mrshutter45 21 #31926 April 14, 2012 Speaking of variables and accuracy! (see attachment)"It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobKnoss 0 #31927 April 15, 2012 Quote well, again it seems your memory works amazingly well with everything except things about Bob, the details you give about the building and then turn around and say things such as "it was before I was hypnotized" when asked about Bob dates? you were only there once and were able to describe it very well, you would of not noticed much while leaving? after the hypnotizing. Speaking of variables and accuracy! (see attachment) Yes, this is deadly accurate. Every word of it. One does not have to use the same words every time to describe what happened. This is all accurate and truthful. They are not different stories, they are writings of a different day on the same subject. You can put them all together and say the same exact thing. TOG is still paranoid about prison. I'm over it. Why not remember. I was brought out of the state and told to forget what was discussed. I was under a post hypnotic suggestion at that point, under the control of McCoy. After I called Nick to inform him of what was going on with the planning of a hijack, I got violently ill, bad vertigo and throwing up. Manic depression. They were going to GET me. Never called Nick again after that. Not until recently. Anytime Mac would call me I would automatically go into a trance and come out of it after I hung up and not be aware of the conversation on a conscious level. I remember everything today. The more I converse about it the more things come back, sometimes I can find myself rattling off stuff and I am not even aware I'm speaking. Especially at night. Thank God my wife is deaf. THAT is scary! You may think I have posted a lot of story here, but it is a very small amount of a very large story that spans almost 45 years. That is a very, very, long time to pay for telling my draft board I'd move to Canada. I really wish I had. And I HATE the cold! Try Raoul in Canada with a patch over one eye. That was Mac's favorite character. He visited us in Dassel, MN. with that get-up. You could Google Raoul, if it is spelled right. Mac had a dark complexion like Duane and Jim Jones, and Adam Beach. A friend of Duane's claimed to get directions from this one eyed Canadian. It was discussed in his MOCK TRIAL on television. THAT's a lot more interesting than checking my draft experiences, and it is only another tiny blurp in a much bigger tale of fact. You have no idea what all you're not told. This internet can be a dangerous thing without Government controls.................... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31928 April 15, 2012 since there were no hijackings from 61 until Feb, 1968, how was it that you explained that planes were getting hijacked on a regular basis? you were given a 4 year suspended sentence right off the bat, but then claim you though you would go to prison for what you witnessed? why didn't you tell the Leavenworth story? you have two different claims! what did you witness? thought you were there to keep records for McCoy, the whole purpose of being there? that's what you agreed too, and then you say, "I thought I would go to prison for what I witnessed"? You never witnessed anything before you were given the suspended sentence!"It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31929 April 15, 2012 when I get your classification, what will I see? I-A-O I-O I-W IV-W or the really bad one I-H"It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobKnoss 0 #31930 April 15, 2012 Quote since there were no hijackings from 61 until Feb, 1968, how was it that you explained that planes were getting hijacked on a regular basis? The purpose of what the pilots were planning had to do primarily with PILOT SAFETY. The Government grew it into a hijacking convention solution. The rash of hijackings started about then and grew. you were given a 4 year suspended sentence right off the bat, but then claim you though you would go to prison for what you witnessed? why didn't you tell the Leavenworth story? you have two different claims! There was a piece of paper with a promise of 20 years for me for talking as I am talking right now. I did not commit any crime associated with Norjak, as I immediately reported everything I knew to the FBI as soon as I realized what had happened. My rights were violated. My claim is against the Government. The story I tell is a single story which is extremely complex in reality and very simple on the face. what did you witness? thought you were there to keep records for McCoy, the whole purpose of being there? that's what you agreed too, and then you say, "I thought I would go to prison for what I witnessed"? I witnesses the entire operation named "Project Norjak" from Sgt. Richard Floyd McCoy, Jr's perspective as a government participant under Commander John Anderson, and assigned to Nickolas O'Hara. I was to be McCoy's witness for his performance of duty, should they decide to use that defense. After the read they got on the judge, they decided NOT to go that way. "Going to prision" was a common discussion. There was a statute of limitations on hijacking but none on kidnapping, so it was extremely important to execute the operation to avoid a kidnapping charge. 20 years was a fair risk to avoid, life was not. I was included in the threat in order to keep me quite. Now that I know that I committed no crime, I am unafraid to speak the truth, since the FBI has heard it, and do nothing, just like with Jo Weber. We have both explained why we think that is. You never witnessed anything before you were given the suspended sentence! Yes, I did. I had long conversations with Mac about his talks with TOG. Mac told me he was going to be FAMOUS, then corrected it to infamous, and he would explain later. He took me over to meet Karen, and talked about his family business in home building materials, his life growing up, his love for bar fights, his dad's fights, our relationship with Mike Barton and his parents, lots of personal stuff. None of what I experienced before the hypnosis was illegal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31931 April 15, 2012 What does Gray have to do with this cover up?"It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Robert99 50 #31932 April 15, 2012 Quote when I get your classification, what will I see? I-A-O I-O I-W IV-W or the really bad one I-H You forgot IV-F. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31933 April 15, 2012 Wanted on charges of hijacking a jet to Havana, a former black revolutionary was arrested in Albany yesterday after almost two decades as a fugitive, Federal authorities announced. Agents from the F.B.I., who have been looking sporadically for the suspect, 39-year-old Linda Joyce Grinage, since the hijacking in 1969, arrested her without incident in the home she shared with her husband, Mylo Eytina. ''She was quite surprised,'' said a spokesman for the F.B.I.'s Albany office, Michael W. O'Brien. The case had never been closed, but F.B.I. agents in New York City, where the investigation was based, said they had lost track of Ms. Grinage - known as Linda Joyce Austin at the time of the hijacking - years ago. ''If we had known where she was we would have effected the arrest earlier,'' said a spokesman for the bureau's New York office, Joseph A. Valiquette. F.B.I. By SARAH LYALL Published: July 26, 1988 In 1976 discussion arose over impending expiration of the statute of limitations on the hijacking. Most published legal analysis agreed that it would make little difference, as interpretation of the statute varies considerably from case to case and court to court, and a prosecutor could argue that Cooper had forfeited immunity on any of several valid technical grounds.[67] The question was rendered moot in November when a Portland grand jury returned an indictment against "John Doe, aka Dan Cooper" for air piracy and violation of the Hobbs Act.[68] In effect the indictment formally initiated prosecution of the hijacker that can be continued, should he be apprehended, at any time in the future. what were you saying about the Statue Of Limitations on Hijacking?"It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobKnoss 0 #31934 April 15, 2012 Quote What does Gray have to do with this cover up? What you talkin' 'bout, Willis? Geoffrey Gray wrote a book covering all of the major Cooper suspects. He tried to pursue information which some people did not appreciate. I told him beforehand that would happen. I think Gray has a very good perspective on the case, but is limited in what he can print. He was once involved with some research which he discovered was less than trustworthy and started his own project. I do not speak for this man. I hold him in the highest regard and he can speak for himself far better than I. He is top drawer in my book. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31935 April 15, 2012 Quote Quote when I get your classification, what will I see? I-A-O I-O I-W IV-W or the really bad one I-H You forgot IV-F. Yes, and while we are at it, maybe IV-C might also fit him "It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobKnoss 0 #31936 April 15, 2012 Quote Wanted on charges of hijacking a jet to Havana, a former black revolutionary was arrested in Albany yesterday after almost two decades as a fugitive, Federal authorities announced. Agents from the F.B.I., who have been looking sporadically for the suspect, 39-year-old Linda Joyce Grinage, since the hijacking in 1969, arrested her without incident in the home she shared with her husband, Mylo Eytina. ''She was quite surprised,'' said a spokesman for the F.B.I.'s Albany office, Michael W. O'Brien. The case had never been closed, but F.B.I. agents in New York City, where the investigation was based, said they had lost track of Ms. Grinage - known as Linda Joyce Austin at the time of the hijacking - years ago. ''If we had known where she was we would have effected the arrest earlier,'' said a spokesman for the bureau's New York office, Joseph A. Valiquette. F.B.I. By SARAH LYALL Published: July 26, 1988 In 1976 discussion arose over impending expiration of the statute of limitations on the hijacking. Most published legal analysis agreed that it would make little difference, as interpretation of the statute varies considerably from case to case and court to court, and a prosecutor could argue that Cooper had forfeited immunity on any of several valid technical grounds.[67] The question was rendered moot in November when a Portland grand jury returned an indictment against "John Doe, aka Dan Cooper" for air piracy and violation of the Hobbs Act.[68] In effect the indictment formally initiated prosecution of the hijacker that can be continued, should he be apprehended, at any time in the future. what were you saying about the Statue Of Limitations on Hijacking? Yada, yada, yada!! In 1968 the facts were different than 1976, weren't they?? We know all that. I'm telling you what happened during the planning, not a lifetime later. That has no bearing on the discussion in 1968, but it affects the paranoya today. That, plus Duane handing off the note too early, but they didn't add kidnapping, YET. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobKnoss 0 #31937 April 15, 2012 Quote Quote Quote when I get your classification, what will I see? I-A-O I-O I-W IV-W or the really bad one I-H You forgot IV-F. Yes, and while we are at it, maybe IV-C might also fit him Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31938 April 15, 2012 Yada, yada, yada!! In 1968 the facts were different than 1976, weren't they?? We know all that. I'm telling you what happened during the planning, not a lifetime later. That has no bearing on the discussion in 1968, but it affects the paranoya today. That, plus Duane handing off the note too early, but they didn't add kidnapping, YET. the hijacking didn't occur until 71, talk about "yada, yada? Bob, there are way to many problems with a plan spanning from 68 to 71, lets get real here! don't you think it's time to get National News from this? instead of pudding around on a thread? TOG is scared of his 20 year gag order? it's been 44 years now, maybe they will cut your Leavenworth time in half, since you went double in your time frame coming forward they didn't add kidnapping yet? this was a Government operation, why would they add anything? charge a dead guy with kidnapping while the other dead guy remains alive? Mac "It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobKnoss 0 #31939 April 15, 2012 Quote Yada, yada, yada!! In 1968 the facts were different than 1976, weren't they?? We know all that. I'm telling you what happened during the planning, not a lifetime later. That has no bearing on the discussion in 1968, but it affects the paranoya today. That, plus Duane handing off the note too early, but they didn't add kidnapping, YET. the hijacking didn't occur until 71, talk about "yada, yada? Bob, there are way to many problems with a plan spanning from 68 to 71, lets get real here! The Pilot's Union was not calling the shots anymore. The controlling factor was the Montreal Convention on International Air Piracy and their hesitation and Congress' hesitation to endorse Nixon's baggage inspection, etc. The delay from 1969 (when the plan was ready) to 1971 was controlled in Washington DC. That's real. don't you think it's time to get National News from this? instead of pudding around on a thread? TOG is scared of his 20 year gag order? it's been 44 years now, maybe they will cut your Leavenworth time in half, since you went double in your time frame coming forward. I committed no crime, they perpetrated a crime on me. TOG, Nick, Duane and Mac are the "National Heroes" and public support might outweigh any charges particularly in view of massive FBI/FAA involvement. I have NO interest AT ALL in national news exposure, only the truth. this was a Government operation, why would they add anything? charge a dead guy with kidnapping while the other dead guy remains alive? Mac Because Jo created a problem which they could not control. Her story was total jibberish and she was a loose cannon with Lord knows what next. Cooper would have to be someone other than Weber. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31940 April 15, 2012 "I have NO interest AT ALL in national news exposure, only the truth" Of course you wouldn't, you would be questioned far more better than anyone on here plus, they would find lots of goodies that I'm sure you would burst a milk can over! again, you are going against logic, that would be your best move, going public on this, rather than them finding out what you are disclosing on here. A truthful move indeed! "It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31941 April 15, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Quote when I get your classification, what will I see? I-A-O I-O I-W IV-W or the really bad one I-H are you going to stand by your statement of I-A-O? FOR THE RECORD!"It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobKnoss 0 #31942 April 15, 2012 Quote "I have NO interest AT ALL in national news exposure, only the truth" Of course you wouldn't, you would be questioned far more better than anyone on here plus, they would find lots of goodies that I'm sure you would burst a milk can over! again, you are going against logic, that would be your best move, going public on this, rather than them finding out what you are disclosing on here. A truthful move indeed! They know what I am doing on here. They told me to go ahead and keep doing it. I went to the FBI on 9 separate occasions and they said they didn't have enough proof, there was nothing they could do. The evidence they had and their witnesses were contaminated. Ref: O'Hara's interview with Bruce. Ralph's interview with the Co-pilot. There are way too many pilots involved after the fact. It would be a mockery to pursue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobKnoss 0 #31943 April 15, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote when I get your classification, what will I see? I-A-O I-O I-W IV-W or the really bad one I-H are you going to stand by your statement of I-A-O? FOR THE RECORD! 1A-0 was the last one I remember. O for Overage. No, I don't pay any attention to that stuff. Wait for the paperwork. Whatever that says is fine with me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31944 April 15, 2012 OK, Bob; 1-A-O - Conscientious Objector - conscientiously opposed to training and military service requiring the use of arms - fulfills his service obligation in a noncombatant position within the military. Note: A registrant making a claim for Conscientious Objection is required to appear before his local board to explain his beliefs. The local board will decide whether to grant or deny a CO classification based on the evidence a registrant has presented. A man may appeal a Local Board's decision to a Selective Service District Appeal Board. If the Appeal Board also denies his claim, but the vote is not unanimous, he may further appeal the decision to the National Appeal Board. when did you go in front of the board? I like the twist....1....A-O"It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobKnoss 0 #31945 April 15, 2012 Quote OK, Bob; 1-A-O - Conscientious Objector - conscientiously opposed to training and military service requiring the use of arms - fulfills his service obligation in a noncombatant position within the military. Note: A registrant making a claim for Conscientious Objection is required to appear before his local board to explain his beliefs. The local board will decide whether to grant or deny a CO classification based on the evidence a registrant has presented. A man may appeal a Local Board's decision to a Selective Service District Appeal Board. If the Appeal Board also denies his claim, but the vote is not unanimous, he may further appeal the decision to the National Appeal Board. when did you go in front of the board? On or before my 15th birthday. I really do not think they gave me conscientious objector status!!! NO WAY!! I was 2S for a while, 1Y for a while, 2A for a while, do they have a 3A? WAIT FOR THE PAPERWORK. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31946 April 15, 2012 you seem to be having some technical difficulty, perhaps this will help 2a 3a, I see we are back on Knoss issues and memory failure! maybe even WTF! "It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobKnoss 0 #31947 April 15, 2012 Quote you seem to be having some technical difficulty, perhaps this will help 2a 3a, I see we are back on Knoss issues and memory failure! Yup. 10 minute failure by coersion, but I'm back after the pepper dowsing. You almost had me going there. Best get some sack time before you convince me that Blevins is really gone and I'm just seeing spots. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31948 April 15, 2012 Ok Bob, get some rest and research which one you think you have (classification wise) the one everyone else knows! nite nite agent man! "It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyjack71 0 #31949 April 15, 2012 Where did YOU find that map or did you make it up. There are 5 towers within the area that might be possible locations of the tower that was NOT there in 1979 - the site in the woods Duane took me to. Since this map does NOT give me the locations and if it really exists then I need more specifics on these towers. When they went up and when they came down and the exact location of the tower. Towers from Orhard and north of there along the flight path or within in walking distance of the flight path and where Cooper might have landed. 1.All I know about the site is this 2.It must have been there in 1971. 3.It was not there in 1979. 4.It had been logged and Duane pointed out the low place in the tree lines saying there used to be a logging road all the way to the rails. 5. The light on the tower could be seen from a long ways - he pointed toward the location of the logging road and the tree line that was lower. 6. There used to be a shed to our right and to the right of the tower - the logging trail was slightly - lower than the other trees remaining. 7. The site was circular and there where no trees on in so the tower must not have been gone for too long --- in other words we were in a clearing in the middle of the woods. 8. The lower tree line was slightly Left of the clearing but not at a complete left angle. In other words if the road we came in on was a clock and we came in at 6 o'clock the logging road would have been at approx 11 on the clock. 9. The shed would have been at 3 O'clock and right beside the tower. Duane told me he buried something BEHIND the shed one time. 10. Because of time and space and sequence in my memory I know it was along the line between Orchard and a Dam North of there which was well lit.Copyright 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2013, 2014, 2015 by Jo Weber Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrshutter45 21 #31950 April 15, 2012 The website is here Jo http://www.firelookout.com/wasw.html you can click on them for info, if you need any help just ask. you can click on the tower in question and most give a picture along with dates, tell me the ones and I can help you "It is surprising how aggressive people get, once they latch onto their suspect and say, 'Hey, he's our guy.' No matter what you tell them, they refuse to believe you" Agent Carr FBI Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
