smokin99

I am all for that, which I'll assume means me. On a more positive note, webmaster Sangiro says he has enabled online images for this thread now. Anyone figured out how to do it yet? I couldn't manage it from the instructions. like this... [inline cooper1.jpg] Upload attachment as per usual - make sure it has naming convention as suggested in instructions (no spaces, etc) then enclose in brackets the following: inline your_picture_name.jpg but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Okay. Just making sure -- cause you started out in that direction but then mentioned that it might end up at Tena Bar. Trying to keep the experiments straight. I actually think testing the paper bag might be an interesting experiment. The outcome might surprise us all. But remember - there's paper bags and then there are paper bags - so to maintain as much validity as possible -- considering we don't have much in the way of controls and such -- you can't just buy the dollar store brand - get some that vary in strength. And it should be the Columbia. I hate to mention it since I know we have fishing folks on this forum, but there might be something in the Columbia that erodes paper faster than say a mountain stream would??

Where would you recommend throwing it in? Are you just proposing a test to see how long the paper bag lasts or a test to see where the bag ends up? I would think with the latter it would matter where it started from? Also have to remember that money is different composition than paper - not sure how that would affect buoyancy, submersion rate etc. I'll have to look up Safecrack's videos again. I think he did a brief demo on that.

Damn..breaking my cardinal rule again. Two errors - First - one person is hardly everyone on this thread. Second - Even with that one person, you mistake wanting to keep the record straight with being satisfied with the explanation. I would love for someone to have another go at it --OR-- for the FBI to give some public details, but I'm not gonna distort the public record, such as it is, to support my cause. And really, I doubt that you intentionally distort information - From years of doing some reading and writing and editing myself, I will tell you what I used to tell my students -- sometimes you need to slow down and absorb what you are reading - maybe even read it twice -- just helps to fully comprehend before commenting on it. Or not....

Question to the skydivers out there. I'm assuming, since the dummy chute was "sewn shut", the FBI would know by looking at a chute that it was not a dummy chute. But then again, I really have no idea since I've never seen one. Would it be reasonable to assume that a whuffo could tell a dummy chute from an operable one? but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

I know who Robbie Burroughs is. I also went by several articles, the majority of which say that the FBI had Cossey AMONG OTHERS look at the chutes, AND they came out with that statement that they had not reached a conclusion AFTER Cossey made his opinion public AND Larry Carr said in an interview with ABC news that forensic testing was being performed on the chute AFTER Cossey made his statements. I don't know how much clearer it can be. I doubt very much that they will re-examine a chute based on your request either. Apparently they also don't feel the need to give us a blow by blow of how they determined it wasn't Coopers, but it sounds like they've examined it and case closed as far as the chute is concerned. Might not make sense but there it is. And I'm done responding on this even if you continue to post incorrect information from articles about it. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Well, since every LEO officer and organization was hunting him for a murder he didn't commit...and made his life a living hell for years...Treasury decided to give David Janssen a job on the other side of the law after they caught the one-armed man and cleared his name. His medical practice was going nowhere anyway. I hope he didn't give up his license - looks like the show only lasted one season.

Well, since every LEO officer and organization was hunting him for a murder he didn't commit...and made his life a living hell for years...Treasury decided to give David Janssen a job on the other side of the law. His medical practice was going nowhere anyway. Look, I searched all the articles, including the ones at Sluggo's website. One says the FBI was going to bring in other experts to 'make sure', but they were going solely on Cossey. Cossey thought it was funny when he told the Seattle Times the chute WAS Cooper's. (he later took it back, saying it was a joke)But if the FBI went to 'other experts' they never said anything about it later. And the Times reporter almost got fired for publishing a false story. That Cossey...a laugh a minute. ???? Quote where it says that they were going solely on Cossey. I'm not seeing it. Plus Ckret also said on here that they wanted to wait before announcing to get further confirmation but Cossey jumped the gun after he was asked to sit on it for a couple of days. Breaking my cardinal rule but...From Seattle Times April 1, 2008 article on SLuggo's site: Cossey examined it on a Friday, On the next Tuesday.... "FBI Agent Robert A. Burroughs in Seattle said Monday that agents had not ruled out the possibility that the chute was from Cooper." "We haven't made a determination one way or the other yet," Burroughs said. "We're still in the process of finishing up what investigative steps we think are necessary to feel certain about calling it one way or the other." And it's a small point but one that illustrates the reading comprehension thing.....

Question to the skydivers out there. I'm assuming, since the dummy chute was "sewn shut", the FBI would know by looking at a chute that it was not a dummy chute. But then again, I really have no idea since I've never seen one. Would it be reasonable to assume that a whuffo could tell a dummy chute from an operable one? but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

There was also a show on called O'Hara, US Treasury. Guess which episode aired on Nov 26, 1971? "Operation: Hijack" lol...what are the odds? but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Watching the 70s on VH1 classics - it's interesting to see what shows were playing on tv in 1971. All in the Family debuted that year along with Soul Train, Sonny and Cher, Columbo and mcMillan and Wife. Mayberry RFD, Green Acres, Lawrence Welk, and Beverly Hillbillies cancelled. The final cigarette advertisement aired in US that year on Jan 1 during the Johnny Carson show. Next time you play Trivial pursuit or jeopardy and get one of the 1970 questions right, you can thank me. :) but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Apparently, the FBI already knew (at time article was published) the repacking date (or DOM, whichever you believe) was months after Walling's jump. But they still issued that statement. Sloppy, at best. I have to stand with what I said in that previous post. This isn't 'Reading Comprehension 101'. It's Verification 101. Not done. Envision the FBI with a broom and picking up the carpet... Bull ---it reads exactly as I remembered....Definitely possible equals anything's possible, but we're not pursuing it anymore. Period. It's Burrough's way of saying Get a Life. You can read more into it if you want but that's all it is - nothing more. Other accounts basically say the same thing and add that we've had some folks look at it and we don't think it's Coopers. You do realize that the FBI could close up shop on anything Cooper at anytime and say that the case is closed due to the fact that they consider him dead and will not expend anymore costly resources on this case. And no one except us die hards would really care. They didn't have to keep it open as long as they have. Some folks cherry pick the FBI's nuggats of information taking what will bolster their case as gospel and nay-saying that which doesn't. You nor I have enough information to know how they investigated the chute - or that they are sweeping anything under the rug -- it's all just more speculation. Sigh.... I'd love to have more info about the chute but do I think it's a coverup? which is what you do when you sweep something under the rug?? Nah.. I hear they just have more important things to worry about. Sloppy investigation and sweeping something under the carpet because it's convenient is NOT a conspiracy. You already admit you'd like to know more about the Amboy chute. FYI: That was a direct quote from the PI article. Here's the rest of the article. There are other, similar articles out there about it. I researched just about every article that came out on the Amboy chute. It's the reason I finally published the article about it at Newsvine, which illustrates better than I can here my position on it. We are closer on this than you think. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I just think the whole thing was investigated poorly and then swept under the carpet. Perhaps they were right. The chute wasn't from the hijacking. But the fact remains that they haven't really established that very well, as least publicly. My question remains the same: If the chute is no big deal, some discarded cargo chute or something...then why would it hurt to let outside experts have a look at it? Even the Sleuths were wondering about it, and make mention of it. So I don't think my suggestion is something out of left field. I never said that you said it was a conspiracy. I said exactly what I said, nothing more. I'm not gonna tit for tat with you trying to get in the last word. Just saying you rely on that one article and said that the chute was only examined by someone that was biased. I say that other articles from the time talk about other examiners INCLUDING Cossey. Also that they were still in the process of having it examined AFTER Cossey made his statements. Just saying you can't always weed out the stuff that doesn't match. I'll make it easy for you - go to Sluggo's site - there are several articles on the chute find there. Just saying --we can bitch about not getting to define the way the FBI investigates, and call that sloppy investigating but that doesn't mean jack squat since we really don't know how they investigated it. Have you tried going at it another way -- like trying to find out where the parachute did come from? You got a serial number and a date. Go for it. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Apparently, the FBI already knew (at time article was published) the repacking date (or DOM, whichever you believe) was months after Walling's jump. But they still issued that statement. Sloppy, at best. I have to stand with what I said in that previous post. This isn't 'Reading Comprehension 101'. It's Verification 101. Not done. Envision the FBI with a broom and picking up the carpet... Bull ---it reads exactly as I remembered....Definitely possible equals anything's possible, but we're not pursuing it anymore. Period. It's Burrough's way of saying Get a Life. You can read more into it if you want but that's all it is - nothing more. Other accounts basically say the same thing and add that we've had some folks look at it and we don't think it's Coopers. You do realize that the FBI could close up shop on anything Cooper at anytime and say that the case is closed due to the fact that they consider him dead and will not expend anymore costly resources on this case. And no one except us die hards would really care. They didn't have to keep it open as long as they have. Some folks cherry pick the FBI's nuggats of information taking what will bolster their case as gospel and nay-saying that which doesn't. You nor I have enough information to know how they investigated the chute - or that they are sweeping anything under the rug -- it's all just more speculation. Sigh.... I'd love to have more info about the chute but do I think it's a coverup? which is what you do when you sweep something under the rug?? Nah.. I hear they just have more important things to worry about. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

If I remember the news reports from the time of the parachute find, the FBI didn't put forward the Walling story. They basically just said "hmmmm, yeah whatever...it could be -- but we're through with it and we're not going to investigate it anymore". In other words, for whatever reason (I'm assuming Cossey, but we really don't know if he was the only one who looked at it) they were satisfied that it was not Coopers, but they did not exactly join in on the speculation of whose it was. I might be incorrect but that's what I remember. If anyone can prove otherwise, please do. I don't necessarily like the lack of detailed information that the public was given about the chute anymore than the next person, but rearranging news reports to suit one's take on something doesn't hurt the FBI's credibility, just yours. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Thanks Airtwardo - I swam around the alligator and you just jumped right over him. So far I'd say you're the winner in the click reduction conversation!

why so complicated here!? Every other forum site you just paste the url, and "click' and the website software does it automatically - viola ______________________________________________ "work-for-wages sheeple" (RobtMBlevins) LOL. Haven't worked for wages in fifteen years. Sorry this website doesn't jump into your Drive-Thru-at-Burger-Queen hoops. Yeah, you actually have to type a bit of simple code to make certain things work. These days, I know kids eight years old who can do this with ease. Actually...this website does allow you to click and drive. For simply posting a clickable link, you can use the little buttons at the bottom of the Post: box. You paste your link then go the begining of the link and click the url box. then you go to the end and click the url box again (which has magically changed to /url). Oh the marvels of technology....but as with anything... you have to check your work before turning it in. If you overclick you might have a plain url in brackets where a front slash url in brackets needs to be

My point is yeah, you can ID or track an IP but that in itself does not mean that it was Knoss's IP to begin with. You need to have a little more information than that. Like a physical address that matches his last known. Or even correlation with posts of his from other sites. Not saying she didn't have this or that you can't get this information ...just saying if all she had was an IP of an post that was signed by Knoss, which is what was basically said, that's not enough to say it was Knoss. Oh well. Enough of this. I've got a bathroom to clean. Yuck

Whatever..my whole point is less about B Smith's letters and more about the fact that it would be next to impossible to ID Knoss only by assuming that he made the original post to which Regina is comparing subsequent posts. That is how you said that she identified him and I'm saying - IF that is the way it was done -- then not so fast. Rationalize your statement now with "she did it somehow" if you need to but, if you can't back it up with proof don't you think it's kind of unfair to continue to make the accusation? but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

You make these accusations and I have no idea if he did or not -- but how do you know that comments made at the article under his "real Name" were made by him? Did Regina track back the IP address to Bob Knoss physical address? Or was it compared to his facebook posts or other posts made by him not just on that site? Just saying. I don't think you can say that he wrote something just because it has the same IP address as something that was posted by someone using the same name UNLESS you can prove that the original poster was him. Unfortunately anyone can appropriate any name to post comments to blogs and forums. Got no dog in this fight - just saying it seems like a big leap conclusion to me. I agree that it doesn't appear at first glance to have been written by a professional, but the writing style on the last B Smith letter doesn't match BK near as much as someone else that posts here occasionally. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

LOL....You are probably regretting that you asked for input. Again according to the fbi guy... He originally wanted them to take off with it open and when told no, apparently assumed the door was controlled from the cockpit. Subsequently needed help from Tina to know how to open. That sounds like someone that knew it could be done but maybe wasn't fully familiar with all the finer details and needed help from the NWA employee that was. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Again I like the overview, but I'm curious where some of your non-attributed points came from. It will take more time than I have right now to go line by line, but some of this - including very specific items that he addressed from the fbi files -- is contradicted by what ckret has posted in the past. Off the top of my head, (memory here, so I might be wrong) states no one mentioned a watch, don't think the briefcase was referred to a "Cloth" briefcase, small paper sack (not sure if color was ever mentioned), use of the word interphone - I thought that was never actually found in the files - can't remember if that changed, no evidence that he had any communication about the positioning of the fuel trucks. There was only one note that he wrote and that was the initial one, Like I said I could be wrong - I'll have to look some of the stuff up, but it always come back to what/who to believe. Some of ckret's posts were his theory based on what was in the files, but also a lot of stuff, so he said, came directly from the files. Never heard about the bennies eta: from ckret that I remember but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

If true then is it cigarette DNA that they use to rule out suspects? I was not aware that they analysed the cigarette butts for DNA. If they did, I assume they would have compared it to the tie DNA to shore up their conclusion that the tie was Cooper's. 377 I don't know that he said DNA -- just that they were "processed" in the lab. From ckret post: Still looking for the cigarettes, after they were processed in the lab they were sent back to the field. So they are somewhere between Washington DC and Seattle or disposed of. Every spot on the plane possibly touched by Cooper was processed for prints. The seats he was sitting in were actually removed and sent to DC. And what happened to the glass he drank from. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

If true then is it cigarette DNA that they use to rule out suspects? I was not aware that they analysed the cigarette butts for DNA. If they did, I assume they would have compared it to the tie DNA to shore up their conclusion that the tie was Cooper's. 377 I don't know that he said DNA -- just that they were "processed" in the lab. From ckret post: Still looking for the cigarettes, after they were processed in the lab they were sent back to the field. So they are somewhere between Washington DC and Seattle or disposed of. Every spot on the plane possibly touched by Cooper was processed for prints. The seats he was sitting in were actually removed and sent to DC. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

So they say. Might be. Might not. My point exactly. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Good overview Bruce. You know, I don't begrudge the CS's access, but it does beg the question how the FBI picks and chooses who to give access to. And as for handling evidence, I think it was not only compromised if CS handled it without supervision, but even before CS - as certain videos and pics showed someone handling evidence without gloves and it appears that that evidence was simply all stashed together with no attempts to prevent contract transfer from one item to another. I know this was in the days before they were concerned about that stuff, but it does bring into question how anything found on the items would be conclusive. For these reasons, (though there are others), I'd venture to say that any conviction of a caught DB Cooper would be a miracle in itself --- which has to make one wonder why still with all the cloak and dagger? but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill