Fred, any attempt to employ Mark Niesse's 2008 AP column in support of Obama's eligibility is laughable, just as that column's source of Obama's campaign spokeswoman was only interested in misdirecting concerns about absent and faulty birth certificate information into her quoted statement, "The constitutionality of being Hawaiian-born and being a citizen is pretty clear." Now there's a fact-based statement (--NOT!) to could allay everyone's concerns! She must've gotten that directly from a Constitutional professor she knew.
Birth-related statements and documents--from a publisher, for example, (in all likelihood both provided and proofed by Obama, since that's the entirely standard way of such things--have been filled not with one fraudulent feature, but dozens. It would appear the person or persons actually directed to carry out the cut and paste forgery found their task so distasteful that they incorporated features ("breadcrumbs," really) that were needlessly inappropriate. When examiners discovered them, they would have to consider why such an easily discoverable error be there? No forger that wanted to remain hidden and undiscovered would leave such a gross error lying amidst his masterpiece of deception! It could only reasonably mean the forger wished to be discovered! That holds true for the stand-alone proofs of forgery cited several paragraphs below, just as examples.
Trump had been slowly beating the drum of, "Why doesn't he show his birth certificate?" That campaign had been so effective in rallying support to the man's side that many were mentioning his name in the same sentence as the word "president." A billboard campaign of "Where's the Birth Certificate?" was also popping up like mushrooms all over America, funded by a variety of groups and individuals. That people around the country were--within hours of BHO's LFBC presentation on April 27, 2011--beginning to discover what they thought were problems with the White House .gov website-downloadable birth certificate's internal form and data probably threw the White House into an unexpected tizzy. Over the next several days, news reports and Internet websites were teeming with reports of people finding anomalies in Barry Soetoro's newly advanced LFBC. The negative news about the LFBC was bad, and people's voices everywhere were rising in a near-unison chorus of, "This has to be a forgery!" What could be done to get Birth Certificate discussion out of the headlines?
As has become well known since that point in history, the Obama Administration had for a long time been working with reports of Osama bin Laden sightings. We would later learn the administration had several times turned down opportunities to get rid of Obama's apparent dithering on terrorism. Those missed opportunities to take out OBL made the administration seem indecisive, perhaps soft on "Islamic terrorism," that term that they had through coercion almost eradicated from the MSM's vocabulary. "Was it because of Obama's Muslim friends?" many people wondered aloud. Was Osama still skulking around in an Afghan tunnel or cave? Had we not carpet bombed him or at least his dialysis machine into a bazillion bits? Could OBL have taken refuge in Pakistan? After all those opportunities to finally "take him out" through which the administration had quailed, this would become the very moment Obama would choose to appear to grow a spine and mount a mission to kill OBL. In combination with rumors of OBL's being protected by Pakistani Intelligence, there had been sightings of a tall figure taking walks in a walled compound near Abbottabad for almost a year, but throughout that time, zero offensive action was deemed propitious enough or necessary. At this point in time, however, the action would be deemed needed--as were Obama's go-to, abuseable, sworn-to-secrecy, military force, the best SEAL team available, SEAL Team 6.
Just four days after introducing his Fuddy-procured LFBC, which a rising chorus was calling fraudulent, amidst other BHO lies and false documents, Obama relented to play the long-held Osama card. It "coincidentally" and successfully wiped the LFBC critics' barrage off headlines throughout the world's media.
To point with misdirection, as 4Zoltan does that one of the Daubert qualified examiners responded that he would have look at the original document to be sure of his forgery claim is the height of opportunism, for it was of course Obama that prevented such examination of any original, except of course that Savanah Guthrie got to snap a photo and "feel the raised seal" of a copy. BHO wanted the exculpation of having provided a LFBC without allowing any responsible examiner the opportunity to look at the original. BHO must've thought no one should be questioning a written confirmation from the Director of the Hawai'i Department of Health, after all!
The entire paradigm has a parallel that one can find on TheFogbow.com's birth certificate report. There one finds several ostensible examples of news organizations that supposedly commissioned this or that document expert to look into possible LFBC fraud of BHO's certificate. Again and again, the word was that, despite such commissionings, no published report was forthcoming from that and the other news organization. That writer would have his readers believe that the absence of a negative report from such document examiners necessarily means there was no truth or story to any LFBC fraud. There was no "there" there. Nothing to report. But in fact, we know the administration had applied significant pressures to many mainstream news organizations not to discuss certain things about the Obama, his ethnicity or his nativity to name two, lest a scrutinizing news agency be labeled racist, see their licenses reviewed by the FCC or worse. There were veiled comments that news anchors would lose their jobs if reported such stories. Not only that, such news people would be blackballed and unable elsewhere to get jobs in the industry. Simply giving even coverage to something that could be called a "birther" story could put a news outlet on a list they wouldn't want to be on. Even publicly mentioning this list of threats would be sufficient to bring on their punishments. Until recently only Fox News seemed to be a partial hold-out for giving "birtherism" any kind of a fair shake. As many of their viewership (not to mention previous adherents to other MSM outlets) liked the "fair and balanced, we report, you decide" way of reviewing the news. The truth was that Fox News also demurred to report stories along this line for fear of reprisal. Instead of reporting the "birtherism" applied to people who didn't believe BHO had yet provided a legitimate birth, birtherism was purposely twisted to become "Whackos that believe BHO wasn't born in Hawai'i" for which, ostensibly, "There is no proof!" thus they were the ones making conjectures without proof.
There are so many features of forgery in BHO's LFBC, however, that many experts have brought forth. To testify in court, nonetheless, it would only be responsible to be able to say one has looked at the original document. It wouldn't do to propound conclusions only later to have to admit that one had never seen an original of the document in question. However, since BHO has self-interestedly withheld examination, and technically only two copies supposedly exist outside the HDOH, it's entirely right to say, "Barring the extremely remote possibility that the withheld original does not show feature X, Y or Z that is undeniably seen on the copy BHO has provided...", this would have to be deemed a forgery. That's the only remote possibility such document examiners seem to have held in reserve. For 4Zoltan to try to "make hay" with such a tenuous position, which implicitly grasps at straws to suggest the shown copy would have to differ significantly in many points from an unseen original to be meaningful as an argument, is entirely without merit.
This misdirecting garbage from 4Zoltan regarding Onaka's seal, as if we don't know what it looks like or that today could it might contain this emoji and tomorrow another for a different mood he might be in is more childishness as Fantasywriter rightly calls out. Onaka is one serious dude, 4Zoltan. He's not to be toyed with. There's nothing Onaka keeps more safely guarded than his seal. There are multiple stamps to which his assistants have access, but only he applies his seal. We know what it looks like and the dimensions thereof. While the Director's seal is 2-1/4" in diameter, his ia 1-5/8". This is how it appears:
When unbiased, yet knowledgeable, expert observers have seen the evidence in our book, they readily have confirmed--without qualification--the book's conclusions. If anyone wishes to suggest any of those conclusions are out of line, or the result of a feeble, distractible or wayward mind, one should recognize he or she bears a responsibility to be fully informed before blithely attempting to trash one or more people's reputations. Having been around conservatives all my life, I've yet to see the kind of repeated, willfully ignorant and insulting postulations displayed here. It's been the mark of an honest heart that has been willing to admit when mistakes may have been made. That's what we've seen here, but certainly not from butterdezillion's many critics here, unless I may have missed it, which I doubt. We know there are government contractor interests as well as official government interests that have fought tooth and nail against full disclosure regarding this event. The preponderance of the evidence is very much against those critics. We've seen one-high ranking person that nonsensically blocked our path at multiple turns rise to become the #2 person at the agency for which that person (ostensibly) labored, against agency policies, left and right. We know people have coalesced to work against the truth of this event (these events, actually) but the evidence is not with them. Disposably using and abusing Navy SEALs, sworn to secrecy, on loan to the Intelligence Community, would grow to become Team Obama's MO. If such assets, oath-sworn to uphold the Constitution as a higher call than their secrecy, would ever threaten to talk, some may have felt they could be loaded into flying school bus and abused once more as target practice, perhaps portrayed as payback for the claimed OBL kill.
From many reports, Fuddy is a dear, sweet Catholic lady. Such a person under questioning from hard-nosed legal types in a court deposition or Congressional investigation might well have said more than some interested parties would like to see disclosed. Fuddy is the person, who somehow was able to order up a realistic-looking-at-first-blush LFBC where Gov. Abercrombie could only elusively talk about something being "written down" from the State Archives after having promised to deliver a certificate. Utter fail! (Presumably he would normally have started (and ended) his search among the Hawai'i Department of Health (HDOH) records, so why did he have to go to the State Archives, which is under the Department of Accounting and General Services?) Even the "something written down" he was unable to produce for anyone publicly (or privately that has been reported).
But somehow, within three months--to the day--Ms. Fuddy was able to hand off to a Perkins-Coie attorney an official-looking LFBC for the President. Savanah Guthrie was the only person reported to have felt a seal on the document. No public image or photo verifies whatever raised seal she may have felt. Even though there were claimed to be only two copies forwarded by Ms. Fuddy, a seal is not seen on any of the three variants of the document seen by the public. Those individually-different variants are curiously seen in apparently edited versions of the birth certificates' numbers.
The top version is a grayscale copy that shows someone to have colored in the numbers with some sort of black pen. It would appear Obama's big ears are highlighted in the right-most '1' digit. (It would appear to be a left-facing profile view, with the nose being the digit's left-pointing protrusion. There's an eye, mouth, big left ear, and four drips down the trunk of the '1'.) In the middle (green safety paper) variant, while all the other digits were copied via a black-and-white copy process, the right-most '1' digit has been rendered in a separate PDF layer, and was uniquely the result of a grayscale copy. Its base has--apparently through editing touch-ups--become very flat and all deviations but a possible mouth remnant from the top variant of the right-most '1' have curiously disappeared. How can this be for one of the only two copies made, both ostensibly through the exact same supervised-by-Fuddy copy process?
On to the third variant, which comes to us by way of Ms. Guthrie's camera. Therein, the '106' numeric sequence has miraculously lined up their feet, while in the upper two variants, the '1' in their '106' combination is clearly lower than the '06'. Add to that, Ms. Guthrie's copy's initial '6' has vertical discontinuities, symmetrically cutting through it, top-to-bottom. Its second '1' has somehow finally stood up straight, where variant 1 and 2 were clearly tilted to the right. The right-most '1' in Ms. Guthrie's variant has a base level with the '4' to its left, where the first two variants' right-most '1' were both below the '4' to their immediate left.
Two copies of BHO's LFBC and yet we somehow have three clearly unique variants. How do you suppose that could have happened? Are the people involved with this LFBC presentation that have only a nebulous attachment the idea of a pristine, original document, procured and provided by Ms. Fuddy? The long and the short is, people there at the White House must have been messing with the documents right up until the very last second, in an apparent attempt to deliver something that wouldn't be detected as fraudulent by the viewing public. That concept-in-motion somehow overrode "prizing the truth."
To close the example loop from above, the following is one proof of forgery I think is completely isolatable from everything else. It's a simple proof I dedicate to BUCKHEAD, known around these parts as having exposed Dan Rather's fake, ostensible Texas National Guard (TNG) documents concerning George W. Bush, Jr. Dan Rather's perhaps-Kinkos-based, supposedly typewritten documents contained proportional spacing which could not have been a feature of typewriters during W's National Guard years. Fail! Insufficiently experienced forgers! Since the TNG could not have been producing such proportionally-spaced documents, one was forced to look at Dan and his co-conspirators for an answer as to who produced those documents.
The same is true here. 
As no 1961 (or even 1982) typewriter could print with multiple, simultaneous typefaces, the two different 'a' variants and 's' variants from the same, single word, 'Kansas', prove beyond all reasonable doubt that BHO's LFBC was produced after 1982 (OK, more likely in 2011), is therefore by no means a true or accurate representation of a 1961 Hawai'i birth certificate. It is therefore a forgery, generated for one or more fraudulent purposes. Case closed.
As a bonus, the evidences in isolation of multiple types of copying (Black-and-White (B/W) versus grayscale completely obliterates any back-and-forth bickering about whether Adobe Illustrator or other software (or other copy-machine hardware for that matter) could reasonably account for the claimed-unintentional, superfluous generation of multiple (PDF) layers via a single press of a copier's COPY button. No single copy process, even on today's high-end copy machines will copy some areas as grayscale while copying others as B/W. Variant 1's signatures are were all copied as B/W copies, where most of the rest of that document was copied as grayscale. The second variant's certificate number containing both types of copy (B/W for all but the last digit is a dead give-away. That same feature is seen in field 17a. as the first three letters of the word 'None' were copied as grayscale while its final 'e' clearly evidences a B/W copy process. The top variant's serial number is entirely gray-scale, making clear its hand-drawn, colored-in nature.) The document(s) had to have been generated as a (painstaking) piecemeal process to render separate fields or groups of fields manually, yet in computer-mediated fashion, to generate those different types of (grayscale versus B/W) fields. Case Closed. Boom!
All three anomalies (1) certificate number variants/documents, 2) multiple typefaces in a single word, and 3) separate evidences of grayscale versus B/W copying in the same field (let alone the same document) each individually are sufficient to prove the document(s) were forged. Collectively, adherence to any other conclusion would suggest bias if not intellectual dishonesty. Knowing that Ms. Fuddy was the nexus for the procurement of BHO's fraudulent document should be sufficient for anyone to see how important it might be for him and people in his administration to assure Ms. Fuddy would never be deposed in a court or Congressional setting. The coercion and breadcrumbs evidence should tell us there are likely more people, who are aware of this fraud that has propagandized the entire country toward a false presidential election. Submission of false documents in support of a candidate for an election is of course a huge problem that needs to see a proper court resolution! (This applies to the AZ Secretary of State's Verification, too, of course.)
deck logs: answered. FOIA was not answered forthrightly; self-serving, false weasel words appeared to relieve the Navy of responsibility concerning requested information until such time that records might be destroyed er, uh, no longer required to be kept.
Why don't we give books away for free? They cost real money to reproduce and money doesn't grow on trees. Neither author in a state to be able to give everyone that might like to receive one, an expensive book for free. It still is by no means a money making venture.
There was no "screw-up" on the dimensions of the SDV that was shown. You even quoted our use of the word 'approximately', 4Zoltan. In the overlaid picture at left in your reference (granted it wasn't your POSTed picture, just your reference, but why quibble about such a matter? Oh, yeah, so you can rack up another nonsensical, biting critique spiced with condescension) "is a known SDV with about an 8' draft that comes close in manpower requirements and acceptable clearance for the waters off Kalaupapa where our possibly-newer craft was found" is how the book reads. The picture was known to be of an older generation. Two newer SDVs were also shown in the book, but 4Zoltan would rather try to make points about an irrelevant possibility that the actual craft we pictured may already have been destroyed, as if that would preclude that there could even have been an SDV on the La Jolla. Fail! Clear, mens rea misdirection! Yes, we could have told a lot more, if the Navy hadn't claimed that all other records were still confidential, even twenty-six months after the incident. That's right up there in the spirit of open government FOIAs, isn't it?
The Caravan pilot said that the engine stopped shortly after taking off, forcing him to make a water landing. The (claimed, false) stoppage was confirmed by the Fuddy Estate's lawyer's remarks to the press. Those comments appear in HawaiiNewsNow and the Star Advertiser media outlets, respectively. Thus, 4Zoltan's references to a completely separate event where the engine may have continued to making engine noises while delivering insufficient power to maintain altitude is so dissimilar to the Fuddy incident that it is specious, irrelevant and meritless. Is that the really the best can do?
Here's an audio clip of the clearly running engine that was claimed already to have had a catastrophic engine failure, lost all power, and had stopped (from the ABC Good Morning America broadcast):
This ABC clip of the same descent-to-ditching shows an engine RPM reduction that may have come as a result of a power lever input (right after the narrator says, "Plane is about to crash"):
This ABC clip of the same ditching segment shows the engine's RPM initially rising, then falling (The impossibility of each of those shows all the plane's occupants to have been lying):
This ABC clip of the same ditching segment shows an RPM change just (and only) as the aircraft hit the water:
So much for a stopped engine that the pilot claimed to the USCG he tried twice unsuccessfully to restart. One hears and sees no restart activity. Who would need or want to restart a smooth-sounding, normally running engine anyway? It would appear the pilot lied to the USCG Commander of the rescue C-130. How much more evidence does one need that the engine was not stopped and that the entire, claimed need for ditching was a hoax? The book has plenty more evidence, but the audience really shouldn't need more to see and hear what has been here presented. There was no "bang" that hailed a catastrophic failure in that engine as the FAA recorded all passengers to have stated. The engine was running normally, other than that the prop was feathered, which when it hit the water would appear to have been the natural consequence of a failed engine. I would want a smoothly running engine too, were I the pilot, just in case the planned ditching had anything go wrong and I might want a "do-over" just before hitting shallow water.
4Zoltan claims the floating hand was not "a manikin" (sic). And yet you offer no proof to make such a claim, simply claiming a possible alternative. The book accepts that there may be other alternatives, but also notes that the dispositive video frame as distributed by the NTSB shows multiple evidences of likely Photoshop editing activity after I pointed out the problem of possible stowaways on board to the NTSB Investigator in Charge. What a coincidence! The same conversation likely was responsible for the result that the book proves was two more clear instances of Photoshopping in the NTSB final report. Boom! Case closed! Are you part of all this charade, 4Zoltan?
"At least [HG]’s a conservative." I doubt that seriously, Fantasywriter. No conservative I know engages in the kind of rampant ridicule and politics of personal destruction we've seen here from him/her. Trying to slime someone with association to Orly Taitz is just one lesser aspect. The so-oft repeated use of 'idiot' and condescending terms, 'sweetiebuns', for example clearly shows the author's intention of character assassination. I know butterdezillion to be the best of the best of investigative researchers. Very high-powered lawyers have relied on her work after appreciating its thoroughness and insight. Such ridicule is meritless and so out of place, that one can only be inclined to see it as a type of the rest of this huge, government hoax--as feckless, malicious or misinformed inclinations poised overpower the truth based on grounds other than evidence and the merits. Why would this be so urgent for you, HG? Assuming for a moment the rest of my post is true, all Freepers can see the import of what he or she and these others have been doing incessantly. This has been part and parcel of what we've seen throughout our investigative research. Response to butterdezillion's FOIA requests get kicked up to HQ in Washington, we've been told. Top people in these agencies have become involved. Yet wizards here get on their high horses with condescension to deride her character. Do you do that for money, or do you just come by that out of your nature? We know the event as well as pushback to us has been well funded with citizen tax dollars. But just as my byline has said for years, "Truth Will Out!" And yes, HG, there is clear evidence of frogmen in this event, so continue to spout that truth if you like, but don't bother with the pejorization. IT'S ALREADY CONFIRMED! (I've conversed about the event with multiple participants in this event and two of its official investigators and two more not-quite-as-official (but heavyweight) investigators of the event, besides butterdezillion, of course. Have any of you? Were any of you participants in this event? Are any of you employees of participating organizations?) Have you compared your notes about this event with senior FAA investigators? Any former NTSB Investigators-in-Charge without either group finding a single flaw in the evidence or logic? I've done that for this event. No brag, just fact.
In addition to billions of dollars in US Naval hardware on site were divers that brought their transports and equipment with them. The progress of their cutting the engine from the fuselage while the passengers were still nearby in the water was recorded--probably inadvertently--by the videographer's lens.
The NTSB averred the engine was found on the ocean floor, already separated from the fuselage. Its report says the plane had been, "crushed and battered in a manner consistent with being repeatedly rolled over on a hard, uneven surface by wave action." But the evidence makes liars out of the NTSB investigative team as a large number of saw cuts were seen on the engine and firewall.
The divers were insufficiently skilled to keep their transport from becoming unbalanced so as to belie their position. If there had been real enemies around instead of US citizens, they might well have brought deadly fire onto themselves. But, as we've seen elsewhere, perhaps they had an inkling of the domestic enemies that had ordered them once again to propagandize the citizenry to affect one or more future elections. Their answer may--like others before them--may well have been to leave breadcrumbs that would expose their fealty to the US Constitution over such domestic enemies. I salute them. At least some are certainly true heroes. They deserve rewards and I hope they eventually get them --hopefully medals--when the truth does finally come out, even if that be only in heaven.
Back in February of 2014, butterdezillion had on her blog the question, "What Do You See?" She wasn't an idiot/whacko-bird, but was one of several perceptive people looking at the video shared on ABC's broadcasts. She thought it potentially important to enlist citizen investigators where the Ministry of Smoke and Mirrors would not dare to tread. Several people participated in inconclusively asking whether they were looking at divers at the scene. They may not always have had the proper frame in view to confirm their suspicious when they asked what others saw, but I think they (as I was one) smelled something more than fishy in this (at the time) possible hoax.
As it turns out, the images at which most people were looking were for the large part not divers, even though the fuzzy, low-data-rate ABC broadcast video imagery certainly seemed to suggest that to many people. However, these people were ultimately correct, inasmuch as there is clear evidence of such divers in the Puentes video as delivered by the cover-up complicit NTSB. Why would that group leave in dispositive evidence of divers and a hoax? Likely because they didn't fully appreciate what they were look at. It wasn't likely NTSB types were in on the core planning for the event, but rather, it's more likely they simply did what they were told, further on down the line. The presence and the activity in which we see divers engaging within the NTSB video comports entirely with other, independent evidence that comes from independent sources. That cleared several questions up nicely! Thank you, patriots among the NTSB!
One might choose from among the Moloka'i tower controller's representation of 300 yards off the approach end of RWY 5, the measured 234 yards, the triangulated 230 yards or the pilot overhead's varying representations of 300 yards or alternately a 1/2 mile, or one might choose what the commuter airline owner and/or the USCG supplied for this HawaiiNewsNow excerpt, as shown, that the crash site was one mile out from shore. (At left are frames from the lead-in of the USCG event-summarizing video)
It's clear the local county authorities had no desire to do any investigation. They didn't do anything beyond briefly allowing a few of the passengers to give a statement. There were no questions asked--none. If there was the slightest inkling Fuddy could have murdered, they would be on the hook to do a thorough respectable investigation. But nothing of the kind was done. It's pretty clear from Maui County Police statements that they were hopeful the NTSB would take charge of the autopsy, but no luck on that score. The USCG notified the FBI, who knew the claim was that a high state official had died in international waters, but there was no investigation from Comey's FBI. Why do you suppose that would be? If one needed even more confirmation that the government was complicit in hiding the facts of this case, there you have it. The Kalawao County sheriff was nowhere officially recorded as even having been near the airport, though radio communications seemed to indicate he was on the peninsula. Though the NTSB accepted investigation of a crash that involved a claimed death and would eventually indirectly in the next year saddle almost every all P&WC PT6a-114a engine holder with $60,000+ in expenses, the NTSB chose to ignore evidence, mischaracterize evidence, lie about evidence, come to provably false conclusions about the evidence, cover-up evidence and falsify the evidence. Several among that list were criminal. Below, that single NTSB image in the upper left was falsified in two ways: 1) two fuzz up the image of the back of the engine such that the public would not see the many saw cuts on the engine, and 2) to repaint the blade tip paint pattern to match the underwater blade tip paint from the engine that actually went down with the plane
(as opposed to the engine that had been sabotaged and was shown on the salvor's barge). 
Oh, and by the way, the claim that the crash site was a mile off shore (4-5 images above), with the picture shown above, notice that what's in that picture is not a Cessna Grand Caravan, but a USCG Dolphin helicopter that had just picked what was claimed to be "Fuddy." Although a previous rescuer checked her and left her in the water as obviously dead (clearly claimed to have been "according to protocol," that is) forty minutes earlier, shortly after "she" was hauled into the second (shown) helicopter, the crew radioed that she was in critical condition. So, instead of showing an aerial view of the crash site an claimed mile from shore, it actually showed an already-dead-for-forty-minutes "Fuddy" who was sufficiently revived by the rescue crew to be able to call her condition "critical". Instead of the crash site and Caravan, it seems to show miracle-working USCG rescuers! Yay! Go, Coasties!
The NTSB's report said Fuddy was wearing an infant life vest, on which "[o]ne of the two CO2 cartridges installed in the vest was punctured and empty, and the other cartridge was full, consistent with a partially inflated life vest." This NTSB report statement (claimed to be on behalf of the USCG--whose report contained no such statement) is entirely contrary to the evidence.
Unless someone stole Fuddy's adult life jacket that she was seen by the videographer's lens to be wearing outside the plane (sans purse), she did not wear an infant life jacket. Compare the shape of a known infant life jacket that the former Green Beret was wearing to what Ms. Fuddy, the videographer and the passenger in the lower right were wearing. Furthermore, the picture in the upper left shows both upper and lower chambers of Ms. Fuddy's adult life jacket to have been fully inflated, thus both CO2 cartridges had been expended. The NTSB couldn't box their way out of this apparent conundrum, but we already know and have the proof that shows the NTSGB team to have been corrupted. If all of a sudden Ms. Fuddy were to be hoisted dead in a partially-inflated infant life jacket with one of its CO2 cartridges still intact after she had earlier been seen to be wearing an adult life jacket, any astute investigator should start thinking of possible murder. However, no such investigation was ever begun.
What actually became of Fuddy? Well, despite a funeral, falsified evidence, claims to the contrary, copious lies upon lies (buy and read the book if you truly want yet more answers) lawsuits settled for millions of dollars, Fuddy didn't die that afternoon before she was whisked away by those frogmen HG loves to cartoonify and hold in plain sight. We, too, can hold them in plain sight. In the following picture, we see in the upper panel, Ms. Fuddy, her hand being held by her assistant. The videographer turns away for 37 seconds of video time, only to return to a differently lit scene (think dropped frames). In the 5'2", 220-pound Ms. Fuddy's previous place, still surrounded by the all the plane's crew and passengers, who sport no amazement, sadness or anger, is a 6'+ tall, spindly, red-wigged diver, who's probably not much more than 160-pounds in weight (note body differences, life vest differences, and shoe differences), just for example. Ms. Fuddy was watched over so incredibly well that a person might be tempted to think she was family of BHO himself.
There are multiple evidences that an underwater communications network was established for the event. We see an antenna, communications devices, repeater nodes, transmitters and receivers.
One of the passengers forewent a plane-based life jacket for most of the aftermath, wearing instead a combination life jacket/communications antenna that likely communicated with a plane or drone circling in reserved airspace above.
There was an electronics package affixed to Ms. Fuddy's butt/thigh (No, it was not a purse as Fred Nerks suggested. She was seen underwater prior to this period of time, but then had no purse; this black box is found in no other place throughout the 2-1/2 hour event than when she was holding hands with her assistant away from the plane. Furthermore, a purse doesn't stay affixed to the butt of a curvy person while she's horizontally thrashing her legs continuously.) 
and another impossible-to-exist-at-an-accident electronics package likely brought a bi-directional a/v back to where the planners were sequestered. The videographer received instructions and updates through a radio hidden on his person and through a single iPod earbud.
A former Green Beret (who lied about swimming a mile or more back to shore in about 90 minutes, supposedly) had his own transceiver. That communications gear was supplied by planners, divers and people behind the scenes.
As we have proof of these things, and confirming info from insiders to involved organizations, don't bother trying to ridicule, heckle or argue we're wrong (in any large way). Questions from honest truth-seekers are welcome, but the quickest way to come up to speed on all these details is to buy the 415-page book that also has hundreds of full-color pictures! So, just like German fairytales end, "Und wenn Sie nicht gestorben sind, dann leben Sie noch!" Which is to say, "if Fuddy hasn't died in the meantime, she's still alive" sipping Mai Thais with her feet in the sand watching the sunsets, knowing that her family has been well looked-after with what ultimately were US taxpayer dollars. As Rush often says, "Don't doubt me!"
The truth has already become public and is in the possession of many of the right hands, already. That truth will persist, irrespective of the book's authors presence to defend the uncovered evidence that speaks for itself. Which is not to say any of us plan to leave. I trust several of you have noticed who and how there have been attempts to silence us. We've already experienced the threats and endured enacted retribution. Still, we've dedicated ourselves to tell you, our decades-long compatriots (for the larger part, at least) and the rest of world the story. Watch for it to hit the news, hopefully before long. Help it along if you can. Help to put the criminals where they belong! Our children would like to get through college despite all the time we've diverted to spend on this project, so "buy the book" to make sure one has as complete picture as possible of what happened in this incident.
SAD, however, was also known to live in Seattle, where there has long been a Subud House, a mere nine-minute walk from where Dunham lived. Fuddy may have been a friend of SAD and conceivably could have been an acquaintance of SAD's mother, "Toot".