I'm not sure what maps he requested. it seems that would give a good idea as to his intentions. I don't think they were aviation maps since he didn't care other than to fly south. the big question is whether they are talking about the oscillation, or the pressure bump...nobody mentions a word about the bump....how about the green paper bag?
Added" Hi Smokin, glad to see ya back...forgive my manners, I'm doing several things here at one time, and it really isn't working out to well
Green bag...Marshall Fields
Further confirmation that they had at least one potential opportunity to leave the plane and the hijacker...but that could be Monday morning quarterbacking.
"Uncirculated" US bills and "small" bills was both mentioned -- I think that what we've been told about his lack of specificity in money demands might have been misleading.....
I also thought it was interesting that she said he talked like he knew the plane could take off with door open and stairs down, but yet he didn't know how to operate them....that smacks of someone that might have seen the open doors in use, but not from the stance of one familiar enough to know how to operate.
Yes! Small Green Paper Bag.
What happened to the "small brown paper bag" ? Funny! I may be losing my mind here but didn't Joe say something once about a "small green paper bag" ? Oh God I hope not!
I also caught the issue of his technical knowledge of the plane, rear door and stairs, and I wonder if Mucklow would be a good judge of who has technical knowledge of flying, the 727 in particular, etc? There is something about this that doesn't resonate with me. It comes down whether Mucklow would be a good judge of technical knowledge or not because if you note she says this was her general impression but she can;t cite specifics much beyond "he knew where the oxygen bottles were" which turns out to be "
he said he knew where the oxygen bottles were but there is nothing saying "he showed Mucklow where the oxygen bottles were" ? It's all a little vague, to me.
One point I do want to make about these "transcriptions": they are very redundant and full of legalese and FBI speak at times. How many times *at this time* do you need to identify who it is that's being identified, who you have already identified 40 times, in a kind of double-speak redundancy. That superfluous FBI speak and it frankly works to confuse the reader at time, for my taste! Oh well. *At this time I will post this *at this time, at this time! That's an example of what I am talking about ...