I spend a lot of my time on a particular internet forum that has the (currently) most active DB Cooper thread anywhere. It is a skydiver forum that has been kind enough to provide the bandwidth for everyone, skydivers and non-skydivers (they call non-skydivers “whuffos”) a cyber-soapbox to stand on and spout on and on about their pet NORJAK theories (present company included).

The supporting website has a rule that all DB Cooper discussion MUST take place on that particular forum thread and can NEVER take place on other threads. Because Cooper used a parachute to escape out of Flight 305, skydiving has become immutably linked to skydiving and skydivers. My guess is that they got tired of other threads constantly being hijacked (no pun intended) by Cooper theorist and now have all those discussions quarantined to a single thread. Whatever their motives, I (for one) appreciate the bandwidth and appreciate that they do not exclude whuffos.

But alas… it IS an internet forum and is fraught with all the weaknesses of those cyber-fighting cages! On that thread, lives the full spectrum of internet citizens. There are trolls, lurkers, smart-asses, butt-heads, intellectuals, comedians, pontificators, pretenders, and dumb-heads. However, an unbelievably large amount of serious information has been transferred via that thread in the last 2 years.

In a recent discussion some of the posters were complaining that the FBI seems to “play favorites” when it comes to allowing private citizens access to the FBI files on NORJAK. It seems that one group of “citizen sleuths” were invited into the Seattle Division office of the FBI and allowed to spend several hours looking at evidence and FBI “work product” and even allowed to obtain samples for analysis. Their efforts were featured on the National Geographic Television program “The Skyjacker That Got Away” which was first aired July 2009. Several other persons, authors and journalist doing research were denied the same level of access. If fact, on author was not able to obtain some specific information under the Freedom of Information Act (FIOA) was forced to sue the FBI for access. The conclusion that the posters came to was: if you are making a television program the FBI will open their doors to you, but otherwise don’t even ask.

The unwillingness to disclose information about NORJAK to “just anyone” is not limited to the FBI. There are some serious researchers and investigators out there that are very cautious and selective about with whom they share information. This caution is a necessary offshoot of having knowledge of “the good stuff.” Authors, journalist, and scientific researchers all operate under the same constraint… the possibility of “premature release.” Authors and journalist efforts are considerably compromised if the blockbuster information in their book or article is leaked. Scientist almost never (and should never) release the results of their research before it has been accepted for publication in a prominent (refereed) journal. [NOTE: This cardinal rule of the scientific method seems to be violated more and more often in modern times, driven by the “publish or perish” mentality inherent with obtaining funding for research.] This is the reason that the “citizen sleuths” have not been heard from (other that the Nat Geo film) yet. Their research is slow and painstaking, and no information will be release until they are ready to publish.

So why do the FBI, authors, researchers, film producers, and journalist share the “latest and greatest” info with some and not others? Why did the FBI allow access to the “citizen sleuths” and not to the author of a book. In my opinion, it has little to do with the activity in which they were involved and everything to do with their publically visible reputation.

When the decision to share guarded information is made is always a “liability vs. benefit” equation. “How much can giving out this information to this individual (or group) HURT me,” as compared to; “How much can giving out this information to this individual (or group) HELP me.” The “citizen sleuths,” based on their individual and collective reputations must have seemed like a “good bet” to the FBI in a risk vs. benefit sense.

When this topic was being discussed on the Cooper thread, I made a statement that I had made several times previously and one person said that they were tired of hearing it. I said; “those that know… aren’t talking and those that are talking… don’t know.” The responses to this statement made it clear to me that my point was not getting through. The typical assumption was that I meant that if someone had really good information, they kept it to themselves, and people who talked about the information they had, were just blathering about things that may or may not be important, new, or factual.

My meaning is something quite different. What I mean is; “those who cannot and do not kept confidential information confidential” are a high risk and low benefit to anyone possessing such information. Hence, they can be a considerable liability be able to obtain confidential important, new, or factual information. Why would the FBI choose to share with someone who has made 100 posts accusing the FBI of incompetence or has made a statement that they believe that no information should be confidential?

So, if you want the “good stuff,” behave yourself (in public and online), prove you are trustworthy, and show that sharing information with you will be “value-added” for the owner. But remember this… once you get the info… you can’t talk about it!

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: “those that know… aren’t talking and those that are talking… don’t know.”

Are you tired of hearing it?