west, just past the freeway, and it will line up over Janet. What Janet was able to see I can relate by comparison: The Grand Canyon is a mile deep at the ranch. I was able to see a mule train at the ranch, an angle of about 45° downward without the benefit of any back-lighting. Small signal lights can be seen for many, many miles. "One if by land and two if by sea." I once saw a barn burning at night from 15 miles away. Satellites orbit the earth anywhere from 100 miles and way up. Those little suckers can easily be seen with the naked eye when they blink. This has a significant bearing on visual calculations and, I believe, makes Janet's story completely believable. Now whether Janet saw some dude on the stairway may be an exaggeration, but the firing of the flare is confirmed by Himmelsbach in his book, and by McCoy's report to me of their pursuit in the helicopter. Mac said they fired the flair to help see if they could see a parachute, but all it did was blind them in the light snowfall. I don't know how many flares were sent up, what the altitude was, or any of that stuff, I was not there. All I have is confirming testimony from numerous qualified witnesses. Ask all the witnesses the same question and you get the same answer? That makes for evidence. Ralph ain't speaking all the truth yet. Just what he wants to. I thought YOU were involved in the PROJECT/ THE RECORDER, you said. Why should you have to guess about anything? You said you were the RECORDER. Clearly, you are making this up as you go along. Your only documentation is your ability to guess. You're doing the same thing here that you did over at Facebook. It's all crap. Now you say it was Himmelsbach who threw the flare ... to see if they could see the chute? That is the first plausable scenario Ive heard since this started. That I could believe. But you are guessing based not on anything you have from your own personal experience, but from a small factette you found in Himm;s book. You dont know any more than any other guesser here knows. The only RECORDING you DID was the recording you are doing here ... pretending to be some Big Shot. Bob, you are transparent and woefully ignorant. That is the only documentation since you came here, speculating as everyone else does. Go blow your nose. There is a reason the FBI sticks with the flight path it has. Once you finally hook up with that fact and start guessing about that, you will change your DOCUMENTATION ... and start bloviating in that general direction, regardless of what you said and did before ... just as you did on Facekook. Hey Bob! How do you allege to have recorded something the hijacker himself did even know, or do? If you were Cooper's coach standing on the sidelines with your clip board ... where the fuck did your player go! ? Where did the whole team vanish to without a single trace!? The parents and the Schoolboard are asking!

This forum has become bullshit in its pure form. I dont set the agenda. I just try and ride the wave and hope there will be some space left for the real Cooper case. If you think this is crazy you should see what's going on behind the scenes! These may be preliminaries. Blevins has nothing. Jo has nothing. That they will go through these machinations speaks for itself ... Sluggo said it all in one line.

You are one of the more civil participants here Jo, and I do appreciate your good manners, but in fact this needs to be a Jerry Springer show, no use trying to dress it up as something else. We need a morbidly obese spurned lover who magically breaks free from Jerry's beefy security boys and starts beating the skinny "slut" that her bail jumping paternity skipping boyfriend has shacked up with. Or better yet, one of KC's gay lovers telling all with lots of tears and hints of wild times in an Airstream. Brokeback Skyjack if you get the picture. Calm rational discourse does not attract viewers and ratings is the name of the game on TV. You need sex, violence and crying. The only exception is dancing. Dancing shows get good ratings, but this subject won't fit that genre. Farflung will be in charge of the production. He knows what to do. 377 Tactically wrong! Blevins needs Jo. Jo does not need Blevins! Jo has the real weapons. Blevins is shooting his mouth. All Jo has to do is sit there and watch Blevins dance around until he either falls down or his wife jerks him back across the river (and lops his head off). Gayla is not going to risk AB Books for the sake of one more of Blevins' follies, or if she does she will go down with him. One appearance of the elephant and they will scatter like mice. Gayla knows there are unseen forces on the field. Robert thinks his vanity is enough! This is Natural Selection in its pure form.

Robert Blevins: Perhaps you Snowed me and/or I am misjudging, but your post was childish and yes, it was AWFUL and it is a PROBLEM! Your post was horrid - it reveals a side of you that is bolsterous and rude and confronting. I do not believe that is what the TV program is looking for. Why sit and argue about suspects. Each one quietly presents their subject and if this is to be a free for all attack on the other subjects - just leave me OUT. The kind or program you are suggesting above is a "Call Me Out" thing that I find completely disgusting. If this is what you want to turn the program into - leave me OUT. Galen and I both can sit down and talk about our subjects without attacking each other - why can't you be the same. I haven't heard you attack Grey? Talk of SHREDDING the theory of another is NOT a person I want to be around...or do a program with. If this program is not on the UP and UP in this way - then NO WAY. I want NO part of that kind of program - they are disgusting...and they are NOT productive....they are Jerry Springer things! Natural selection in motion. Jo. Bring up your war elephants and chariots. He has no archers and his swords are broomsticks. He launched this attack before consulting with his General. She's going to yank him back to a fast retreat. Blevins the Great.