New Forum & News Updates

[georger]

Update on my Seatac ATC tapes. In the recent fbi file drop the feds state that they only received transcripts of the tapes and that the tapes remained in the custody of its it’s owner. Well you can call me custody…. the tapes are being put on CD as we speak. They run about 90 min each side, stay tuned cooperville! I linked the 302 below.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Nicky, you may have in hand the goose that laid the golden egg.  Let's discuss this further.

The FAA is mandated to keep records of accidents and reportable "incidents" involving aircraft and I don't believe there is a cut-off time involved for retaining those records.  The FBI page you linked clearly indicates that those records were being retained in late December 1971 more than a month after the hijacking and about a month after written copies of the radio transcripts were provided to the FBI.

The hijacked airliner was on the ground at SEATAC for slightly more than two hours.  Radio transcripts for the time on the ground at SEATAC are available here on Shutter's site.  Highly redacted ATC radio transcripts for the flight from SEATAC to the point where the airliner was handed off to the Oakland ATC Center are also on Shutter's site.

Take a look at the radio transcripts for the Oakland Center, which are also on this site, if you want to know what the Seattle Center's radio transcripts should look like.

Several years ago, I attempted to get an unredacted copy of the Seattle Center's radio transcripts for the flight south.  I addressed my original FOIA request to the FAA Regional Office in the Seattle area where the records would initially be retained.  They replied by registered mail with a full page of contact information for the FBI's FOIA office in the Washington, DC area.  I sent a FOIA request to the FBI office and essentially got a big-time bureaucratic runaround.

I got my US Congresswoman and her staff involved and they worked through the FBI Congressional Liasion Office to get my FOIA requests back on track.  The end result of three FOIA requests to the FBI and FAA was two pages of about one short paragraph each.  Those pages are also posted here on Shutter's site.

Nicky, if your recording has the Seattle Center's complete unredacted radio transcripts for the flight south from SEATAC to a point about 50 miles south of the Battleground VORTAC, then we really need to talk further.   

Here we go again -

Redacted by whom, when, and for what reason?  Who discovered these socalled redactions? You or WSHM since it was WSHM's work that started this whole saga over redactions? Just state the whole history of this issue for a change! Who discovered 'redactions' ? You, WSHM, or both ......... and when?

WSHM states "The examination of the George Harrison ARINC printouts was made on site at WSHM on Jan. ... with a corresponding timestamp on 2013.5.15.5 [page 93 of transcript; page 5 of PDF ... there were found to be eight 8 areas of missing, or redacted, teletype print copy, ..."


eight ( areas of missing, or redacted, teletype print copy,

Moreover I am not sure Shutter's Vault does contain all of the relevant documents you say it does!

In a previous post by you you said: "The Seattle ATC radio transcripts have 19 redactions indicated.  The ARINC transcripts are also incomplete according to a study of them done by Fred Poynter and his staff at the WSHM.  This has been discussed at length previously on this site."

WSHM  says: there were found to be eight 8 areas of missing, or redacted, teletype print copy,  ...  You say: The Seattle ATC radio transcripts have 19 redactions indicated.  The ARINC transcripts are also incomplete according to a study of them done by Fred Poynter and his staff at the WSHM.  This has been discussed at length previously on this site."   Who is correct? You or WSHM ?

***  Exactly WHEN was the "Seattle ATC radio transcripts" released to the public and by whom?  2000?  2013?  Were they released by Ckret to Sluggo who in turn put them uyp on his website to share with the public via Dropzone? What year did that happen? Or were they first released by the Seattle FBI to the Seattle Post Intelligencer newspaper who put them up on their website (where I got them) ... in what year?

What is the exact date of the REDACTIONS you are claiming the FBI made. When did it happen? 1971? 2000? 2013? Neither you or WSHM have nailed down the date redactions were made ?

What I am asking for now if the mere minimum of what you should be supplying given the nature of your contentions. WSHM mentions eight ( areas of missing, or redacted, teletype print copy,  ...  You say: The Seattle ATC radio transcripts have 19 redactions.

Frankly, I dont expect you will answer any of these questions (now that time is running out on the life of this forum) any more than you answered these questions years ago when last put to you. Where are you going to go when this forum closes with your claims?

Here we go again indeed!  This is just more disinformation from Georger!

Georger doesn't understand the difference between the radio transcripts from the Seattle ATC Center and the teletype transcripts that were loaned to the WSHM for their analysis.  These are two separate documents.

I stand by my previous posts and analysis on this subject and I'm sure that the WSHM personnel stand by their posts and analysis.

So explain it to the world, your Majesty!

[nickyb233]

Bruce:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The redactions in the transcript are explicitly discussed in the latest FBI release, according to the 302s the redactions were unrelated to flight 305.

What transcript are you talking about or referring to ?  Redactions in what Transcript?

Give url to the latest FBI release you are talking about .

Or is this a private conversation btwn you and Bruce Smith on this forum ?

Could people stop talking in codes?   Otherwise all of this is pointless!

Chill G… I’m sure Marty will be happy to provide you with what you’re looking for. Try asking nicely and not accuse him of working in secrecy. It’s not his fault you can’t access the vault and read the dang files yourself!

[georger]

Bruce:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The redactions in the transcript are explicitly discussed in the latest FBI release, according to the 302s the redactions were unrelated to flight 305.

What transcript are you talking about or referring to ?  Redactions in what Transcript?

Give url to the latest FBI release you are talking about .

Or is this a private conversation btwn you and Bruce Smith on this forum ?

Could people stop talking in codes?   Otherwise all of this is pointless!

Chill G… I’m sure Marty will be happy to provide you with what you’re looking for. Try asking nicely and not accuse him of working in secrecy. It’s not his fault you can’t access the vault and read the dang files yourself!

OK but you could just give a url and save the speech? Why not just give a url? I have the url. It is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I dont see any of the files Andrade is talking about. He doesnt give a url to the files he is talking about.

Do you seriously think I am alone in this Andrade Nickyb233 mystery?

I will go over to Andrade's site - maybe he has explained it there.

(laughter) 
Intermission searching)



So I went to Andy's site: he says: 

Wow, I know it’s been awhile…
The latest (#52) FOIA document file the FBI gives insight into where the case was just after DNA was sequenced off the tie, but before Larry Carr took the case public and brought in outside investigators to help.

Then he launches in Egg Harbor, suspect, file(s) . . .


Part 52 the latest?    ................................ hmm Part 67 is the latest!  Now Im really confused.

Im even being NICE!   

One conclusion is inescapable.   Nobody has identified a url where FBI 302s talk about or explain REDACTIONS. It is surely not in Part 67 which is the LATEST release.

Im juts glad somebody knows what he or she;s talking about IN SECRET! 

 

[nickyb233]

Bruce:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The redactions in the transcript are explicitly discussed in the latest FBI release, according to the 302s the redactions were unrelated to flight 305.

What transcript are you talking about or referring to ?  Redactions in what Transcript?

Give url to the latest FBI release you are talking about .

Or is this a private conversation btwn you and Bruce Smith on this forum ?

Could people stop talking in codes?   Otherwise all of this is pointless!

Chill G… I’m sure Marty will be happy to provide you with what you’re looking for. Try asking nicely and not accuse him of working in secrecy. It’s not his fault you can’t access the vault and read the dang files yourself!

OK but you could just give a url and save the speech? Why not just give a url? I have the url. It is You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I dont see any of the files Andrade is talking about. He doesnt give a url to the files he is talking about.

Do you seriously think I am alone in this Andrade Nickyb233 mystery?

I will go over to Andrade's site - maybe he has explained it there.

(laughter) 
Intermission searching)



So I went to Andy's site: he says: 

Wow, I know it’s been awhile…
The latest (#52) FOIA document file the FBI gives insight into where the case was just after DNA was sequenced off the tie, but before Larry Carr took the case public and brought in outside investigators to help.

Then he launches in Egg Harbor, suspect, file(s) . . .


Part 52 the latest?    ................................ hmm Part 67 is the latest!  Now Im really confused.

Im even being NICE!   

One conclusion is inescapable.   Nobody has identified a url where FBI 302s talk about or explain REDACTIONS. It is surely not in Part 67 which is the LATEST release.

Im juts glad somebody knows what he or she;s talking about IN SECRET! 

 

It surely is G… the only mystery here is how somebody with your education can’t seem to read!? Here is the the 302 Marty is referring to from the latest release. See the link below and quit your bellURLaching!

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

[andrade1812]

I still don't have a computer, so all I can say is FBI release #67 and the page is marked DB Cooper -28475

This transcript was called:

Ground Radio Teletype Log

[nickyb233]

I still don't have a computer, so all I can say is FBI release #67 and the page is marked DB Cooper -28475

This transcript was called:

Ground Radio Teletype Log

I took a screen shot and linked it for him in my last post. Thanks Marty!

[andrade1812]

Georger, I will email a screen grab from the file. I can't figure out how to upload from my phone.

[andrade1812]

Looks like Nick got it for me. (I haven't updated my blog in years, sorry.)

[Robert99]

I still don't have a computer, so all I can say is FBI release #67 and the page is marked DB Cooper -28475

This transcript was called:

Ground Radio Teletype Log

I took a screen shot and linked it for him in my last post.  Thanks Marty!

Nicky, thanks for that link.  As I understand the first sentence in the last paragraph of #28475, the FBI removed all teletype posts related to the hijacking from the NWA teletype roll.  And that the remainder of the cut-up roll was then returned to NWA and eventually was loaned to WSHM personnel for some period of time.

If anyone is in current contact with Fred Poynter's digital group at WSHM, please inquire if they found any posts related to NWA 305.  They did find enough discrepancies to realize that the teletype roll had been redacted and prepared an analysis stating that.

If the FBI did remove everything related to NWA 305 from the teletype roll, then the few teletype posts related to the hijacking that have been released were released by the FBI, and apparently, some of them were released to Sluggo.  They would be in the 17 page (I think it was) report that some agent wrote immediately following the hijacking.

[Bruce A. Smith]

G, I'm confused, too. So the "code" is fooling us both.

I'll check out the link shortly, but I'm having lots of Internet and pc issues....

[nickyb233]

I still don't have a computer, so all I can say is FBI release #67 and the page is marked DB Cooper -28475

This transcript was called:

Ground Radio Teletype Log

I took a screen shot and linked it for him in my last post.  Thanks Marty!

Nicky, thanks for that link.  As I understand the first sentence in the last paragraph of #28475, the FBI removed all teletype posts related to the hijacking from the NWA teletype roll.  And that the remainder of the cut-up roll was then returned to NWA and eventually was loaned to WSHM personnel for some period of time.

If anyone is in current contact with Fred Poynter's digital group at WSHM, please inquire if they found any posts related to NWA 305.  They did find enough discrepancies to realize that the teletype roll had been redacted and prepared an analysis stating that.

If the FBI did remove everything related to NWA 305 from the teletype roll, then the few teletype posts related to the hijacking that have been released were released by the FBI, and apparently, some of them were released to Sluggo.  They would be in the 17 page (I think it was) report that some agent wrote immediately following the hijacking.

No problem just be sure to tell G what the code word is!

[georger]

Georger, I will email a screen grab from the file. I can't figure out how to upload from my phone.

OK at least we are on common ground and communikating .... 

What Part do comments about redactions come from?     

Part 67 is a clerical nightmare. 67 pdfs!

[andrade1812]

p193 of:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

[georger]

p193 of:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Here is pg 193. I dont see the word redactions on this page. Or any comment about redactions.

This isnt worth pursuing further. Bye.

[Robert99]

p193 of:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Here is pg 193. I dont see the word redactions on this page. Or any comment about redactions.

This isnt worth pursuing further. Bye.

Georger, did you happen to see the phrase "edited to exclude" in that document?