Recommended Posts
QuoteDo you mean calling you out on inconsistencies and "evidence" that isn't there or doesn't add up? Yes, those kind of things probably don't go down too well with the FBI, for obvious reasons.
Think about that statement:
You and others have done that in public forums - therefore you or anyone who questions my statements are/or maybe FBI.
I have to laugh out loud on that - GOD help this country if you are FBI.
Why bother to make note of what I have said or not said unless you have, as you accused me - A motive? Without a motive what does that make you?Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber
Ckret 0
Soon we will all have something to actually discuss, we are a few weeks away from what I hope will be the first new evidence/information since 02 of 1980.
Just thought I'd throw that in since it seems the discussion has taken a turn.
Just thought I'd throw that in since it seems the discussion has taken a turn.
377 22
Darn,
Just as I was getting a good night's sleep... Insomnia will rise again as I anxiously await the new development.
Glad to know Ckret is still on the case and that he still reads this often meandering forum.
377
Just as I was getting a good night's sleep... Insomnia will rise again as I anxiously await the new development.
Glad to know Ckret is still on the case and that he still reads this often meandering forum.
377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.
Orange1 0
QuoteSoon we will all have something to actually discuss, we are a few weeks away from what I hope will be the first new evidence/information since 02 of 1980.
Just thought I'd throw that in since it seems the discussion has taken a turn.
Oh Ckret, you have made my day
I am so sick and tired of hearsay and piling up of "evidence" (read: straws) which seems to be one assumption leading to another etc etc with clearly no foundation whatsoever, simply repeating something does not make it fact, which some people don't seem to get. Looking forward to something tangible. Just hope it is not a dead-end like the parachute that was found.
Georger... agreed!
Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.
Feb of 1980 is when the FBI went public about the money find.
I remember this because the day after the find was reported in the newspaper - Duane submitted his resignation.
If Georger was involved as he has mentioned in the forum then the opinions will be biased - he has made it clear in the forum what he thinks of me, but I will hope for the best.
Georger (supposedly a money specialist) is away for a wk and then we get a message from Ckret.
What could they discover with new technology about the money.
1.How long it had been in the water.
2.How long it had been in the Columbia.
3.If it had ever been buried elsewhere and then thrown in the river.
4. If there was blood on it (the cut on Duane's hand).
6. If the marks match a part of the jumping apparatus.
7. If the marks match a part of the belly pack.
8. If more money was there than they thought.
9. If there is residue that shows the money was buried in a container.
10. DNA not likely - the money has been handled by multiple agents and lab techs prior to the rubber gloves requirement regarding such evidence.
Someone else add to this list.
I remember this because the day after the find was reported in the newspaper - Duane submitted his resignation.
If Georger was involved as he has mentioned in the forum then the opinions will be biased - he has made it clear in the forum what he thinks of me, but I will hope for the best.
Georger (supposedly a money specialist) is away for a wk and then we get a message from Ckret.
What could they discover with new technology about the money.
1.How long it had been in the water.
2.How long it had been in the Columbia.
3.If it had ever been buried elsewhere and then thrown in the river.
4. If there was blood on it (the cut on Duane's hand).
6. If the marks match a part of the jumping apparatus.
7. If the marks match a part of the belly pack.
8. If more money was there than they thought.
9. If there is residue that shows the money was buried in a container.
10. DNA not likely - the money has been handled by multiple agents and lab techs prior to the rubber gloves requirement regarding such evidence.
Someone else add to this list.
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber
georger 247
QuoteGeorger State:
Georger states:QuoteExample: a photo copy of the library book with
Duane's handwritten notes on the hijacking?and they were sent copies of those pages in 1996.
REPLY>
You say above, you sent copies of Duane's BOOK notes to the FBI in 1996. That was 12 years ago.
Scan the copies and show them here now.
Show me yours, and I will show you mine!
Georger
georger 247
Quote
QuoteDo you mean calling you out on inconsistencies and "evidence" that isn't there or doesn't add up? Yes, those kind of things probably don't go down too well with the FBI, for obvious reasons.
Think about that statement:
You and others have done that in public forums - therefore you or anyone who questions my statements are/or maybe FBI.
Motives: I was thinking about this today. Sounds corny but one of my motives is so children of the future will have this case solved and not have to
think about it!
I'm funny that way.
snowmman 3
New evidence won't matter.
We had new evidence before, that raised a question that should have been simply answerable. No answer was found.
Ckret produced 3 new photos of Tena Bar area, from '70, '74 and '79.
The '74 photo was dated 9/6/74
We know from other records that the dredging in the Tena Bar area took place approx. 8/74 thru 10/74. (some records indicate 8/74 for OR side, 10/74 for WA side).
In fact, there is a pipeline dredge in operation, in the 9/6/74 photo, which I highlighted before. (attached again). My post back in Jul 25, 2008, 8:12 PM had some pictures (closer up) of pipeline dredges on the columbia at willignham for comparison. It's a match to what you see in the 9/6/74 photo.
I did a montage of all available photos. The circled areas were theorized to be the money find location. (what else could it be? (edit) they were present on the photos as given by Ckret).
The important part: the 9/6/74 photo shows the money find just N of a "bump-out" in the sand..i.e. the beachline is disturbed too abruptly to be natural.
Since:
1) we know sand was dumped at the Fazio's,
2) and it sure looks like a pipeline dredge was used that summer, (photo) which spits sand out close to shore (a slurry of water+sand)
3) and Tosaw said a pipeline dredge was used based on talking to the Corps of Engineers,
4) Those two bumps of sand were not there in '70 and had disappeared by '79, they don't appear to be naturally reoccurring? Google Earth shows them not there now.
The attached montage (which I posted before) zoomed and aligned the areas from the 4 photos as best I could for ease of comparison.
In short, I think there was strong evidence to suggest that the money was found at the point where a pipeline dredge deposited dredge spoils at the Fazio's.
It would seem to be an easy proposition to show the '74 picture to Corps of Engineer folks. Either back in '80 or now.
The '74 sand bumpouts at the money find location, with the money being found "above" or "in" dredge spoils, seems like too much coincidence to me.
Sure there's the unanswerable question about going thru a pipeline dredge .But the simple question of "Was the money found right where the pipeline dredge spit stuff out?" should have been easily answerable.
We had new evidence before, that raised a question that should have been simply answerable. No answer was found.
Ckret produced 3 new photos of Tena Bar area, from '70, '74 and '79.
The '74 photo was dated 9/6/74
We know from other records that the dredging in the Tena Bar area took place approx. 8/74 thru 10/74. (some records indicate 8/74 for OR side, 10/74 for WA side).
In fact, there is a pipeline dredge in operation, in the 9/6/74 photo, which I highlighted before. (attached again). My post back in Jul 25, 2008, 8:12 PM had some pictures (closer up) of pipeline dredges on the columbia at willignham for comparison. It's a match to what you see in the 9/6/74 photo.
I did a montage of all available photos. The circled areas were theorized to be the money find location. (what else could it be? (edit) they were present on the photos as given by Ckret).
The important part: the 9/6/74 photo shows the money find just N of a "bump-out" in the sand..i.e. the beachline is disturbed too abruptly to be natural.
Since:
1) we know sand was dumped at the Fazio's,
2) and it sure looks like a pipeline dredge was used that summer, (photo) which spits sand out close to shore (a slurry of water+sand)
3) and Tosaw said a pipeline dredge was used based on talking to the Corps of Engineers,
4) Those two bumps of sand were not there in '70 and had disappeared by '79, they don't appear to be naturally reoccurring? Google Earth shows them not there now.
The attached montage (which I posted before) zoomed and aligned the areas from the 4 photos as best I could for ease of comparison.
In short, I think there was strong evidence to suggest that the money was found at the point where a pipeline dredge deposited dredge spoils at the Fazio's.
It would seem to be an easy proposition to show the '74 picture to Corps of Engineer folks. Either back in '80 or now.
The '74 sand bumpouts at the money find location, with the money being found "above" or "in" dredge spoils, seems like too much coincidence to me.
Sure there's the unanswerable question about going thru a pipeline dredge .But the simple question of "Was the money found right where the pipeline dredge spit stuff out?" should have been easily answerable.
snowmman 3
Jo didn't give all the known facts (i use that word as in Jo's interpretation) of how Duane threw the money in the river. I'll fill in the details here.
If I'm wrong, Jo can correct.
It's important to understand that the Duane didn't transport the decomposed money to the Northwest in '79.
It's also important to understand that most of the decomposition happened before Duane threw the money in the river. There was too much for it to happen in just the 3-4 months between Duane's throw-in and discovery...
The full story is that Duane split the money up into a couple of buckets and buried them in 1971. It's unclear if they were plastic or metal buckets. I put out some info that suggested plastic 5 gallon buckets with the self-locking/sealing lids that are so common now, may have just been coming on the market then. Possibly less likely to be used by Duane 007.
Jo and Duane proceeded to return to the area in 1979 because of a business trip. While on this trip, Duane dug up one of the buckets, got the money bundles and put them in the paper bag as Jo as described. It is unclear if there were more bundles or only 3 at this time.
Obviously all of the money was not in one bucket, because all of the bundles wouldn't have fit in the paper bag Duane threw in the river. There was also the later Duane testimony about not being able to remember where he put a bucket.
This was then tossed in the river. The paper bag and rubber band were apparently new in '79, provided by Duane. There was no description of what was done with the bucket that was dug up. Apparently it was left behind, or maybe thrown in the river also?
In any case, it was important to throw the money in the river, rather than leave it in the hole/bucket it was in, or have Duane retain it.
That's the whole story. There is another detail about Duane apparently knowing about the money find already, when Jo read about it in the paper, and Duane muttering how it was no good. (And the $173,000 in a bucket story)
If I'm wrong, Jo can correct.
It's important to understand that the Duane didn't transport the decomposed money to the Northwest in '79.
It's also important to understand that most of the decomposition happened before Duane threw the money in the river. There was too much for it to happen in just the 3-4 months between Duane's throw-in and discovery...
The full story is that Duane split the money up into a couple of buckets and buried them in 1971. It's unclear if they were plastic or metal buckets. I put out some info that suggested plastic 5 gallon buckets with the self-locking/sealing lids that are so common now, may have just been coming on the market then. Possibly less likely to be used by Duane 007.
Jo and Duane proceeded to return to the area in 1979 because of a business trip. While on this trip, Duane dug up one of the buckets, got the money bundles and put them in the paper bag as Jo as described. It is unclear if there were more bundles or only 3 at this time.
Obviously all of the money was not in one bucket, because all of the bundles wouldn't have fit in the paper bag Duane threw in the river. There was also the later Duane testimony about not being able to remember where he put a bucket.
This was then tossed in the river. The paper bag and rubber band were apparently new in '79, provided by Duane. There was no description of what was done with the bucket that was dug up. Apparently it was left behind, or maybe thrown in the river also?
In any case, it was important to throw the money in the river, rather than leave it in the hole/bucket it was in, or have Duane retain it.
That's the whole story. There is another detail about Duane apparently knowing about the money find already, when Jo read about it in the paper, and Duane muttering how it was no good. (And the $173,000 in a bucket story)
snowmman 3
I have information that a FBI informant in Alaska, known as Deep Congeniality has been tracking all known US terrorists. (There are 3.2 million). I talked to her, and she informed me that the alias "Dan Cooper" has initials "D.C.". She pointed out that Flight 305 originated in Washington D.C. "Didja every notice that?", she said.
Suddenly, things got very quiet in the room, even though there were 8 guys with nice jackets and things in their ears, standing around.
She then said "Ever hear of the North Woods". I said "You mean Northern Exposure? Or ....'Operation Northwood? Fake terrorist attacks' ?" ..She winked, and said "Did you look under the 727 schematics in the safe deposit box?". I hadn't. I went back and found the attached two pdfs.
Page 3 has been removed. It is too politically damaging and I have been threatened and beat up. When I was a kid we played "hot peas and butter" with my cousins. The thing is, they always swung with the buckle end free. I was in a bar once with said cousin. The men at the pool table took one look at us and muttered "You're in the wrong place my friends". We wisely left.
Suddenly, things got very quiet in the room, even though there were 8 guys with nice jackets and things in their ears, standing around.
She then said "Ever hear of the North Woods". I said "You mean Northern Exposure? Or ....'Operation Northwood? Fake terrorist attacks' ?" ..She winked, and said "Did you look under the 727 schematics in the safe deposit box?". I hadn't. I went back and found the attached two pdfs.
Page 3 has been removed. It is too politically damaging and I have been threatened and beat up. When I was a kid we played "hot peas and butter" with my cousins. The thing is, they always swung with the buckle end free. I was in a bar once with said cousin. The men at the pool table took one look at us and muttered "You're in the wrong place my friends". We wisely left.
Orange1 0
QuoteQuoteGeorger State:
Georger states:QuoteExample: a photo copy of the library book with
Duane's handwritten notes on the hijacking?
The FBI is more than welcome to make copies of those pages and they were sent copies of those pages in 1996.
REPLY>
You say above, you sent copies of Duane's BOOK notes to the FBI in 1996. That was 12 years ago.
Scan the copies and show them here now.
Show me yours, and I will show you mine!
Georger
On this subject, Jo, did the handwriting just "look" like Duane's, or did you ever actually get a handwriting expert to compare the two? Again, my immediate response is: if the FBI were sent something and didn't bother to do anything about it, well, maybe that's because they didn't think the so-called "evidence" was worth anything.Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.
snowmman 3
Jo posted the following on May 16, 2008 3:05 PM
"This is the page showing a map, but Toutle is written in pencil and circled -there are other notations on another page. I recognized the handwriting as being Duane's - and the person had to have known where Toutle was located --- the mark is dead on. "
I attached her attached jpg. (supposedly scan of a xerox) She never posted the supposed other page.
Remember, Jo never tells a single coherent story. She leaves it as bits and pieces on purpose, so the reader can invent a better story for the gaps. If Duane did have knowledge of Toutle and did note it in the book, it's implied to be sinister knowledge. If one accepts that he called himself Dan Cooper, then you would think he'd have news article-level knowledge.
"This is the page showing a map, but Toutle is written in pencil and circled -there are other notations on another page. I recognized the handwriting as being Duane's - and the person had to have known where Toutle was located --- the mark is dead on. "
I attached her attached jpg. (supposedly scan of a xerox) She never posted the supposed other page.
Remember, Jo never tells a single coherent story. She leaves it as bits and pieces on purpose, so the reader can invent a better story for the gaps. If Duane did have knowledge of Toutle and did note it in the book, it's implied to be sinister knowledge. If one accepts that he called himself Dan Cooper, then you would think he'd have news article-level knowledge.
georger 247
QuoteQuoteQuoteGeorger State:
Georger states:QuoteExample: a photo copy of the library book with
Duane's handwritten notes on the hijacking?
The FBI is more than welcome to make copies of those pages and they were sent copies of those pages in 1996.
REPLY>
You say above, you sent copies of Duane's BOOK notes to the FBI in 1996. That was 12 years ago.
Scan the copies and show them here now.
Show me yours, and I will show you mine!
Georger
On this subject, Jo, did the handwriting just "look" like Duane's, or did you ever actually get a handwriting expert to compare the two? Again, my immediate response is: if the FBI were sent something and didn't bother to do anything about it, well, maybe that's because they didn't think the so-called "evidence" was worth anything.
REPLY> The relevant quotes are these, from post
above:
"Jo never knew Duane to go to the library. Yet in pencil in the book's margins was what looked to her like Duane's handwriting. On one page he had written the name of a town in Washington where a placard from the rear stairs of Flight 305 had landed. "I knew right off the bat that handwriting was his," says Anne Faass, who worked with Duane for five years.
Jo called the FBI the night she read the D.B. Cooper book. "They just blew me off," she says."
(US News & World Report, 2000)
Jo never names the book in question -
Claims Duane had written the name of the "town"
where the placard was found. (The placard was not
found in a town but in the woods & Duane could have picked this info up from a newspaper?)
The date when Duane was in the library writing these notes?
Has an independent witness to these notes being
Duanes handwriting - one Anne Faass who had worked woth Duane.
Lastly, Jo ignores the possibility Duane just went to a
library, got interested in DB Cooper case, got a book
to read on the subject, and made notes in the
margin of the book - as is very common in libraries.
But her reaction is to call the FBI!
Next time I have a water leak I think I will "call the
FBI for help"! Hell ... I will call the President! Might
as well go right to the top?
Orange1 0
QuoteLastly, Jo ignores the possibility Duane just went to a library, got interested in DB Cooper case, got a book to read on the subject, and made notes in the margin of the book - as is very common in libraries. But her reaction is to call the FBI!
Or the simple possibility that someone else with handwriting similar to Duane's (no idea what the writing looks like) and, as you say, did what people often do - annotate in the margins of something they are interested in. (For the record, my opinion is that it is extremely bad behaviour to write in a book that doesn't belong to you, even if it is in pencil.)
Looking at it from an evidentiary perspective - I doubt that any court would accept "hearsay" evidence that someone "knows" whose handwriting it is. Wouldn't the courts want a handwriting expert at the very least? And this really is something that Jo could organise very easily and without much expense - I agree that it is still nothing conclusive (like you say, Duane may simply have been interested) but at least there would finally be something in Jo's story that stood up to minor scrutiny.
Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.
Georger State:
I wish that was true - then my health would not have take the toll it has - the ONLY MOTIVE IS TRUTH...I have never recieve one cent for anything I have ever said.
It was hard to get me to consent to interviews.
You are the one who is inciting and you know that inflamatory remarks can cause the site to be closed - those are the kind of remarks a shill makes.
=======================
Georger states:
I would not release that information to you, but the FBI does have copies of the pages.
======================
Georger States:
I have held on to DNA, prints, records anything that I had not destroyed in that yr after he die and before I knew who "DAN COOPER" was.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites