georger

Robert, Many of the Cooper posters on this board do not live in this area. What kind of response are you expecting from posters? Look...if you want to have Cooper event, you should have it. If you don't want to do it, don't. Why do you care what anyone on this forum says? Exactly! People will either come or they won't! People will vote with their feet. This aint Blevins-Science! Blevins should stop thinking and speaking 'in tongues' shama lacka ramah bi doo nanna nanna ninny nanny noo noo ? ... and begin living in the REALITY HOTEL he keeps telling others to check into! Huh? Sham Wow cant have his cake and eat it too! Your opinion on this matter means exactly zip to me, which I already knew before I even posed the question. This happens when someone is 100% negative on any and all statements I make. See...I already know what your responses will be on anything...even BEFORE I do the 'anything'. LOL. It's not a matter of reading your mind. You're simply predictable as hell.

Robert, Many of the Cooper posters on this board do not live in this area. What kind of response are you expecting from posters? Look...if you want to have Cooper event, you should have it. If you don't want to do it, don't. Why do you care what anyone on this forum says? Exactly! People will either come or they won't! People will vote with their feet. This aint Blevins-Science! Blevins should stop thinking and speaking 'in tongues' shama lacka ramah bi doo nanna nanna ninny nanny noo noo ? ... and begin living in the REALITY HOTEL he keeps telling others to check into! Huh? Sham Wow cant have his cake and eat it too!

Ever have someone on your side in an argument and realize they are more of a liability than an asset? GrayCop: You only BELIEVE Kenny Christiansen was DB Cooper. Trust me on something here. I have far more evidence against him than you do. I have witnesses who have given testimony over the period of more than a year in God-Knows-How-Many interviews. But until someone in authority puts Bernie Geestman in one room and the witnesses in the other, the truth on Kenny will never be known. Sure...I suspect he could have been Cooper. Can I prove it beyond a reasonable doubt? Not a chance in hell. And neither can you. What was inside that little box with the cover in the attic? Nothing. What box? Only you say it was a box!@promotions.com Promote it again Sam. What would a gay man who cant even get to the attic have in a non-box in the attic? Ooo Ooo! I know! A photo of RobertMBlevins. Maybe you should get off your dead behind, buy a plane ticket, and look for yourself. I did. This is what I found: A pair of two-by-fours had been cut and nailed into place between two ceiling joists. This assembly was covered by a piece of Formica countertop sized 3/4" thick, rough cut. It approximately matched the top of The Box. This was covered in loose insulation. There were no hinges. The assembly was located above what was formerly Christiansen's bedroom. The countertop piece itself seems to resemble the same countertops Christiansen installed into his kitchen soon after he moved into the home. (Source: Helen Jones interview) Don't believe that? Go to the house and ask Rattenbury if you can borrow his ladder and have a look for yourself. Otherwise put a sock in it. I don't know why I even bother taking the time to answer your questions... Hmmm. No radio carbon dating! I thought so! On to the next piece of Coppola extraordinaire. Have to go walk my pet pig .... nice talkin to ya.

Ever have someone on your side in an argument and realize they are more of a liability than an asset? GrayCop: You only BELIEVE Kenny Christiansen was DB Cooper. Trust me on something here. I have far more evidence against him than you do. I have witnesses who have given testimony over the period of more than a year in God-Knows-How-Many interviews. But until someone in authority puts Bernie Geestman in one room and the witnesses in the other, the truth on Kenny will never be known. Sure...I suspect he could have been Cooper. Can I prove it beyond a reasonable doubt? Not a chance in hell. And neither can you. What was inside that little box with the cover in the attic? Nothing. What box? Only you say it was a box!@promotions.com Promote it again Sam. What would a gay man who cant even get to the attic have in a non-box in the attic? Ooo Ooo! I know! A photo of RobertMBlevins.

Well, Mark we may never know exactly what REALLY Happened, but what I have been involved in the last few days may provide a LOT of food for thought. I GOT fed up with the FBI and moved on information I thought would NOT be important in the investigation of Cooper and in my case Weber. It is very difficult NOT to contain myself and won't know the results for a couple of day. I have NEVER felt this good about a move (a risk) I have just made. NO I did NOT sign a contract or anything like that! IF I can debunk the FBI on a part of their investigation regarding subject or subjects then it just MIGHT debunk the entire Cooper investigation. ALL I can say at this time. If it proves to be wrong - then I will spell out what I have just done at a later day and they you guys can laugh me out of the thread. I am following my GUT. Desperate people make desperate moves! I KNOW 377 - I can hear you now as you are thinking and will verbalize - "OH, No! Jo is at it again". Well, I never stopped and I never gave up completely. What I am working on will NOT prove Duane Weber was Cooper, but it will unhinge the FBI investigation and the efforts of the FBI. I started to call them and let them know what I was doing, but this post is as close as I will get to doing that at this time. Since they probably monitor my contacts - then they just might know, but will think - "WHAT the HELL is she up to NOW?" I explored this part of Duane's life before - but, now a statement made by Florence to Geoffry Grey seems very appropriate at this time. "May you are on to something". Since I knew I had NOT lied or fabricated the things I told the thread & the FBI - I knew I could not leave this world without making a stand on this Cooper unrelated 'theory' on my part. There are 2 individuals who know what I am doing - and they are excited. It could BLOW up in my face! My heart knows it will NOT put Weber on that Damn Plane, but will provide fodder for the FBI to reinvestigate Weber. IF I debunk the FBI regarding another investigation - What will that do to the Cooper case. What I am doing could also make a BIG fool out of me - but, I have let this one thing just ride along in my back pocket for many yrs. I was NOT pro-active and I did NOT follow my gut instinct. NOW since everyone thinks I am a complete LOONEY - I did what I should have done YRS ago. I was afraid of being proven wrong and laughed at. NOW - I don't care. When all has been said - WHAT did I NOT do and WHAT did the FBI NOT do? What SHOULD I do. OH HELL, it may blow up in my face like so many things I have chased, but I feel I had to put this in the hands of God. NO one will be made the fool of other than myself if I am wrong. What I think I know - may free someone else. I chased this memory before, but at was just gut feelings & a memory unrelated to connecting Weber to Cooper. I unleashed this memory today - because I finally acquired the information to do so. THIS will probably blow up in my face like so many other things I chased, but for the first time I feel I am letting it ALL go - NO holds barred. I have to do this for myself and if I am right - Lucy, the FBI has some explaining to do...and I this does NOT infer anything Cooper related (at least I don't think so). Tell us about Columbus and Duane? Where did Duane sit on the boat? Which boat? The FBI has a lot of explaining to do keeping this from us all these years - Merry Everything!

very nice photos - more! PIX of Mark Bennett, now up at the Mountain News, by popular demand, of course. nice! - more !!

very nice photos - more!

Agree! Bruce is the best! I read Bruce's write up, and said to myself "That sounds really fun. I wish I were there!" Then, I remembered I was! good line ...

More baloney. I mistakenly thought once that MADD started in Auburn, due to a very famous accident where a drunk lady killed three kids here who were riding their bikes. My mistake. And I have NOT made 'hundreds of bogus claims' either. You want to call me a liar? Give specific examples and allow me to defend myself. Otherwise it is just cheap slander on your part. You can put that in your hat, as far as I'm concerned. If I REALLY considered myself some type of Cooper royalty, or any kind of 'Cooper Leader' I would have showed up to the symposium or at least to Ariel. I just don't care that much about it anymore, to be frank. And the museum is about twenty minutes from my office. I haven't even seen the display yet. So your assumption is dead wrong. Where do you get this stuff you simply spout from the top of your head? I never said I 'spoke for Auburn officials'. I said this: I humbly serve on the Organizing Committee for the annual Auburn Days Festival that happens on the second weekend of August. That's ALL. And in all of that, I only have TWO main responsibilities: Helping to hang the banners, and deciding on how we use the Auburn Ave Theater each year. That's all. Nothing else, nada, negatory on additional responsibilities. In fact, my actual 'boss' for this is not the mayor, but the director of the festival. She is a good friend and one of the nicest people I've ever met. You rattle on and on with these assumptions about me and yet you really know nothing. You haven't met me, you never attend the recent Cooper events as far as I know, and yet you have the LARGEST opinions on them. Why is that? In addition, you've been caught name-dropping known Cooper folk and crediting them with negative statements about me...and yet those people deny saying those things when I ask them about it. So that makes either YOU or THEY a LIAR. I think that's simple enough. So I don't really listen to you. To Everyone else: After reviewing the previous posts regarding the Symposium and this year's Ariel celebration, I would say the Symposium was a modest success and that Ariel was just as big a hit as it has ever been. This is better than I expected, and my congratulations to the organizers. I think some of you are missing the main point on what a Symposium should be about. It's simple. A symposium is where you have a good venue, a packed house of Cooper fans, and you present an event where the Cooper Folk participants interact with the public attendees. In simpler terms, you can bring all the Cooper folk you wish, but without a fat audience it is mostly a convention, not a real public event. That has what has been missing so far. I wouldn't even agree to doing anything Cooper-related at the theater unless I felt good that all or most of the 220 seats would be filled with both the public and some members of the media. Otherwise, the festival committee would hit me with two points: You couldn't fill the seats this year, and you made it into a private convention. Neither of those things is acceptable to either me or the rest of the committee. The reason they picked me for this job originally was because the festival program at the theater had been an abject failure for several years. The first year I ran it, I allowed the current program to run. It failed. The next year, I did the KC slideshows. It was a modest success. They wanted me to try it again the following year. I said no. Then, we finally came to the idea of the Book Swap (hundreds of books on tables in the lobby, you bring your own and swap out for ones you want) and running films. Big hit. We didn't quite pack the house, but it was a big improvement. So the plan is to move this to Friday afternoon/evening, and again all-day Sunday. I will have to be convinced to change this program. I have to think of the general public and my responsibilities to the festival, the budget they grant me, etc. (Have to pay licensing fees to show films, pay for the free snacks, etc) I don't have time to organize a Cooper event at the Auburn Ave Theater, nor would I want to. I only offered a better venue for one. A place where there are things going on besides Cooper, where the parking is free and so is the admission. The movie screen, PA system, the free snacks, the Book Swap, and the nice seats certainly are a help. But it is much easier and cheaper for me to simply say, 'We're running movies again this year...' instead of throwing open the doors for a Cooper event. Now next year....they have allowed me to decide which days the theater will run movies. (so far, unless something changes). Usually we do it on Saturday. But...Saturday is also the day the parade happens, so we couldn't get an audience until around 2PM. So, I have shifted the movies to Friday and Sunday only, leaving Saturday for the literary event run by the White Water Poets and the other poetry guys. Most of the people who attend that event are not interested in the parade. So...Friday evening and Sunday-All-Day it is. My current position on the whole thing is that if there is no interest we do the same stuff as last year. Run three or more films on Sunday, and others on Friday evening. If I receive SERIOUS inquiries on using the theater for Cooper, then we would do that on Sunday, and run movies Friday afternoon into the evening. I've considered the idea of running Cooper-related films on Friday, though...should there even BE a Cooper event. Otherwise, normal films. And really...running the normal film event is much easier for me. Trust me, I'm not going to care if no one is interested. Just makes my job easier. Movies were very popular last year, even though we did nothing on Friday and ran the films on Saturday after the parade. Once people hear we're shifting the films to Friday and Sunday, we will probably pack the house. Im sorry Blev-a-lot. I just finished reading Bruce's backstory above your ... whatever you've said ... gimme three days to recover from Bruce's story .... and I'll ge6t back to ya ... Blev-a-lot. If you are posting about your convention/sympisium/ etc ... good luck to ya on that. I want to go back up the page and read Bruce's Ariel story again! Damn that kid can write!

"Having problems seeing the screen lately so reading the post is difficult. Don't know if it is the medications or the other problems going on. In just a 3 wk period of time - the screen has become very difficult to read." Hmmm. Didn't see to bother you writing a thousand + words? Or do you copy and pastes scripts like Blevins?

Remember? Sluggo called it the 'malady of central position'. Blevins, In your haste to be the "first responder" chasing all fires and emergency responder events . . . what on Earth makes you qualified or even personally popular enough ... to be "central position" with regard to any Cooper event, much less a convention or symposium or gathering of people intelligent and informed enough to be able to discuss the Cooper case, with some hope of a positive outcome? Moreover, you claim to be speaking for the people and officials in Auburn, Washington ... which I happen to know you do not speak for! [We know a few of those people. They never heard of a RobertMBlevins!] You once boldly claimed that Auburn was the birthplace of AIM - you are still living down that shameless assertion, which is just one bogus claim of hundreds of your bogus claims! Geoff Gray can organise and get people to gather because of who he is. You surely cannot claim a similar 'central position' ? The FBI could get people to gather because of who they are. Surely you are not claiming a similar 'central position', or are you ? You keep telling the world to "Check In At Reality Hotel'. When if ever will you be checking into Reality Hotel ? In fact, why should anyone read your posts at all? They are all the same thing, which is: ME ME ME ME ME ME ME! Are you a little like Jo Weber when it comes to personal credibility? Very likely, Mr. Blevins, people will just demur from attending any Cooper event organised around - YOU - ME! ME! ME!. But it did give you 500 posts at Dropzone clear into next year! Howza Gayla ?

Snipped above but means no disrespect Bruce. This is a pretty good report. I have similar reports from reps who were there (to satisfy Blev-a-lot and Weber's curiosity) ... You attribute the paucity in exhibits and symposia presentations to ... tight control from the gods who control Cooperland ? I see another cause, the same old cause, raising its ugly persistent head again ... ie a lack in hard info about the crime, that ordinary people can process and make connections with. Plus, no new media driven information has been added in the last year or more - This would be hard info from the FBI and from the better researchers, and not knowing what to do or how to connect with the info that does exist makes it difficult to "present" anything. I could elaborate. Note Tom gave a talk earlier ... but while well given and received it seems to have fallen on deaf ears, for lack of vital connecting tissue... It's that Cooper 'vacuum' again! (not some gods controlling the fates of mortals). Does this make sense from your perspective, my take on this? Thanks for a nice report - G. Was the WSHM-based symposium a lame affair because the organizers were clueless in Seattle, or because of other dynamics, such as a dearth of substantive information and facts? I say no. Plus the debacle in Tacoma begs bigger questions: why was such inadequacy tolerated? We have basic crapola going on with this exhibit in all areas Besides one of the prime curators, Gwen What’s-her-name schlepping around like she wished she was somewhere else and didn't have professional attire to wear, her partner in creating the exhibit, Fred Poynter, didn't even show up! Plus, when I talked with Gwen and her associates, such as Susan Rohrer, and introduced myself, they had no clue who I was despite my many unanswered emails and phone calls to them, even when I reminded them that they stole part of their exhibit from me off the Mountain News (two pix - one of the rigging card and one of Norman). Further, didn't Gwen and her crew even care their re-enactor had a beard? Geez. And Doug spent 30 minutes giving us a campy historical rendition of the tobacco industry? Hunh? What was that about? Doug couldn't find any cool Cooper stuff to talk about, so he was forced to scrape the bottom of the barrel and make unfunny jokes about a 15th Century tobacco merchant? I don't think so. Maybe Doug Crispin-Kenck is just a misguided historian who really wishes he was a stand-up comic working Vegas? Maybe. So, why doesn't someone buy him a Greyhound ticket to the comedy club of his choice and say goodbye to the Kick-Ass travesty that has no kick and ought to avoid all butts, unless they're Raleighs with 42 year-old dried saliva on them. And if a presenting parachute expert says he is a good friend of Earl Cossey, then he better be ready to talk about his buddy's murder. And if another presenter wants to talk about Richard McCoy at a DB Cooper symposium, he ought to know the exact airport where McCoy exchanged his passengers for half a mil (San Francisco and not LAX) and how much the duffle of money really weighed. Hint, it wasn't 70 pounds. The real question is why people chose to not adequately educate themselves when they agree to talk to the public about a major crime, and why professional historians accept their ineptitude. Do you think the $10 buck entrance fee denied the public access as Blev-a-lot claims? What "rules" (Blevins claim) screwed things up? What "rules" is Blevins talking about? Bruce, maybe there aren't that many real experts on the Cooper case anymore? It sounds like people who do know something about the case weren't part of the presentation ? (Tom gave a talk and Geoff was there...) It sounds like you are saying the wrong people were in charge of this. I will say I have a report that there were some good private side discussions between people who didn't announce themselves and werent part of the program ...

Snipped above but means no disrespect Bruce. This is a pretty good report. I have similar reports from reps who were there (to satisfy Blev-a-lot and Weber's curiosity) ... You attribute the paucity in exhibits and symposia presentations to ... tight control from the gods who control Cooperland ? I see another cause, the same old cause, raising its ugly persistent head again ... ie a lack in hard info about the crime, that ordinary people can process and make connections with. Plus, no new media driven information has been added in the last year or more - This would be hard info from the FBI and from the better researchers, and not knowing what to do or how to connect with the info that does exist makes it difficult to "present" anything. I could elaborate. Note Tom gave a talk earlier ... but while well given and received it seems to have fallen on deaf ears, for lack of vital connecting tissue... It's that Cooper 'vacuum' again! (not some gods controlling the fates of mortals). Does this make sense from your perspective, my take on this? Thanks for a nice report - G.

More baloney. If you believe the flight path was WEST of Portland...then PROVE it. The map the FBI still keeps on their website says otherwise. In other words, put up or forever hold your peace. Check-in Time at the Reality Hotel: The Citizen Sleuths concluded that the flight path forwarded by the FBI was correct. There is also the map, which says Flight 305 did NOT pass over Tena Bar. Just because you say it did, doesn't make it so. And by the way, claiming you 'want to know the truth' (as you quoted me as saying) is NOT a bad thing. And You have whined More baloney so many times, while producing nothing but snarling nonsense and total fabrications yourself, you have no Credibility whatever. Yours is a howling in the dessert. I crown thee - Sir Blev-a-lot.

What an absolute load of baloney. I will remind you of this statement the next time you post up long entries of song lyrics (some Biblical, BTW) as responses to posts. Both you and Robert99 have demonstrated a fear of the truth on the Cooper case. You are afraid that Kenny might actually be the hijacker. I showed the easiest way to find out. Just bring in the witnesses and question them. And for some weird reason you are afraid of that. I can see it in your responses. Well, that is a personal problem for you. Get over it. I'm not afraid. Chances are such an action would DISPROVE KC as a suspect. So what are you afraid of? You should WANT this if you are (ahem) a legit Cooper investigator. But you seem to be frightened of this possibility. And by the way...I never said Kenny was not gay. It was in the original article by Geoff Gray, and covered reasonably well... Your swish ss my command herr general! Calliope Jane just for Blevins! When you go "toot-toot" you're happy the whole live long day. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhBzXLO7-OA Toot toot! Whoopie!

Something we finally agree upon. And I will grant you that none of the current crop of suspects, including KC, rise to that level. There are other forms of evidence besides physical evidence. Such as witness testimony. Do you realize how little is actually required to prove (should any LEO entity take the time to bother) whether Christiansen was the guy or not? It is VERY little, but also beyond my ability to do so. But here's the best example: On the Decoded show, alleged accomplice Bernie Geestman told the cast that yes...Kenny could be the hijacker. Geestman adds that Kenny looks 'just like the sketch'. However, multiple witnesses whom I consider solid, reliable, and truthful have all agreed on the same point. That Geestman and Christiansen went missing for the entire week of the hijacking together. Also remember that Geestman's wife has outright accused her ex-husband of being a participant in the hijacking. She didn't hint around about it, she SAID he was involved. And not in just one interview, but seven, although she did try to keep Kenny's name out of the whole thing until the last interview, where she admits he WAS with Kenny that week. Let's suppose that the Seattle FBI finally decides to check out these witnesses' stories, find the stories credible, and brings everyone to Seattle for a little chat... This is the point where the FBI runs Geestman's statement for him from Decoded on a little flat screen, and then presents him with the testimony of the witnesses. What happens after that? Your guess is as good as mine. But there it is. You want to prove or disprove Christiansen as the hijacker, that's how you do it. One of two things will probably happen. Either Geestman will attempt to lie his way out of it, (probably won't work) or he will admit his guilt. If he goes for the latter, then he will undoubtably provide information to the FBI that will settle the case to their satisfaction. In any event, it's likely that the FBI - in order to finally close the case - would urge Geestman to come clean and assure him he won't be prosecuted today. There is a THIRD possibility of course. That neither man was involved. But this is hard to reconcile with the confirmed (more than one witness) missing-over-the-key-week, KC's chute experience, his sudden influx of cash, and his resentment with the airline. There could be some OTHER explanation for everything, yes. But it's hard to get around those six interviews with Mrs. Geestman where she names Bernie, and the fact that he's been caught in multiple lies...all related to distancing himself from either the Cooper case or Kenny Christiansen. Could you strip your convoluted diatribes down to one or two lines? NOBODY! is going to read all your convoluted nonsense to get to some non-point of personal gesticulation. Eunuch Biblical scribes and Prophets used to write in simple thoughts. You should follow their example!

Something we finally agree upon. And I will grant you that none of the current crop of suspects, including KC, rise to that level. There are other forms of evidence besides physical evidence. Such as witness testimony. Do you realize how little is actually required to prove (should any LEO entity take the time to bother) whether Christiansen was the guy or not? It is VERY little, but also beyond my ability to do so. But here's the best example: On the Decoded show, alleged accomplice Bernie Geestman told the cast that yes...Kenny could be the hijacker. Geestman adds that Kenny looks 'just like the sketch'. However, multiple witnesses whom I consider solid, reliable, and truthful have all agreed on the same point. That Geestman and Christiansen went missing for the entire week of the hijacking together. Also remember that Geestman's wife has outright accused her ex-husband of being a participant in the hijacking. She didn't hint around about it, she SAID he was involved. And not in just one interview, but seven, although she did try to keep Kenny's name out of the whole thing until the last interview, where she admits he WAS with Kenny that week. Let's suppose that the Seattle FBI finally decides to check out these witnesses' stories, find the stories credible, and brings everyone to Seattle for a little chat... This is the point where the FBI runs Geestman's statement for him from Decoded on a little flat screen, and then presents him with the testimony of the witnesses. What happens after that? Your guess is as good as mine. But there it is. You want to prove or disprove Christiansen as the hijacker, that's how you do it. One of two things will probably happen. Either Geestman will attempt to lie his way out of it, (probably won't work) or he will admit his guilt. If he goes for the latter, then he will undoubtably provide information to the FBI that will settle the case to their satisfaction. In any event, it's likely that the FBI - in order to finally close the case - would urge Geestman to come clean and assure him he won't be prosecuted today. There is a THIRD possibility of course. That neither man was involved. But this is hard to reconcile with the confirmed (more than one witness) missing-over-the-key-week, KC's chute experience, his sudden influx of cash, and his resentment with the airline. There could be some OTHER explanation for everything, yes. But it's hard to get around those six interviews with Mrs. Geestman where she names Bernie, and the fact that he's been caught in multiple lies...all related to distancing himself from either the Cooper case or Kenny Christiansen. Blevins, You continue to claim that KC had a "sudden influx of cash". But you apparently can't produce any proof to back up your allegation. You now even claim that your none-existent real estate records, proving that "sudden influx of cash" bit, are being reserved for your third book. Why don't you stop the BS and prove something right now? But, of course, you don't have any proof to back up your claims do you? You have been doing things this way for the last three years. Robert99 I would be happy if Blevins ever proved ANYTHING he asserts! I'll make it easy. Kenny was gay. Wooops. Blevins has said "Kenny was not gay" then he has said "Kenny was gay, everyone knows that!". So which is it today? Which Blevins is posting today? Is it Shadrak, Mishak, or Bendigo .... or, is it BLEVINS BINGO!?

Georger, I wonder if I could phrase this a little differently, and you can tell me if I'm still saying what you're saying -- since none of these people will see themselves in what you're saying. Just like a case where the police "knows" the identity of a murderer, but needs the evidence to prove it, they will look favorably at evidence that promotes their suspect and skeptically and the evidence that doesn't. Almost everyone with a preferred suspect in the Cooper case -- either because of a confession, a story relayed or some bit of evidence feels they "know" the identity of DB Cooper. Therefore, a physically description that doesn't match could not possibly be right, so we have to reinterpret it match the "truth". Each of those people doesn't feel like they're twisting the evidence at all. They feel the others with a preferred suspect are twisting the facts, because, of course, those other people are wrong. And, you're right...Anyone who is starting at the position that they "know" the identity of DB Cooper is a distraction because they are by definition taking a slanted view of the evidence. Am I at all close to stating your position, or am I still missing something? And if someone "knows" that their guy is the one, then what's the harm in even totally fabricating something to get people to believe? After all, they are right. The end justifies the means, right? I'm afraid there are those that feel this way. I agree 100% and there is ample evidence to prove what you say is the case, in several instances -

Georger, I wonder if I could phrase this a little differently, and you can tell me if I'm still saying what you're saying -- since none of these people will see themselves in what you're saying. Just like a case where the police "knows" the identity of a murderer, but needs the evidence to prove it, they will look favorably at evidence that promotes their suspect and skeptically and the evidence that doesn't. Almost everyone with a preferred suspect in the Cooper case -- either because of a confession, a story relayed or some bit of evidence feels they "know" the identity of DB Cooper. Therefore, a physically description that doesn't match could not possibly be right, so we have to reinterpret it match the "truth". Each of those people doesn't feel like they're twisting the evidence at all. They feel the others with a preferred suspect are twisting the facts, because, of course, those other people are wrong. And, you're right...Anyone who is starting at the position that they "know" the identity of DB Cooper is a distraction because they are by definition taking a slanted view of the evidence. Am I at all close to stating your position, or am I still missing something? Short answer: What is required is hard evidence. Physical evidence from the crime and/or person. Unimpeachable hard testable evidence. None of the suspects advanced here rise to that level. None of the suspects advanced here left anything of their own (not even clear cut independent circumstantial evidence, letters, etc) which link them to the crime. Below these two levels are suspects advanced by parties who claim 'circumstantial' evidence, but their evidence is open to interpretation. Below that level again, are suspects with promoters I can name who I believe are advancing pure fabrications (which change almost daily to fit circumstances) .. who are engaging in pure fraud they known is false. These people always claim personal privilege or personal knowledge or expertise of some kind, not available to the rest of the public .... be that age, supposed illness, position, special skills, etc. Quite often these people finally resort to: "I just can't explain what I know!" Others claim moral superiority! Comment: Suspects should be held to the same level of evidence one would expect in regard to claims about the flight path and money find. The Cooper case is a vacuum which attracts abuse. The availability of the internet has multiplied that effect, exponentially.

I am saying Duane Weber fits the profile. Troubled young man who stayed in trouble and never fit the mold and was an out-cast by the family. His first experience with prison was in WA and a connection to the CCC's by way of programs to ease the over-crowding of McNeil during that time. These were HIS first CLOSE friends. Indians, War encampments, work farms, other encarcerated individuals, fair workers, road workers and yet he came from a middle class family and was taught manners and respect. He was actually a kind man - but to the underdog. He fought the establishment so to speak. The only friends Duane had during this time of his life until after the skyjacking had consisted of the types I have listed above. The only work he could get that allowed him to use his "manners" and not be doing hard manual work - was that of a food service worker - the mainstay of his employment until 1973. When Duane left Jefferson - he worked large Banquets - because of his manners & he was a hard think on his feet worker. One banquet he worked was for Bob Hope! Until his success in the insurance field - that banquet was the highlight of his life. He worked as a doorman in New Orleans and Colorado. This was a man who knew how to use his charm and manners to gain entry into a world he wanted to be a part of. His brother who worked for Boeing made sure Duane received NO funds from the estate of his parents.... 1971 - With a criminal record and the medial employment available to ex-cons & the diagnosis of a hereditary kidney disease - he BLEW emotionally. He had not made any money in 1971 and could not support his family. According to the wife he had one of his explosive episodes. She claimed she did not know where he was in NOV and DEC of 1971. Yet, they are back together for New Yrs even in N.Y. Duane wants more than she could ever be - so he gets involved with a woman from a professional background. When his wife is told of his affair in 1972 she has a break down and tries to harm herself. They divorced in 1972 and 2 months later he remarries. The new wife came from a professional family. He had actually met this woman before 1972, but obviously she had rebuffed him because of his associations (won't touch that one with a 10 ft pole). Duane could charm people with his personality, but eventually his lack of a formal education would show through. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time. Duane's background became known to the woman - and that was part of the problem with the marriage. She found out what he was and this is when the BIG problems started. It was an on again - off again marriage for 5 yrs. His friend who did NOT know of his background told me he moved that hidebed one time too many. I met Duane after the divorce - in fact the day he had left divorce court. I expect he was looking for his next victim - but, something happened. Not sure what happened! I just know we made the marriage last for 17 yrs and it was NOT bad. We moved a lot, but I adapted and he was a great father...he handled situations I could never have handled. He was a great negotiator and could sell with his charm. He was a terrible lover, but he could make a woman feel like she was treasured and loved...it was just a chemistry created by his personality. I also did NOTdig into his past. No one is perfect. Something interesting I remembered - Duane had worked for a carnival in my hometown when I was a teenager. I didn't know this until after we were married and he made a comment on a trip we made to Ky when I showed him were I was born and where I was raised. I had been taught NEVER to talk with carnival workers " the traveling" men who could get no other kind of work. It was also very interesting that when Duane found out I was a Collins (on our first meeting) he became very interested in my family name. Of course I found out years later WHY - when a patrol man came to my door in 1990 asking if I knew the man on the blank license card with the name John Collins. This is when tried & did successfully obtain a drivers license under that name...and when he had to reveal to me the Jefferson prison stay as John Collins. Have we not learned, that you, Myers-Dvorak, Blevins, Marla, and Greycop, etc will adjust your promotions - and make shit up! - just to continue your promotion. In any event, it's not me you have to convince but the FBI and forensic specialists. So you can get off my back! You will continue in any event because that is your nature... Basically, you and the rest of these vendors will adjust your suspects to fit any scenario and blame any critic with having "personal issues " !? This is what makes your performances so laughable, shabby ... and UNINFORMED! On a scale of 1-10 these suspects would not even register in the real world. Have a nice promo. [edit] These socalled suspects being promoted for the promoters personal needs, would be more subject to a standard 'cult' psychology analysis ... having nothing to do with the Cooper case. These socalled suspects are nothing more than a diversion and distraction from the actual Cooper case. TRUST ME! ON THIS...

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/..._aircraft_hijackings and http://en.wikipedia.org/..._aircraft_hijackings To date, the self-promoted stable of suspects on free internet forums have been: nice middle class American white guys Cultural Gomer goggles? No description of Cooper including Gregory's description, fits the WMCWG profile! Moreover, a list of hijackings at links above (see prior Farflung & Georger posts) shows the Cooper hijacking occurring in a larger context of hijackings, most with a foreign connection, and nice middle class American white guys are a rarity! I would note that one of Himmelsbach's first publicised profiles for Cooper was: "food service worker (of foreign extraction)"! Domestic hijacking is rare prior to the Cooper hijacking vs foreign connected hijackings. Domestic hijacking increases after the Cooper hijacking but there is always a strong political or financial motive. Use of the North-west hub for hijacking is almost non-existent prior to the Cooper hijacking. The Cooper hijacking represents a northward extension of what has previously been a middle to southern State or east coast phenomenon. The Cooper hijacking represents a sudden geographic change. It is noteworthy that ALL of the suspects suggested by internet sleuths have been nice middle class white guys! That conflicts directly with the statistics of actual mainstream hijacker profiles before and after Cooper (1960-1980). If the gloves don't fit you must acquit? The internet seems to be generating candidates who don't fit the profiles of actual hijackers and may not fit Cooper at all! Great lengths have been exercised by suspect promoters here to CHANGE the hijacker profile to FIT their candidates. (This post was edited by georger on Dec 1, 2013, 3:15 PM)

Since Georger didn't seem to read this - perhaps I need to repost it and the picture I attached. See Below. P.S. TWO white guys with an Indian, Mexican, Italian or German? Many do not realize that the Germans had varing colors of complexions depending on the origin. Duane was darker than anyone in his family, but he and his brother looked like brothers. The sister had a relatively fair complexion....Duane had olive undertones but then with a suntan it was called Ruddy in the prison records. As Clara stated - she described Cooper complexion comparing it to the color of mahogony - if I remember correctly. It definitely was NOT that dark but it would get a reddish brown with the gray/olive undertones. I never knew him to use any sun protectors Or tanning lotions. So you are now saying Duane was an Indian! Mongolian? Eskimow? Congolese ??? Pygmy ??? No wonder he didnt make it as a comedian and had to resort to crime!

Oh its not bickering - just diagnostic work. Everything at DZ happens for a reason, including ... you.

Since Georger didn't seem to read this - perhaps I need to repost it and the picture I attached. Why are you so mean?