smokin99

I'm pretty sure pictures of the day showed more than just a "few more trees". I will try to look up a picture of the search area from published articles if I have time later tonight. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Not so...the original 68 pages of this thread started in November 2006 is locked but still accessible and so far I haven't had any problems opening attachments for same. I would hope this thread can survive but if it doesn't, it wouldn't break my heart as long as they still allowed access to it. Face it .. this forum has been disintegrating into a free for all for the past several years and now has pretty much no value except for what can be found by searching the "archives". You say views are potential revenue, well I say if everyone left here except Jo and Blevins processing the same ole, the views will eventually dry up. Just like they have on other long running db cooper forums in the past when only one or two were left re-hashing and bitching. There have been many valuable researchers and/or interested parties that just don't show up here anymore because of the constant bickering and constant repetition of the same old talking points that are then argued down again and again. Even the bickering - you guys bring up the same offenses time and time again - always saying I wouldn't bring it up , but............ I mean, really, get over the pdfs with the dirty words. You are the only one that keeps that in play. And, Robert, you are the one that originally started dissing Galen Cook on this forum almost immediately after you registered when he wasn't on here to defend himself. Just saying

I didn't take that as defending actions or statements. Moral stands on issues? Jeez....looks to me like Mark was merely pointing out that you did, in fact, post on this thread about suing him for libel. At which time, I responded and included a link about the generally uselessness of someone filing suit claiming defamation for a dead guy, the irony of someone suing for defamation while they are writing books making the claim that the same dead guy was a terrorist, and, as 377 pointed out, you have no legal standing to sue for KC. But that's okay - you've had quite a few retractions so it is probably easy to get distracted. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

No need to waffle. Just say you don't think Christiansen was the hijacker. You have company there. And this isn't the first time I've done interviews or investigated some issue. Your statement 'even if Kenny was Cooper, I don't think you can prove it,' is very true. That is not my job, since I am not the FBI. Only they can say who the hijacker was, should they ever discover the answer. And you don't know EVERYTHING we uncovered. It's just too bad there are some folks out there who make it impossible to be more open and frank, sharing files and information in a Happy-Happy World. Unfortunately, that is the reality of things in Cooperland. Some people can be trusted. Others have agendas. Some even engage in outright hatred over the whole case. Georger is a good example. He's been going on like that for months now LOL.

Creative LICENSE? Are you kidding? Did you NOT read his book? He was granted an appointment with the case agent for crying out loud. That's how he got access to the files. He wasn't allowed to copy them, but he did view at least some of them and made notes. They probably did not give him unlimited time to do this, either. He thanks a lot of people, and used a LOT of sources. He names all sources on all key points and why they are listed. You guys should try reading his Acknowledgements section in the back of the book, and the Notes section that precedes it! It's a non-fiction book, and that means when there is an Index, a Notes section, and Acknowledgements...that those things are a KEY part of the book! Gray lists every single source he contacted and why in Notes, and pretty much the same thing in Acknowledgements. Skyjack is extremely well-researched. Sounds like some folks only looked at the pictures.

Creative LICENSE? Are you kidding? Did you NOT read his book? He was granted an appointment with the case agent for crying out loud. That's how he got access to the files. He wasn't allowed to copy them, but he did view at least some of them and made notes. They probably did not give him unlimited time to do this, either. He thanks a lot of people, and used a LOT of sources. He names all sources on all key points and why they are listed. You guys should try reading his Acknowledgements section in the back of the book, and the Notes section that precedes it! It's a non-fiction book, and that means when there is an Index, a Notes section, and Acknowledgements...that those things are a KEY part of the book! Gray lists every single source he contacted and why in Notes, and pretty much the same thing in Acknowledgements. Skyjack is extremely well-researched. Sounds like some folks only looked at the pictures.

I swear I don't understand where some of you get this weird idea I can prove Kenny was the hijacker. I can't, not yet. ... Maybe you misunderstood me at some point. I don't have a weird idea that you can prove Kenny was Cooper. Quite the opposite, I don't think you can. Even if Kenny was Cooper I don't think you can prove it, and, while I acknowledge the time and energy that you put into your interviews, I just don't think that anything that you have uncovered will lead the FBI to prove that Kenny was Cooper. It's all just too circumstantial and speculative to prove at this late date and I think some Cooper writers get so focused on a specific outcome that they get tunnel vision. I think it's an occupational hazard. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Oh - I just remembered one thing I liked about Tosaw's book. He had all of the serial numbers listed in the back in alphanumeric order. That was pretty nice. A lot easier then trying to read them off of the FBI's site. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

I agree with some of what you say though I think "you people" paints with a pretty broad brush. I, for one, thought Gray wasted a tremendous opportunity. He had access to the actual files and I think he squandered that trying to be clever. I was left not knowing what was an actual quote from a witness or fact from the file and what was creative license. But then, I still don't understand what it is that gives some access to the files but not others -- but I think I've mentioned before that life ain't fair. As far as the books in general....I didn't end any thinking "this is the one", but I think we discuss them because, aside from the transcripts, news articles, and the items that came from the museum, that is all we have. I've read almost all of them and they all have factual errors and yes, a couple are kind of out there. With that said, I think Larry Carr, SA who had total access got at least one thing wrong on this forum. The FBI could probably paper the walls with FOIA requests but they ain't giving up what I think is probably a non-winnable case -- so, maybe we just have to take our fun where we can get it.

Umm..I doubt it and I probably wouldn't count on that as a sales strategy.

Umm..I doubt it and I probably wouldn't count on that as a sales strategy.

I'm neither for or against the McCoy is Cooper theory, and I'm no expert, but based on articles such as the one linked below from the day, the McCoy lawsuit doesn't seem to be quite as clear cut as some think. According to published accounts: The authors agreed to settle out of court, but they said they stood by the book and never retracted anything. According to their attorney, they settled because that was the cheaper way out. And, fair or not, that happens a lot. As frustrating as it is sometimes to someone who wants to fight the lawsuit, an attorney tends to focus more on economics than emotion. The book itself did not receive an injunction and this article asserts that the lawsuit actually helped sales of the book, such as they were. The movie rights were restricted but only to the extent that the movie would claim 4 allegations that McCoy protested: That she threatened to throw her infant daughter under a passing truck, that she dated an FBI agent while married to Richard McCoy, that she drove a getaway car used by Richard McCoy in the Provo hijacking and that she conspired with the FBI to have her husband killed. In fact, she had to modify her original lawsuit and withdrew the request for temporary restraint against the book because she finally admitted that she did have a part in the hijacking. [Judge] "Wilkinson said the revelation that McCoy participated in "a capital federal offense" was more damaging to her than any injury she may sustain by the continued publication of the book." http://www.deseretnews.com/article/211317/MCCOYS-WIDOW-ADMITS-HELPING-IN-72-HIJACKING.html?pg=all but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

If the red tape allegedly used on the "bomb" sticks was seen and the FBI recorded it in a witness interview, but did not publicize it, then you may have a point Robert. I'd expect wrapped red tape would look phony and defeat the purpose of the fake bomb. You'd see the overlapped lines of tape. 377 lol.... I do believe we have once again come full circle. I remember on this very forum when being red alone was enough to get it labeled phony. Let's see...we're not going to use road flares cause they have the caps and stuff and and even stewardesses might recognize that a red flare is not dynamite because it looks well, more like a flare, So..... let's wrap these coin rolls in red tape to make them look like dynamite, except everyone knows that dynamite is not red. How do I know that? Cause I read it right here on this forum -- that's why we know the bomb was probably fake anyway, because it was red. Okay I'm being a little facetious but this is just one more example of how logic can get all twisted around when folks start speculating on the life and time of DB Cooper. My bet is more that she saw something and her imagination has taken over from there, and this is going to be one more balloon that goes bust in the KC = DB Cooper saga, but only time will tell.........or not. Just dropping by.... hope everyone is doing well... but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

I had to print them up and send them to Mullenberg. (co-founder of Wordpress) The reason was two-fold. First, I brought up the subject at DZ long ago and warned users here that their names were possibly being cloned and really bad comments being made under their names there. No one bothered to check, and no one protested that their names were being used. Also...some folks around here kept linking to the article in DZ posts. So it was obvious they wanted attention to the comments. So I spoke to Regina Winkles, the author. She said, 'I will delete them'. A month later she hadn't and the number had grown to more than 400 comments. So I sent off the material to Mullenberg and he took care of it. I never made the material public and I never will. At least three of the people making those posts were matched up with their current DZ identities. The others I don't know. But two of them present themselves as legit investigators of the case here at DZ right now, which only proves that some people present one face publicly, and another where they play Joe Lowlife. And even then, I never named them or called them out personally. Matt Mullenberg was so pissed off about the whole thing that he told Regina that she could either delete the really bad ones or he would delete all her articles and her account to boot. It was a lot of trouble for everybody, not some 'straw man' crud. The CNN writer? I just felt sorry for him. He didn't deserve that. As far as I'm concerned, the situation is resolved. No because you still don't understand the straw man "crud". To bring up all of that bullshit in response to a post about something completely different because you can't or won't debate the issue on its merits is known a straw man argument. Example of a straw man argument: Question to Blevins: Do you have documentation that proves A gave a loan to B? Response from Blevins: I interviewed B 10 times and she always said the same thing. The only reason you people don't believe A did everything that I say he did is because you just don't like me and anything to do with Kenny threatens you, and besides you people can't be trusted and I tell everyone I come in contact, especially the high sheriff at Auburn days that you are all a bunch of Cooper nuts and I have the filthy pdf files to prove it - filthy files that no one even cared enough to go check out except for all those people that did. That proves there are Cooper nuts. So see if doesn't matter what I say about A and B cause you are all a bunch of scary, evil cooper nuts. Face it.....We've heard the filthy posts review for a million years. If it's resolved then quit bringing it up everytime you respond to a challenging post. Sheesh. I've got a great sense of humor. I just didn't open your picture. The last time I did I got a bunch of evil spam malware. Must of been from a cooper nut. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Straw man? Accusatory? Excuse me for living. You were not the one who had to print up an absolutely filthy-ass document full of filthy-ass comments signed with the same names as users here on this thread! Are you kidding me or what? Wake UP! Cooper nuts exist, and there is definitely hatred and jealousy in Cooperland. I had to print all that crap up on paper and mail it to Wordpress' co-founder in San Francisco. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. This isn't some pie-in-the-sky straw man stuff. This is reality. And Matt Mullenberg didn't think it was funny, either. The other guy...a Christian CNN writer who happened to do what he thought was a harmless Cooper article...was forced to delete the whole article to get rid of the comments. That REALLY pissed me off, because I think writers shouldn't be kicked around like that for no other reason than hatred and jealousy among Cooper researchers. I took DB Cooper off my Google News list after that. I didn't want to see any more of those articles or have to deal with them. So now I no longer trust some of you. Accept that and move on. I did not create this situation. You did. (Not YOU personally, Smokin. I mean others, and they know who they are.) To satisfy the whiners, I will no longer refer to my co-writer by anything but 'co-writer' and the person coming to see the slideshow as 'guy coming to the slideshow who wants to meet me'. blevins.... google straw man fallacy. That is what you do with your responses. When a person can't or won't debate something on its merits they counter punch with something that has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand but serves to obscure the original issue. And when I say accusations, yes - When you add all this crap to your responses, about filthy files, trust, stalking, nuts, children haters, book haters, yada, yada, it certainly appears that you are making veiled accusations towards people who challenge your posts on the merits. Frankly, trust goes two ways. As for the filthy posts. You did not have to print anything. You could have told the guy that someone was playing around with the comments on his web site impersonating people on this site with internet trash and let him delete them. You are absolutely the only person on Planet Earth who is obsessed with your filthy pdf files - and the only one that keeps bringing them up. But for you, they would have been in the internet dung heap of history long ago. Why you felt the need to download and save them, and keep bringing them up is beyond the scope of this internet forum. I don't know, perhaps a room with a couch. Treat internet trash with the disdain that it deserves and ignore it. And if you don't trust anyone then don't let em in your sandbox. Other than that....As you posted not too long ago....lighten up. You bring a whole lot of crap on yourself. Just saying. And hey, referring to your co-writer and visitor as who they are is just as good as trying to present them as someone they aren't. Maybe better, come to think of it. Truth, justice and the American way and all that jazz. Sounds like a good plan to me. lol...just saw your edits....we should quit editing after a while and create a new post. But trust me ...I don't feel threatened by anything that you have to say on the subject of KC. I just don't believe you've presented enough to make your case, and I don't think he was they type of guy that would do what Cooper did. Maybe someday you will prove me wrong...but until then.....just not seeing it. lol....and I doubt water boarding Geestman is gonna change that outcome. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

I just have a feeling that they are going to be ....wait for it...I know I've got it here somewhere.......yep you guessed it.....public relations files!! Translation....newspaper articles or press releases. I hope I'm wrong. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

You're right about that. And nice suggestion, but we're way ahead of you, Robert. Something much better. Boots on the ground as it were.... Right Vick? but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

An ex-employee of an airline does not speak for the airline or represent the official view of the airline unless they had an official capacity with the airline (as in an executive, decision making capacity) - such as it was. Do you really not get this or are you just being deliberately obtuse? As Mark Bennett pointed out, a pilot or other employee that worked for the airline doesn't count. And Robert....you keep changing your story. Another credibility red flag. Read/watch the co-pilots address to NW Historical Society. He brought up KC in his presentation so it's not like former NW employees are not aware that some are trying to make one of their own the hijacker. A few people who view and post here regularly (I mean the ones I actually trust) already have all the details. And if you haven't figured out who the person is already, then I don't know what to say. If you look at what I actually provided, it should have been easy to figure out. I said it wasn't a member of the Flight 305 crew, or anyone who investigated the case originally, but that this person represents much of what NWA is now. Correct? Now think about this real hard. WHO meets that criteria? Who might already have my phone number and feel familiar enough to call me, even though we've never met...someone who certainly saw me on the Decoded show...someone strongly associated with the airline, or what is left of the airline...which is memories and a group of very nice people... (I'm not sure why you keep bringing up NWA as an 'airline'. It no longer exists. Other things associated with NWA still exist, but the airline does not.) The person has to do with the 'other things'. *It's coming to you now* See you in August, anyone who decides to show. If not, you can catch the results on YouTube. EDIT: I just received another email from the NWA person. I have told them what is going on here, issued another Cooperland Miranda Warning, and then asked if they minded if I gave their name, etc. When they get back to me on this, I will have an update. Not that some of you deserve this courtesy, of course... But I don't suppose you'll stop whining about it until I do. You should know also that any poison-penning will be a complete waste of time. They have been well-informed on what Cooperland is capable of doing, and sometimes it isn't a pretty thing. They are prepared for this eventuality. (*laughs*) I had to apologize for even having to give the warnings, but they understood why. Hell, three-quarters of the posts around this village are nothing more than people slamming each other. Cooper is a sideshow, not the main subject by any means, and that's too bad because it should be the other way around. Jealousy and hatred run rampant. Blevins...all of the negativity that you espouse as coming from other people has been evident in every response that you have made to me. If I took you seriously I might be offended by all of the veiled accusations, but I just consider the source. Once again, I did not need the clues because that is not what I was getting at. I was talking about credibility and veracity. Truth in advertising if you will. Go back to the drawing board. You failed. As for NWA - you are the one that originally brought up NWA as an airline (such as it is I believe was your reference). Do I really need to quote your post AGAIN???. I used the term NWA as a literary device - allusion or amplification - google both, then take your pick. But as per usual, you ignore the true context of the post and proceed to straw man with your accusatory (lol...poison-penning, are you for real?) and misleading characterizations of the post-- Assuming as usual that you will wear everyone out and have the last word. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

An ex-employee of an airline does not speak for the airline or represent the official view of the airline unless they had an official capacity with the airline (as in an executive, decision making capacity) - such as it was. Do you really not get this or are you just being deliberately obtuse? As Mark Bennett pointed out, a pilot or other employee that worked for the airline doesn't count. And Robert....you keep changing your story. Another credibility red flag. Read/watch the co-pilots address to NW Historical Society. He brought up KC in his presentation so it's not like former NW employees are not aware that some are trying to make one of their own the hijacker. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Oh, there was a connection all right. But since I couldn't tell you the name of the NWA person, it's easy to dismiss it. I probably should not have said anything at all. Look...once I am able to announce who the person is, you'll understand everything. I just can't do it right now. If you don't believe there are hateful folks out there in Cooperland who would actually try to sabotage anything I'm trying to do for their own hateful ends...then you haven't been paying attention. Unfortunately, this kind of thing is rather common in Cooperland. That is not my fault, but the fault of the two-faced people who do those things. For crying out loud...some of them post here on a regular basis. Now I don't feel like I can be completely open with people anymore on this thread. Think about it. Don't you think I would love to say who the NWA person is, and how they relate to the airline? Or who my co-writer is and direct you to her Facebook or something? I would love nothing better. But I can't. ***'Trust is a hard thing to come by these days...' Kurt Russell - The Thing I erred when I said none and I edited my post to say that you inferred a GREATER connection than there actually was. Because you inferred an official connection. It's okay. Robert... you still don't get it. I understand. Class dismissed. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Robert...never mind...if you don't get what the posts were about I don't have the energy to school you. You made a post where you inferred a greater connection than there actually was - you got called on it - you tried to change the subject instead of just owning up to it. It just goes to credibility, for pete's sake. It's not about your presentation, you, your life, your assistant, your books, or a festival. Have fun, live a long life, be successful and more power to you. It's just not about you... It's about your claims and the credibility and veracity of same. That's it. That's all. And no....as to TIna M.... no...I didn't leave out that part....I clearly said that I realized that you are talking about another person who coincidentally shares the name Tina M. Once again you mis-characterized my post. Pay attention to your quote about the truth. And as the song says ...that's all she wrote. Carry on.... but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

Well that should get the ButtHurt Brigade yapping for a few months... I think a couple of them need to run to the store and stock up on tissues.. stat. Maybe so.... I'll check my supply..

The filthy posts thing is like a straw man fallacy. Blevins brings it up because he can't just admit that he was wrong. Along with the hating kids and crazy people and the veiled accusations in his response. He further does the straw man by then turning the whole deal around to being about MarkB dying to know this person's name and being pissed off when he wouldn't tell it - when it is clear to everyone with a brain that was not the point of Mark's post at all. It all gets rather tiresome. Here's what RobertMBlevins just does not seem to get when he responded to my post..... I didn't ask for the person's name or to be present at some future unveiling of same. I did not say anything or inquire about his work, his personal life, his books, his obsession with his own philanthropy, his obsession with filthy posts, or any plans that he may or may not have for the future. I posted nothing that should have spawned the response that he gave. RobertMBlevins is like the kid that is not sorry he did wrong but real damn sorry he got caught -- and then blames the cops cause they were profiling people driving drunk the wrong way on a one-way street. And we all know that profiling is wrong. Classic straw-man argument. Quite simply it's just more noise. I don't have a pet suspect and I would have no problem if it turned out to be ol whatshisname. When RobertMBlevins has solved the case, I'll be the first to congratulate him. But he hasn't -- and short of finding a body with a fistful of twenties clutched in its bony fingers, he isn't going to. The anecdotes are just never going to be enough. He should trust me on this. As to RobertMBlevin's response……. He inferred that a spokesperson for the entity formerly known as NWA was going to come out and say that KC was the guy. I did not edit or alter, or misconstrue the post - other than underlining the relevant portions to try and help Mr. Blevins see what folks reading his posts see. Shortly thereafter, RobertMBlevins tried to backpedal the post. So….I quoted the entire post to point out that Blevins did say what he said he didn't say…. Obviously I was not responding to later posts where he tried to backpedal. From that came his response....go figure. I won't even go into the later Tina M. references in his post about his presentation - Yeah-- I know it is a coincidence and he is talking about someone else, but using it in the context that she is going to be at the function with Blevins -- without explaining to the unsuspecting that it is a different Tina M -- is, frankly, pushing the honesty in advertising bar - but hey, whatever - he can play his little games. Quite simply, no matter how he tries to skew it.. at least for me, it's about the case, not about RobertMBlevins. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

I am not going to requote your lengthy post of more obfuscation. Robert, you do not have to explain what you posted because I quoted exactly what you posted. You then proceed to equate me with Atilla the Hun, bring out your filthy post rant. and say I'm baiting. Bullshit- I'm calling you on your claims - Just like others call out Jo when she claims to have talked with Whoever. No more no less. Frankly I couldn't care less about who called you or what you do for a living or how many books you gather - so stop trying to make my posts to you personal. I'm just keeping the playing field level. you've made a lot of claims that I and others have shown by documentation to be obfuscation. This is one more. No one asks you to post here so stop yer whining. And I mean that in the nicest possible way. but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill

lol....Your post to Mark Bennett ...Blah, Blah, blah as you like to say.... was long, and a nice try, but sorry - I'm calling bullshit. You definitely inferred that the airline (as it exists today) has contacted you. And if you were Jo, other folks on here would be calling you on this. Obfuscation Obfuscation (or beclouding) is the hiding of intended meaning in communication, making communication confusing, willfully ambiguous, and harder to interpret. . The word comes from Latin obfuscatio, from obfuscāre (“to darken”), from ob (“over”) + fuscāre (“to make dark”), from fuscus (“dark”) and is closely related (first cousin once removed) to lying. ......Or maybe I'm just lying about the whole thing. It could be that. You never know. Lol...I do get a kick out of this forum....it never ends.... but....A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.....Winston Churchill