Recommended Posts
Orange1 0
Jo,
I think you are wrong about Duane. And that means there is no way he married you to 'lie low'. He married you because he loved you.
I think you are wrong about Duane. And that means there is no way he married you to 'lie low'. He married you because he loved you.
Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.
377 22
QuoteJo,
I think you are wrong about Duane. And that means there is no way he married you to 'lie low'. He married you because he loved you.
That's a sweet thought Orange. Occam would agree.
Jo's persistent suspicion that Georger is an FBI or CIA agent or affiliate tells me that she jumps to exotic conclusions about ordinary people, including Duane Weber.
G isn't FBI and Duane wasn't DBC.
Of course how do we prove a negative? We can't. That inability just fuels Jo's conviction that her assumptions are true. Sigh...
377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.
georger 244
Side Note: I watched the Adrenaline Hunter show on Cooper tonight. They got some of the basic facts wrong, but I did like how they disputed Himmelsbach's notion about the 'big storm' the night of the hijacking. They went to Weather Underground and checked it out, too. The heavy winds and rain didn't start until the morning AFTER the hijacking.
Better send H and Rat a printed copy of what their
lines are sup'osed to be, from now on.
Now that you are in charge - that is.
Are you going to run for elected office?
georger 244
QuoteQuote
Side Note: I watched the Adrenaline Hunter show on Cooper tonight. They got some of the basic facts wrong, but I did like how they disputed Himmelsbach's notion about the 'big storm' the night of the hijacking. They went to Weather Underground and checked it out, too. The heavy winds and rain didn't start until the morning AFTER the hijacking.
Better send H and Rat a printed copy of what their
lines are sup'osed to be, from now on.
Now that you are in charge - that is.
Are you going to run for elected office?
Georger, it's tough to answer your comment any other way...
Quote'You're a funny guy...'
'Funny how? Funny like a clown? I amuse you?'
Goodfellas
You'll let me know when you have any serious questions, right?
On the contrary, Mr. Blevins, you avoid all serious
questions. If you had not come here you would
still be talking about the comic book! Be sure to
include that in your speech.
Farflung 0
There seems to be a familiar cadence to these questions and answers. Oh, different subject just the same structure, complete with deflection, minimization and obfuscation. He’s clearly trying to answer the questions but the interviewer keeps referencing his previous statement. I say foul. Each answer should be allowed to exist in a uniquely parsed box which should never be associated with another. Like claiming that ‘Eye Witnesses’ are unreliable on one hand while contacting a crewmember of Flt 305 (an eye witness) for information on the other; keep them separate and you will enjoy both, just like bacon and ice cream.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGBOjhorqxc&feature=related
He said he NEVER had contact with women on the internet, she was the first one. It was recorded and documented and certified with witnesses who are unreliable regarding things I don’t like but are unimpeachable with things that make me happy. Just like Cooper theories.
This next guy is obviously getting railroaded because he was married with four (4!!) kids scattered all across the country. So why would he be visiting a young boy if not to mentor and guide him?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPUZYSZLrJA&NR=1
My research skills are being honed to a fine edge thanks to what I’ve gleaned from this thread.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGq6U5-_qSs
Just look for the oft repeated patterns, you’ll see them too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGBOjhorqxc&feature=related
He said he NEVER had contact with women on the internet, she was the first one. It was recorded and documented and certified with witnesses who are unreliable regarding things I don’t like but are unimpeachable with things that make me happy. Just like Cooper theories.
This next guy is obviously getting railroaded because he was married with four (4!!) kids scattered all across the country. So why would he be visiting a young boy if not to mentor and guide him?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPUZYSZLrJA&NR=1
My research skills are being honed to a fine edge thanks to what I’ve gleaned from this thread.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGq6U5-_qSs
Just look for the oft repeated patterns, you’ll see them too.
377 22
QuoteHad the FBI not have lied to me in 2000 with me holding proof of what I was stating, I could have walked away. That LIE by that FBI agent proved to me that they had NOT investigated the past of Weber and REALLY didn't know who he was - just an ex-con they dismissed.
The FBI was quite interested in Duane for a while. He wasn't casually dismissed, he was ruled out on DNA, as was Sheridan Peterson. Was that sloppy forensic investigation? Perhaps it was, but it's wrong to imply that the FBI paid no attention.
The FBI is certain that they have a partial sample of Cooper's DNA. It seems to be a possibly unjustified level of confidence about the source, but they might be withholding info that would explain it. They aren't complete idiots. They do want to solve the case. What if the sample really came from the bourbon glass and not the tie? What if the tie story is fake and designed to make Cooper willing to give a sample. If he didn't leave a tie he'd be happy to give a swab sample and be ruled out.
The Amboy chute news picture recently posted shows a lot of fabric degradation. Earlier statements about it's near pristine condition are obviously incorrect.
377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.
georger 244
The Amboy chute news picture recently posted shows a lot of fabric degradation. Earlier statements about it's near pristine condition are obviously incorrect.
377
377
Looks degraded to me. Holes, pieces missing?
Didnt Cossey say the dummy chute Cooper took had panels missing?
Even if this is the dummy chute that doesn't mean
this location is where Cooper bailed.
georger 244
I would call this a serious response, for example:
http://adventurebooks.newsvine.com/_news/2011/01/30/5955262-the-25-best-reasons-we-think-kenny-christiansen-was-skyjacker-db-cooper
http://adventurebooks.newsvine.com/_news/2011/01/30/5955262-the-25-best-reasons-we-think-kenny-christiansen-was-skyjacker-db-cooper
I would call it "horse pucky" and parasitic.
You keep repeating this same scripted nonsense
as if it was some kind of phD thesis!
I pity these folks you are going to be giving
speeches to. That's a fact.
377 22
QuoteThe Amboy chute news picture recently posted shows a lot of fabric degradation. Earlier statements about it's near pristine condition are obviously incorrect.
377
G writes:
Quotewhich photo where?
QuoteRe: [Farflung] Amboy Chute in Near Perfect Condition [In reply to] Quote | Reply
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m no expert on textiles or the decomposition rate of organic materials in an anaerobic environment; especially since they found that ‘Bog Man’ (over 2,000 years old) still wearing his clothes and the noose he was hanged with.
That Amboy parachute did not appear to be pristine or laden with any sort of hardware. You can see this fabric is quite degraded (my estimate for purposes of exhibition only; please no wagering).
http://www.komonews.com/news/17000841.html
Check the video at (1:20-1:30) and (1:38-1:48). Then decide for yourself.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't remember seeing this video. From the angles I have previously seen I also thought the buried parachute was in better condition than this video shows. Definitely not in "near-perfect" condition (unless your standards for perfection are really really low......or you have a death wish -- sure don't think I'd wanta jump with that one) .
Thanks for clearing that up.
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.
georger 244
That Amboy parachute did not appear to be pristine or laden with any sort of hardware. You can see this fabric is quite degraded (my estimate for purposes of exhibition only; please no wagering).
reply]
Looks degraded to me. Holes, pieces missing?
Didnt Cossey say the dummy chute Cooper took had panels missing?
Even if this is the dummy chute that doesn't mean
this location is where Cooper bailed.
But, the chute sure looks like silk, just as Larry
said. What I am keying in on is the lightness of
the fabric, and the way the fabric lofts as Larry is
moving it around. Its airy. Nylon would loft
differently - be a little stiffer? I'm just guessing
here and freely admit it.
But the chute is definately degraded ... not pristine
whoever claimed that.
reply]
Looks degraded to me. Holes, pieces missing?
Didnt Cossey say the dummy chute Cooper took had panels missing?
Even if this is the dummy chute that doesn't mean
this location is where Cooper bailed.
But, the chute sure looks like silk, just as Larry
said. What I am keying in on is the lightness of
the fabric, and the way the fabric lofts as Larry is
moving it around. Its airy. Nylon would loft
differently - be a little stiffer? I'm just guessing
here and freely admit it.
But the chute is definately degraded ... not pristine
whoever claimed that.
377 22
Georger,
The lack of "loft" is consistent with both silk and nylon twill canopy fabrics. Before the advent of ripstop weaves, canopies were made from "twill" nylon and it was often mistaken by surplus dealers and others for silk.
The Amboy canopy looks shredded in portions which could be consistent with rot and physical damge during its extraction, especially if something like a backhoe was used. It's hard to tell but it also looks like some suspension lines are broken.
Cossey has a demonstarted history of "playing" with the press, but if this really were a DBC canopy it would be worth a lot and he'd still own it. He makes zero if it's of some other origin. I believe him when he says it wasn't his canopy.
Still, where did it originate? Why was it buried? Wish Snowmman were here, he'd have some ideas.
Think Quade still reads this forum? It was heating up a while back but no sign of the Quade Fire Truck.
Fortunately the embers self extingusihed.
377
The lack of "loft" is consistent with both silk and nylon twill canopy fabrics. Before the advent of ripstop weaves, canopies were made from "twill" nylon and it was often mistaken by surplus dealers and others for silk.
The Amboy canopy looks shredded in portions which could be consistent with rot and physical damge during its extraction, especially if something like a backhoe was used. It's hard to tell but it also looks like some suspension lines are broken.
Cossey has a demonstarted history of "playing" with the press, but if this really were a DBC canopy it would be worth a lot and he'd still own it. He makes zero if it's of some other origin. I believe him when he says it wasn't his canopy.
Still, where did it originate? Why was it buried? Wish Snowmman were here, he'd have some ideas.
Think Quade still reads this forum? It was heating up a while back but no sign of the Quade Fire Truck.
Fortunately the embers self extingusihed.
377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.
Farflung 0
QuoteBut the chute is definately degraded ... not pristine
whoever claimed that.
Georger,
Here is a little attribution and sourcing so rarely used on this thread.
georger 244
QuoteQuoteBut the chute is definately degraded ... not pristine
whoever claimed that.
Georger,
Here is a little attribution and sourcing so rarely used on this thread.
Beautiful. Ive already Classified all of this.
Wont ever appear again, not even in China.
Holy Jodpers! Maybe its Muckluks. I dunnoh.
Quote
This year, the committee is asking a lot from me, but I'm going to do it. They've scheduled me at the theatre for four presentations, two on Saturday, August 13, and two on Sunday the 14th. I'm doing a slideshow and a talk on the Cooper case. After each appearance, the AB table set up in the lobby of the theatre will be handing out free books.
No one owns a monoply on doing Slide Presentations. Why don't you tell the thread what I proposed for the TV program you said wanted to interview me.
Since I did NOT want to be on the program - I suggested a slide presentatation presenting some to the things I have regarding Weber versus Cooper.
I did NOT even want my voice to be heard and suggested they take my words and have someone else repeat them.
NOW, you are doing a slide presentation on KC! You have used this thread and everyone in it and you will NEVER ever acknowledge anyone of them or your participation in this thread...and that the DZ basically had to teach you the fundamentals of the crime and point out your errors.
You will NOT point out anything regarding Cooper that points AWAY from Christiansen - such as Kenny Christiansen had Hazel Eyes and he was balding. NONE of which fits any description given by any witness and any given time.
Again - When will you realize the "mouthpiece" you talk to in the FBI office - does NOT relay the things you tell him nor your questions to the agent of record.
Blevins, Your suspect was ruled out a long long time ago. You posted a letter you supposedly sent to the co-pilot, yet you claimed to have recorded witness testimony from him. Why do you need to send him such a vague letter? You were not even specific in what you were asking him.
You know how to write "fiction", but stay out of the business of doing stories about deceased or living persons. I have never made too many derogatory remarks about you, but your "story" is really really bad and you are discrediting yourself personally everytime you try to promote your book. You can't even be objective because it would hit you were it hurts the most - in your wallet.
P.S. I already know your ANSWER! We wrote the book off on taxes and other such excuses you have presented. When you get the Simple Simon Dumb Blonde JO WEBER telling you your story is really bad - then it is bad. Of Course, I have a subject so nothing I say means diddle squat.
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber
377 22
QuoteQuoteBut the chute is definately degraded ... not pristine
whoever claimed that.
Georger,
Here is a little attribution and sourcing so rarely used on this thread.
Pretty good job Farflung, you nailed Blevins squarely... but to be fair to him, there were some initial FBI photos that made the canopy appear to be in good shape, e.g. the one showing the data panel with a 1946 manufacture date.
Blevins seems to attract vitriol and spite here in a quantity and intensity disproportional to whatever imagined or real transgressions he makes. He only has a theory, not a solved case, by his own words. To me, that makes him a benign presence. I don't get all worked up about him or KC. His book makes a good case that KC was up to something, and that something made him more money than could be accounted for from an NWA salary, but the ties to Norjack are entirely circumstantial and don't convince me.
377
2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.
georger 244
It's almost as if you blame me because the Bureau wrote off Weber as a suspect. That's not my fault, and it happened long before the KC story became public.
So what explains the paucity (outright obtuseness)
of your "25-reasons" and the fact you wont discuss
it?
Is it just the introduction to the case, and a real
book, you intend to produce, someday?
Blevins stated:
You wanted to debate the idea of whether it was Weber or Christiansen, or perhaps neither of them. I only gave you the History Channel rep's email, and then I told him you might contact him. He was open to the idea, but it wasn't my responsibility to finalize anything between you and Decoded. If you wanted to be on the show, you should have told them. They were willing to send a local (Florida-based) film crew to your house. But you had to make the first move.
Jo States:
I was NOT involved in your Decoded - I am talking about another program you mentioned after Decoded. Something for the 40th. I was not and did NOT want to get involved with the program you did on Christiansen.
It was a program you claimed they asked you to be the commentator of...on some kind of sports station? I also told you I did NOT want to be interviewed and I would submit slides and a commentation to be used with it.
When they did NOT contact me - yes, I did call, but obviously they were NOT interested.
You wanted to debate the idea of whether it was Weber or Christiansen, or perhaps neither of them. I only gave you the History Channel rep's email, and then I told him you might contact him. He was open to the idea, but it wasn't my responsibility to finalize anything between you and Decoded. If you wanted to be on the show, you should have told them. They were willing to send a local (Florida-based) film crew to your house. But you had to make the first move.
Jo States:
I was NOT involved in your Decoded - I am talking about another program you mentioned after Decoded. Something for the 40th. I was not and did NOT want to get involved with the program you did on Christiansen.
It was a program you claimed they asked you to be the commentator of...on some kind of sports station? I also told you I did NOT want to be interviewed and I would submit slides and a commentation to be used with it.
When they did NOT contact me - yes, I did call, but obviously they were NOT interested.
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber
Blevins stated:
Why don't you relay this message to Special Agent Frederick Gutt yourself. I certainly won't. He's been very cooperative about answering most questions put to him about the case. And by the way...he HAS made a point of saying two things: That KC has not been eliminated, but that Weber HAS been eliminated. He adds that some in the Seattle office think KC might be the guy, but that some others believe there may be better suspects...but NONE of them are Weber. You don't like the message, so you blame the messenger. As far as I'm concerned Agent Gutt has been very forthcoming in his answers.
Jo States:
Gutt is a "mouthpiece". I will talk to the AGENT in charge and at one time I told you who that agent was. It was by accident, but I did say his name!
Other sources say just the opposite of what you are saying.
I was told there is NO Comment when Weber's name comes up, but when KC is mentioned that they have stated that he has been eliminated. Now is another party playing games with you and with me. A he said, they said and you said game?
Perhaps it is time for both of us to confront the FBI! Have you been face to face with tha agent of record? NO, I didn't think so!
If you have please state the day and time of that face to face meeting.
Why don't you relay this message to Special Agent Frederick Gutt yourself. I certainly won't. He's been very cooperative about answering most questions put to him about the case. And by the way...he HAS made a point of saying two things: That KC has not been eliminated, but that Weber HAS been eliminated. He adds that some in the Seattle office think KC might be the guy, but that some others believe there may be better suspects...but NONE of them are Weber. You don't like the message, so you blame the messenger. As far as I'm concerned Agent Gutt has been very forthcoming in his answers.
Jo States:
Gutt is a "mouthpiece". I will talk to the AGENT in charge and at one time I told you who that agent was. It was by accident, but I did say his name!
Other sources say just the opposite of what you are saying.
I was told there is NO Comment when Weber's name comes up, but when KC is mentioned that they have stated that he has been eliminated. Now is another party playing games with you and with me. A he said, they said and you said game?
Perhaps it is time for both of us to confront the FBI! Have you been face to face with tha agent of record? NO, I didn't think so!
If you have please state the day and time of that face to face meeting.
Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber
.
=================
It makes me feel sad for the young man I now know to have been 37 yrs old and had spent most of his adult life in prison.
I see a slumped shoulder Duane who appears to be much younger than 37 yrs of age and a guy who is happy and sad at the same time.
The profile shot shows a slumped shoulder Duane I never knew until his last yrs. Until Duane started dialysis in 1990 he was a proud man and he did not slouch. I have noted in the beach picture his wife of the days sent to me - that he seems slight of build - but, later pictures seem to show a different demeanor.
The man I married had a completely different look and build. Yes, I can look at the face, but when I look at the body I do not see the Duane L. Weber I was married to. I would not meet Duane until 1977 - that is 15 yrs later. That change started according to the photos his wife sent me around 1970.
The Duane Weber I knew - was a business man and a man who everyone liked. He held his shoulders - up he was proud of his accomplishments, but ALWAYS gave the credit to others. I wish I had a recording of the impromtu acceptance speech he made in St. Thomas. He gave the credit to his guys and to me - he was very humbled by the award.
Admittedly he did have some confidence issues until 1984 when he threw them away with abandonment after he opened the Virginia office. He actually got in touch with his sister because he needed to share this with her. I now know that was to let her know he was OK with his life and he was SAFE.
Note the profile in the Canon Release photo - the NOSE is NOT pronounced. But he has a big big smile - he is wearing that smile I fell in love with and all who knew him, remember his mischievious grin.
P.S.
I have a couple of pictures - NO one will ever get out of me - he looks like Mafia in those pictures...made between 1970 and 1975 - I did not and do not understand those photos. I guess trying to fit in with whatever he was doing and who he was associated with. Perhaps just the mode of dress in those days, but I was single from 1971 until 1978 - but, if I had met him dressed the way he was in those photos - there would never have been a 1st date much less a 2ed date.
The Canon release photo will always cause me to feel sadness.
The photo you guys brought forward with the 1957 arrest in St. Pete again is sad. He gave his occupation as "Crook" - can anyone imagine what it must have been like to spend the prime of your life in prison.
It is hard for me to believe the man I married and the Duane in those photos are one and the same. How could I have NOT know this for 17 yrs? Did he change that much? Was I just blind? How did he manage to hold Insurance Licenses in several states? I guess most important - what WAS it that turned his life around? It was NOT me nor my daughter. Where we just a shield? Was our marriage his way of "Staying Low" ?
When he left CO he could have just left and not have moved us to AL where he went in 1980 after the "Money Find" was published in the Denver Post. I think he was afraid he had said too much on that "Sentimental Journey" and that I would read more in the papers or see something on TV he could not shield me from. He knew in all of his heart of hearts that I would have turned him in...and I would have - that is just how I am made.
The FBI has NOT proved that Duane L. Weber was not Cooper and that he was not involved. He knew TOO much not to have been Cooper or to have had a knowledge of the crime beyond "just reading about it". Duane Weber was hands on in 1971 and there is NO alibi or any explanation for his knowledge of the area and his making those fateful stops at the Columbia River in 1979. That is how the money got to Tina's bar.
I have gone back to my old accountings - the orginal accounting before my mind was tainted by pictures and what I was told and read. My first wks trying to get the FBI to listen to me. I made tapes of my memories of the trip...I am crying as I remember (note I had NO maps of the area at that time). I describe our stops - and also know that the only thing I knew about Tina's bar was what was in a book of fiction, yet I described the place.
There was the first place he goes down to the water - down a steep incline and then the Large Green tank and then under a tressel and along the river. He makes another stop and then we go to the Red Lion where he threw the paper bag in the water.
I wish I had gone back to that tape yrs and yrs ago - it would have shut another party up right away - but I allowed my memory to be "played" with by others. I had little access to any kind of research and depended on Himmelsbach and another party.
In 1998 the FBI basically dismissed Weber and that is when I started to research any thing I could get my hands on - but, most of it was just futile phone calls to Himmelsbach. I thought he was telling the FBI everything - but, I now realize he did not.
Had the FBI not have lied to me in 2000 with me holding proof of what I was stating, I could have walked away. That LIE by that FBI agent proved to me that they had NOT investigated the past of Weber and REALLY didn't know who he was - just an ex-con they dismissed.
It was ONLY after that phone conversation in 2000 that the FBI actually HAD to re-investigate the background of WEBER, because the article came out in the US News and World Reports.
Or did they just use what the agent found prior to 1998 when they sent me that letter...and I kept calling them about the things I found - but, in 2000 the agent WAS unaware of actual records - criminal and military??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
That will ALWAYS forever leave an impression with me and anyone else who knows the struggle I have made to be heard. March of 2000 the FBI agent had NO knowledg of Duane's Army record and claimed Weber was never in McNeil - and I am on the other end of the phone holding ACTUAL government Documentation that stated otherwise.
Oh, there was a communication later where he admits his error - but, by then it was TOO late. The Deed was Done.
Fed-up with the FBI and the desk agents - the "mouthpieces". They answer the phone and have no real knowledge of the crime in question - such as the mouthpiece Blevins talks to. That man is NOT the agent of record and these desk "agents" only know what is on the screen they read from. If you think they even relate your information to the agent of record - you do not live in the REAL world..most of us are on that ignore list.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites