DB Cooper

[skyjack71 0]

Quote

Jo,

Tell us about Duane's shoe wardrobe in 71. Was he more like me, OJ Simpson, or Imelda Marcos?

377

17 yrs later and I cannot tell you what size shoes he wore - I can't believe I just forgot that. It came up the other day when a person (not to be identified) asked me about Duane's shoes.

Strange you guys are NOW asking me the same question!

When we got married Duane had several pairs of shoes. He had what I call ankle boots, because they kept snow out, but looked dressy when he had appointments. He had what I called a very dressy low cut ankle boot and the standard ankle dress boot. He also had very expensive western boots.

Then there were loafers with and without tassels for dress. There was also the usual nice tie up shoes.

Duane aways carried rubbers to protect his shoes - both slip overs and the ones that buckle at the ankle.

Contrary to what Knoss said - Duane took pride in the way he looked and dressed. I NEVER ever SAW him with boots that were soiled or that laced up like jump boots. That was totally out of character for him, but he had in the past stated he had a pair of lace-up ankle boots.

He wore Johnny Carson suits and Kojak suits along with other name brands. Middle class. One pair of shoes he owned when we got married was a very very expensive pair of shoes and this is what I was being quized about the other day. Name brands where thrown at me, but nothing sparked a memory.

This individual was set on the shoe question (and why I wonder why you guys are bringing it up).

I tried to describe them to him. They were a very very rich dark brown /black, but they had a grain in them. A find grain - finer than Alligator - I kept telling him lizard, but I never found a picture of men's llzard shoes from the 1968 to 1971 era. He kept throwing names of leathers at me - and I told him what it was NOT. They were not loafers and they were not what I call high ankle boots. These shoes I never saw him wear, but he would never let me throw them away....my brain won't let me remember anymore than that.

Duane did own a pair of penny loafers - they were too casual looking. He liked shoes with a good shine on them. He never owned a pair of tennis shoes during our marrage.

Duane wore suites in grey, charcoal grey, dark brown, Blue, burgundy wine, light blue and the typical blazer look. I never saw him wear a black suit...and he did not own one during our marriage. He had a large wardrobe of ties - and pitched a fit the last yr. he was alive when I was going thru the ties to discard...this was the same time he refused to let those shoes go out. He did let me get rid of a few thngs, but the rest went out when he died.

He was a very good dresser and looked really sharp when we went out. He owned one pair of blue jeans and he liked to wear the dicky jumpers in the later yrs. after the went on the kidney machine - pants presented a problem when he was refinishing a piece of furniture or wanted to be comfortable sitting in the recliner for 5 hr at a time for dialysis.

Also as the kidneys get larger just to pump away the fluid the stomach becomes very extended making pants with belts difficult to keep up. This was NOT true in the early yrs - only during the later yrs. He had so much pride in wearing dress clothes that he did end up buying suspenders so he did NOT look sloppy and worry about his pant slipping down.

Still wonder why this QUESTION has come up on this thread and I was QUIZED a lot about this less than 3 wks ago. Makes one wonder what the H--- is going one right now.

As for Knoss's remark - HOW or WHY would I know what Duane wore in 1967 - 1977? I didn't meet him until August of 1977.
There was NO reason for the obtuse statement he made other than to be rude and argumentive and to be heard.

Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

[skyjack71 0]

Quote

I know some of you think I went over the top with that post regarding the television program and my challenge to Galen Cook. I understand that.

But here's the problem: Cook needs to be brought to reality. Look at what he does for a moment. He uses old pictures of his suspect that were taken years before the hijacking, and the one taken only 18 months after the hijacking bears absolutely no resemblance to Cooper. Three years ago he says he's going off to write the book. No book. He brings in a ridiculous witness with x-ray eyes.

I know most of you saw the Decoded program, and if you did then you know I'm not the type who would actually go ballistic or do a Jerry Springer-type show. I'm very soft-spoken, and I was a bit shy to appear on the show. You can barely hear me most of the time.

Yes, you were over the top and this kind of action is why I would rather do my part of the interview in my own home with only photo aids and my explanations. I don't need exposure - and I don't want exposure - I just want to know the truth about the man I spent 17 yrs of my life with. I am not interested in tearing anyones subject apart nor their investigative means.

I do not interview well. because I am submissive to others - why I was a good wife back in the day. I have LEARNED how to hold my own, but only in the written word. In person I would get very confused and combative if presented with a question I did not want to answer or someone became argumentive with me. My personality has gone through a great deal of change with all the stress I have experienced in the last 20 yrs...and 80% of this is age.

As for Cook - he will do his thing when he is good and ready, rather than jump in the frying pan. He has had other suspects, but his passion for solving this crime matches my own - my passion is more because it is personal and NOT just solving the case.

I don't think Cook, myself, Mr.S or Grey want to have to defend our subjects - but to present the subject. Let the public decide without any influence from anyone other than what the evidence presented shows.

If Mr. Spencer Stephens from Comcast Sports, offered to go heavy on your book promotion in exchange for your appearance that sounds like a rigged deal - certainly does not sound like some one wanting to make an imparticial presentation. It was generous of you to present a more balanced show, but can you and Stephen really do that after what you have presented here in the email above?

As for the evidence presented on any suspect - it will always be suspect. (Now that one is a play on words). There is NO conclusive evidence on any of the subjects and with Duane the most damning is only my word. We can't even get the FBI to give us a straight and solid background on the man. He was an elusive man who disappeared off the face of the earth from 1962 until 1968. Who and were was he and what was he doing - how did he stay hidden for 6 yrs?

Everyone will agree that Cook's subject projection is thin but, you really have NO idea what he is dealing with right now. He wanted so badly to be the one to solve this case - and he has had a lot of set backs, but he is a logical person who when the truth flies at him - will come to the aid of another. There are times when you set out to prove one thing and what you prove is the opposite of what you were trying to do. This is the quandry that Cook faces right now...he will deal with this in his own way and in his own time.

As individuals investigate suspects in this crime - you find overlaps that suggest more than what has been projected. If you are objective in your view of this crime and your suspect - it gets hard NOT to ignore the obvious, but you preserver. Since you and others turn a deaf ear to what I say as does the FBI - the obvious goes underwater.

Your post reminded me that DUANE AWAYS carried those little RUBBER BOOTIES you put over your shoes - some that slipped on and others that buckled at the ankle.

One can say your story on Kenney is thin ice - so be careful what you say - it can come back on to you. I frankly think Grey who did the orginal story on Kenny feels like he was duped. He has never said so, but then he probably plays the fleld with all of the investigators and tells them each the same thing...to get their co-operation for his own book.

By the WAY - why didn't Grey do his book on Kenny? What did Grey discover during his own investigation that made him decide to go a different way? I know why, but then that will be revealed when his book comes out.

Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

[BobKnoss 0]

Quote

.....
You think our evidence on Kenny is thin? Take a good look at what Cook offers. Pictures off the date, the Janet thing, a supposed confession but the person who heard it is dead, money in Canada that no one can find, a gold key no one can find, and Gossett's son who keeps offering up videos of his dad that have nothing to do with the hijacking. Wouldn't you like to see some REAL evidence from Cook? I would.

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.

Jo asks: "What did Grey discover during his own investigation that made him decide to go a different way? I know why, but then that will be revealed when his book comes out." ~ Grey worked with Porteous, if that gives you any clues. I think Grey is an honest and trustworthy person in whom I have total confidence and the highest respect. Smith appears to be in the same category.

Blevins, you can't possibly be so nieve as to go through all that effort and miss the headline, "Lyle Fulfills Brother's Last Wish!" "Cooper for a Day!"
The more you type, the less respect we have for you. Time for the old lady to bring the ceiling down on you and save what's left.

The "Janet thing" is a rare bit of truth that peeks through that blue cloud of bovine flatulence to which I referred. If Jerry means what he said, No More Fiction, he will confirm 'Janet's' story. I have documentation that confirms it is true.


Bob Knoss

[377 21]

Bob Knoss wrote:

Quote

The "Janet thing" is a rare bit of truth that peeks through that blue cloud of bovine flatulence to which I referred. If Jerry means what he said, No More Fiction, he will confirm 'Janet's' story. I have documentation that confirms it is true

OK Bob, prove it's true. Tell me how Janet could have visually resolved a person on the stairs. Rayleigh's Criteria (spatial resolution limits for a given aperture) says no way. Do the math.

I've done a jet jump and I have watched many jet jumps. Even without the equations I have a pretty good sense of what can and cannot be resolved from the ground at given vertical distances. I say Janet's story wouldn't hold water on a sunny clear day much less a dark partially cloudy night

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_resolution

And her story about being rudely threatened by an FBI agent? Tell me why that makes any sense at all.

And if a flare was tossed, why was Janet the only person who reported it?

You wrote: "'Janet's' story. I have documentation that confirms it is true."

Waiting for your documentation.

377

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

[BobKnoss 0]

Quote

You wrote: "'Janet's' story. I have documentation that confirms it is true."
Waiting for your documentation.
377

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. To the West!

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.

[Orange1 0]

Quote

I once represented a counterfeiter who avoided several attempted bulk buys that were traps. He said when the Feds pose as high roller organized crime guys, they might be wearing expensive suits but they always blew it by wearing cheap shoes.

Reminds me of that scene in Silence of the Lambs...

Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

[BobKnoss 0]

Quote

Quote

I once represented a counterfeiter who avoided several attempted bulk buys that were traps. He said when the Feds pose as high roller organized crime guys, they might be wearing expensive suits but they always blew it by wearing cheap shoes.

Reminds me of that scene in Silence of the Lambs...

When they delivered the ransom to McCoy they did the opposite, wearing black wing-tip shoes with an airline mechanics-type suit. Guess they just aren't always 'sho-smart.'

[georger 200]

Quote

Quote

You wrote: "'Janet's' story. I have documentation that confirms it is true."
Waiting for your documentation.
377

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!

[BobKnoss 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

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.

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.

It started as a friendly conversation between two pilots and grew into a plan presented to other pilots then an FAA executive, retired, with connections, and grew from there. I'm no big shot. I was a draft dodger that got caught and punished. Nothing glorious in that. The only thing left is my honesty about refusing to participate in VietNam and holding the truth above the flotsam. America does not mean lies and deceit to me. I can't accept that view of our country. Not then, not now. No, I'm no big shot. I'm a stubborn old-fashioned American.

[skyjack71 0]

Knoss! YOU are SO FAR OFF:

Quote

First, you make a couple assumptions which I hold in question. I believe most of the flight 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.

You are ASKING everyone to discard every piece of information they have on the flight path. NOT going to work, you are not a pilot.

There is NO information at all that would assume the plane was WEST of vector 23 - NONE, IOTA!

THere was another plane behind the skyjacked plane that was W of the Vector that landed in Portland.

I have eyewitness accounts from 4 individuals - who put the skyjacked plane West of Cougar, East of Amboy and 2 directly over Heisson. Hell, I don't even know if these are in the VECTOR, as I never could get the maps to work on this. I just know what I know. I also know there was an old logging bridge East of Amboy and Cougar - which was taken out by a flood yrs ago and there were old logging spurs in that area.

The co-pilot says they were EAST of the Vector and I have never heard him say WEST.

You cannot pitch technical date and sitings.

One witness I spoke to mentioned layered clouds and a low plane....he did NOT state he could see the plane - shadows perhaps and light from behind the clouds (there were 4 siting at that one place, but only 1 is alive) and he was in his 30's in 1971.


--------------------------------


Knoss States:

Quote

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

.

Knoss! It WAS NOT SNOWING.


Knoss States:

Quote

All I have is confirming testimony from numerous qualified witnesses.

THESE testimonies?
Are they coming from voices in your head?


P.S. I have tried NOT to hurt your feelings, but you leave me little choice. If you have a story to tell - do IT with the TRUTH and not with the VOICES. For 12 yrs you have told me you have WRITTEN files - I have yet, to see one file other than a bunch of pictures of old wrestlers and NO documentation about any claim you have made. I don't even have documentation Duane ever lived there other the the ex-wife stating they were there for about 6 wks...that is second hand information and information I could never verify.

You supposedly told a writer something that could verify the existence of Weber and his wife living in the locality - WELL, a through search was made of newpapers and criminal files for that period of time and not one IOTA. I am sure you are going to reply - the papers where expunged as that is typical of how you have injected yourself.

No emotioncon for SICK and TIRED - so these will just have to do!

Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

[georger 200]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

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.

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.

[BobKnoss 0]

Quote

Clearly, you are making this up as you go along.

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.

"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?"

OK. I'm lost. What are you trying to say? The FBI has told me nothing except they have a different way of seeing this. Not much help to me. I speak English, not ^mumbo-jumbo^. I was a witness for McCoy to be used as a supporting witness for his involvement in Project Norjak. I was not a 'recorder' for the whole project. I just recorded a lot more than I was supposed to, for my own protection. CYA.

[georger 200]

Quote

Quote

Clearly, you are making this up as you go along.

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.

[BobKnoss 0]

Quote

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 am not begging for anything. I am demanding the truth or an explanation. I am due that, everything considered.

[Farflung 0]

The air path Flight 305 took is called a VICTOR Airway. In order to make giving what would be long route explanations of taking off from Seattle then flying to an intersection defined by some magic formula then to Battle Ground VORTAC then to Eugene then……. All you had to say was “Cleared Seattle Six departure then Victor 23 to Red Bluff”.

So for the first time in thread history I have combined the L-1 chart (IFR) with the Sectional Chart (VFR) of unknown origins with common depictions. I accept that the measurement system of near, huge, east, big, high and downriver will still be the greatly favored mode of nebulous measures.

The attached charts illustrate several items which you may wish to dismiss or glean whatever miniscule intellectual value it may possess.

There is the FAA approved (code for – you won’t die if you use this) route V-23, the same route drawn on the sectional chart, the radar track and the width of the airway (shoulder of the road).

[377 21]

Bob wrote:

Quote

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.

Wrong Bob. Point sources can be seen for huge distances, but a human's ability to reolve spatial differences, like seeing a binary star accurately as two stars instead of inaccurately as a visually merged single star, is limited by Rayleigh's Criteria.

It's all aperture limited. It applies to radar too. The ability to individually resolve targets that are very close to each other can be figured out mathematically if you know antenna aperture, beam width, frequency etc.

Seeing a bulge under the rear of the 727 (stairs down) and being able to resolve a person on the stairs are two different matters.

The Janet story is just not believable. If your wild story that McCoy visited her posing as an FBI SA is true, why would he threaten her? That's just flat out stupid. Best way to silence that kind of witness is to tell her that her information is of vital importance, will be analysed by our "top men" and ask for her cooperation in maintaining confidentiality so as not to compromise the case. Swearing at her and threatening her makes no sense. Many people would complain to the FBI in Wash DC or to the DOJ if they were a bystander-witness and were rudely threatened.

I've dealt with a lot of FBI agents. They can get rough with suspects but they are unfailingly polite and courteous when dealing with innocent witnesses. They have really good manners, for cops. If you are going to impersonate an FBI SA you'd want to do it accurately. Accordingly, you'd refrain from swearing, threatening and acting crudely because that behavior is not the MO for a real agent.

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

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

[BobKnoss 0]

Quote

The air path Flight 305 took is called a VICTOR Airway. .

I stand corrected, thank you. Take the Air Force plots and move them 15 miles west, since as a matter of record they were ordered to fly around Portland airspace, not directly over it. That puts that path directly over 'Janet's location, as per Cook.

[skyjack71 0]

Quote

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?

Well, Now lets see. Covert action in the 60's led to Mafia Connections which led to some information the authorities needed to know. Two insiders knew a journalist and told him what they knew in order to divert something they didn't want to happen. Maybe this is how Duane bought his Commutation.

Since the 'group' didn't know his real name - he struck out to continued life on that one, but forever looking over his shoulder. Hell, he had made it for 6 yrs under an alias. Maybe that alias was provided by the authorities? He finds out he is has a disease and starts to feel bitterness about his life and in desperation - does the Cooper thing. He had the knowledge from his past actions under John Collins - so why not?

Maybe he felt someone OWED him something when he snitched and that he had been offered no reward or retribution other than for John Collins to disappear.

Desperate people do desperate things.

No I am not desperate and I may or may not be making up the scenario above, but it is feasible. One has to wonder how and why Duane managed to disappear from 1962 till 1968!

He and his "wife'' of the time even used at times her maiden name as their couples name. They changed names like they changed clothes - what the hell where they running from or to?
Why were did they resided in multiply locations (all of which supported covert and mafia)? What where they involved in?

There might have been some washing by the government, but tell me a time there has not been? Perhaps the goverment even KNEW who did the skyjacking, but circumstance might have blown the hatch off of something they preferred to keep quiet at that time and perhaps since. The USA has NOT always done things exactly right in both military and political activities from the past - and nothing is transparent. This will be speculated till the end of time, but I want only one answer. Who did I marry?
Who was this man? Was he this horrible ex-con or was he actually a loyal misguided American trying to do the right thing? Why did he take that plane and why did he do what he did? Why did he leave messages behind and he did do that?

What he left was a symbol of who he was and what he knew.
Fear of death and anger - they take hold and you make your decisions and you stand by them. So what if you have failed at all you tried to do - and when you made your one contribution to society that you thought would "count" - you find you are just a dirt to be covered up?!

Cooper went out of that Plane because he Could! He disappeared because he Could!
WHY? Because no one would dare come after him!

OKAY, Knoss how is that for a truth? Or is it just a fantasy and a story just to have something to say?

Time to get some rest!

Knoss will go on till the end of time - doing whatever he can to be sure he writes himself into this damn saga. He has contacted every journalist and ever writer and the co-pilot and others making their lives utter chaos.

My claim about Duane Weber has been genuine - I have never claimed "inside" knowledge or to "know" much about Duane's past life but, I want explanations for actions taken by the FBI and others I have felt totally unnecessary. WHY?
Again I borrow this from Nuttall, because it really makes my point.

WHY lie unless you HAVE to COVER-UP SOMETHING? This means Secret service, CIA, Coverts, government, politicians, military - and every human on the face of the earth. White lies for the sake of NOT harming someone - are OK in my book, but that is the ONLY lie I condone.

To tired to continue on this way. When Knoss stops posting then I will finish MY WISH LIST and then I am gone.

Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber

[BobKnoss 0]

Quote

Bob wrote:

Quote

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.

Wong Bob.

377

It is what happened. Wong or not. I report what I was told to report, not going to change it to make it sound good or more believable. It is what it was, and I can not help that. What Janet saw was sufficient to create a stir with Norjak. He wanted to scare her, and he did. She shut up. Case over. I couldn't make up anything so stupid. It is what really happened. Not my story. I can write a lot better stuff than that. Anybody can. The truth is not very interesting at all, story-wise. Except to sick, lonely, mental cases, with not enough money to become addicted to any serious intoxicants other than airplane glue.

[377 21]

Bob wrote:

Quote

It is what happened. Wong or not.

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

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.

[BobKnoss 0]

Quote

Quote

Explain it?

He had the knowledge from his past actions under John Collins - so why not? ...
One has to wonder how and why Duane managed to disappear from 1962 till 1968!...
There might have been some washing by the government, but tell me a time there has not been? Perhaps the goverment even KNEW who did the skyjacking, but circumstance might have blown the hatch off of something they preferred to keep quiet at that time and perhaps since. The USA has NOT always done things exactly right in both military and political activities from the past - and nothing is transparent....
OKAY, Knoss how is that for a truth? Or is it just a fantasy and a story just to have something to say?

It would be consistent with what I know and what I suspect, but I have is no basis to believe it. If it were presented to me as a valid truth, I would accept it, yes. It is possible and matches things I have not discussed with you. It has no bearing on the Cooper incident proper, but would explain Duane. Why silence the Cooper incident? Just to cover Duane? Makes no sense. I see no reason to silence the Project with such a ferocity all these years.

[georger 200]

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

[Orange1 0]

Just saw a retired CIA agent on a program (about something completely different but) - made a point some of us have been trying to make for ages: secret plots don't stay secret for very long. Nice to hear it from a horse's mouth
(maybe something to bear in mind when wading through the current dominant debate here about whose version of a patently ridiculous conspiracy theory is 'better' than the other one)

Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

[BobKnoss 0]

Quote

(maybe something to bear in mind when wading through the current dominant debate here about whose version of a patently ridiculous conspiracy theory is 'better' than the other one)

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HdUF9Y6xLZ8J:www.wildworldnews.com/news/2011/dbcooper-near-death.htm+tina+mucklow&cd=11&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

Blevins is in his car and on his way to get his sticky fingers into this pile of money. He is re-writing the BLAST again, while he drives........

[JerryThomas 0]

Blevins. I PM you and ask you to make the same chaledge to me that you did Galen. I even Pm Geoger and mentioned it to him. The Message read. Invite me and I will Put a stop to All your Hoax'es.How ever there was no response so I took mater's into my own hands.Guess what see you soon. Jerry