Falsified NTSB Investigation Frames Pratt & Whitney Canada

Feugen Publishing, Inc. ^ | December 2, 2017 | Hugo Feugen & Nellie Ristvedt

[rx]

These are the partial findings of an investigation into the claimed catastrophic engine failure that was said to have occurred within a couple minutes of take-off of a commuter airline Cessna Grand Caravan that carried a pilot and eight paying passengers off Moloka'i, Hawai'is Kalaupapa Peninsula on Wednesday, December 11th, 2013. The multi-media report's findings are generally limited to the NTSB's crash investigation. Found were several instances of fraudulent and likely criminal activity by NTSB employees or others participating closely with the NTSB investigation.

The NTSB is the US Transportation System's investigative agency, uniquely chartered to be insulated from outside influences. Rightly so, as influences that could skew investigative results could otherwise have far-ranging, inappropriate effects both domestically and internationally.

The results of NTSB investigations affect the activities and profitability of many multi-billion-dollar and smaller (for these purposes, aviation-related) corporations. FAA determinations and Airworthiness Directives related to this crash event cost thousands of dollars from each (US and ICAO) owner of the aircraft involved (and some other users of the same engine) in this crash, to the FAA-estimated tune of $60,000+ each. Shareholders of the Grand Caravan's Type Certificate's corporate manufacturers (engine: Pratt & Whitney Canada (P&WC); airframe: Cessna Aircraft Corporation and parent company, Textron Aviation) were implicitly made to suffer via degraded reputation of the the Cessna Grand Caravan product, if not in other ways as well.

Were outside influences that penetrated the NTSB's independence primarily responsible for the misbehavior evidenced inside this NTSB investigation? Or does the evidence show that false investigative activity took place entirely from within the NTSB by self-interested personnel?

If the instigation of misbehavior came from outside the NTSB, does uncovered evidence suggest the source--or at least characteristics that could help identify the source--of such external influence(s)? Given the downside potential of career-ending professional evaluation for complicity, criminal charges and possible prison time, what could nonetheless have enticed one or more NTSB employees to come to purposely false conclusions regarding one of the NTSB's larger, multi-man-year investigations?

Strikingly, clear evidence suggests not only did one or more NTSB employees write multiple false conclusions into the NTSB report for this incident, but such employee(s) may be responsible for the proven evidence falsification that has had the effect of framing engine manufacturer P&WC as culpable for this ditching, related hardships, injuries and a claimed, passenger death. Prior to any results of this partial finding report being published, P&WC saw it within its interest to settle two lawsuits that had been filed in Hawaii by the ostensible fatality's family and the Deputy Director of the Hawaii Department of Health. The plaintiffs' attorney for those cases declared to the media that he was pleased with the settlements.

Some of the answers as to why the NTSB would allow its investigation to become tainted lie outside this multimedia partial report, while additional evidence and information has been brought to light by the full investigative report in recently published book form, called "The Fuddy Hoax," by Hugo Feugen and Nellie Ristvedt. (An electronic form is also available.)

[rx]

In the larger context, the false catastrophic engine failure and staged crash was a coordinated, militarized, election-related deception-and-propaganda event intended to insulate the Obama administration from impeachment and removal, and bolster the likelihood of the Left (with its closer alignment to the Deep State's Middle East interests) remaining in power beyond the 2016 election. The claimed fatality of the Hawaii Department of Health Director was a hoax. The NTSB's corrupt investigation was a cover-up intended to distract the citizenry from government criminality if not TREASON!

[rx]

PDF version of the PPT (slide + notes)

[ex91B10]

I worked for GEAE for fourteen years. I was never afraid to fly until I worked there.

[PAR35]

Who did the ‘investigation’ of the NTSB? The OIG? DoJ? or the bloggers you are quoting.

In other words, is this real or BS? Because one can’t tell from your posts.

[rx]

Someone from the outside might note that GE is and has long been P&WC's strongest competitor. One might also note that GE is a domestic corporation and P&WC is Canadian.

Oh, and who was at least one of Obama's heads of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness? Jeff somebody... Jeff, Jeff. Hmmm... Who was GE CEO throughout this period, until 2017? Oh, yeah, Immelt!

And no, I'm not trying to say any of these facts are related to one another in any way!

[rx]

The authors of the book did the investigation, of which these results are partial.

Obama's DOT OIG stated, in relevant part, "[W]e only have oversight of DOT-related events so anything related to DHS, US Navy, NTSB, Hawaii State officials or offices is outside our scope."

This is not BS, as a thorough review of the materials will show. The results have been quite favorably mentioned by several Senior FAA Investigators and a retired NTSB Investigator in Charge.

[rx]

For clarification, the authors’ results are not of an investigation of the NTSB, as your post might seem to suggest took place.

The authors’ investigation was of the Grand Caravan crash off Moloka’i 12/11/13, which the NTSB also investigated.

[PAR35]

I didn’t suggest that the investigation was of the NTSB.

YOUR except clearly shows that the agency was targeted, and makes accusations of criminal misconduct:

“The multi-media report’s findings are generally limited to the NTSB’s crash investigation. Found were several instances of fraudulent and likely criminal activity by NTSB employees”

[CivilWarBrewing]

Paging Butterdezillion! I remember how she believed she saw a frogman in the water and caught MUCH condemnation from FReepers. I can't say I disagree with her though..

Also, remember the man who videoed most of the flight, camera pointed at the front of the aircraft the whole time? WHOOOO DOESSSS TTTTTHHHHAAAAATTTTT! He KNEW something was fishy about the whole thing.

Fuddy was murdered AFTER the 'crash'. The entire lot of sent to die but whoopsie the aircraft made a soft belly landing and it was off to PLAN B FOR FUDDY.

[ex91B10]

I left in before JW stepped down. Immelt was the only failure of JW’s reign @ GE.

[rx]

Clear evidence of false conclusions and mutliple evidentiary instances of falsification of the evidence were found within within what the NTSB presented.

The presentation, as I see it, is not of the authors' accusations, but of the logical exposition of the conclusions the NTSB has made on the basis of facts that show to the contrary of their conclusions. Such would not reasonably be considered accusations of the authors, but of the evidence.

Your characterizations of "target[ing]" and implied inappropriate personal responsibility merely for pointing out the NTSB's false conclusions and falsified evidence (contrary to presented, real evidence) as if such author activity should be inherently constrained or considered tainted simply by investigators' involvement should only be considered on the basis of proof or at least evidence, both of which I note you haven't bothered to provide.

Your pejorative use of the terms "BS" and "bloggers," as if such use should sweep away facts in evidence, is not reasonable, but nonetheless characteristic of your statements here.

[rx]

I suggest no passenger or pilot placed and extended that hardware on the starboard wing, as seen from below water, under the starboard wing.

There has been confirmation that the green, pictured troop transport--likely in use by a contractor (i.e., less than fully adept with its operation)--was apparently allowed to become unbalanced so as to allow its momentary appearance above water.

The personage that appears between the Deputy Director (left) in three successive images from the lower left and Ms Fuddy (right) was "not on the manifest." It may have been "diver gear" as opposed to "a diver," but either possibility would likely give sufficient impetus to skew an NTSB investigation, as would all three of these frames. Such may well give incentive to certain empowered trolls that are not entirely interested in the truth sufficient reason to engage in derisive FR attacks on Butterdezillion. Hopefully, the evidence will suggest to the unbiased where the truth lies.

[50mm]

Such may well give incentive to certain empowered trolls that are not entirely interested in the truth sufficient reason to engage in derisive FR attacks on Butterdezillion.

You mean like Jim Robinson?

JimRob calls Butter a nutcase conspiracist

By the way, did you get permission from Jim to advertise Butter's "book?"

[rx]

I did not have Jim Robinson in mind, no.

[50mm]

I didn’t think so. Maybe you should carefully review Jim’s comments in that thread. They’re among the most punitive and at the same time entertaining comments Jim has ever made. I bookmarked it and go there to get some chuckles when I’m feeling out of sorts.

[rx]

Whatever the good Jim's comments are, I'm confident any shortcomings noted in other places or at other times haven't manifested themselves in the book, which I understand was vetted by several very competent professionals. Thus, I doubt the book or this partial presentation contains any of that of which you seem fearful, or perhaps that's "by which you would be entertained."

For myself, I'm always open to a collegial discussion on the merits of an interesting case and much less so on the personalities that might be finding the fleeting derision of the moment. If someone seems to cross an inappropriate line, assuming the subject matter is sufficiently interesting or important, I would generally try to see whether that person can be reined in to be productive to the conversation. If not, I would move on.

I'm convinced that history teaches us that false flag operations have been de rigeur for many governments in the last couple of hundred years, such that we always need to be vigilant, question authorities, and scrutinize their actions closely if we wish to maintain our republican government Of, By, and For the People. We need to make sure it represents our best ideals, as we've been graciously endowed by our Creator and as first handed down in our country's founding documents and strengthened through history's tests.

[rx]

BTW, I believe there is a strong case to be made that Ms. Fuddy did not die, as from murder or any other cause, though an autopsy report that took a month before it was signed, attributed Cause of Death to "acute cardiac arrhythmia due to hyperventilation."

The presentation makes the case that none of the three, 1) arrhythmia, 2) stress (mentioned by Fuddy's Deputy) and 3) hyperventilation were even possible to be viewed at autopsy.

At the close of the autopsy's (claimed) viewing of the body, the Medical Examiner said that pending toxicology reports, the tentative Cause of the Death was drowning.

Drowning as a Cause of Death is not some last possibility to be crossed off some list. For a Medical Examiner (ME) to make such a statement means there was positive evidence of drowning, typically evidence of the involuntary inspiration of ocean water (in this case) accompanied by specific histological changes indicative of oxygen starvation, such as acute congestion and swelling of the capillary endothelia or over-distension of the alveoli, to make that assertion. To claim drowning without such positive evidence is likely irresponsible, if not possible malpractice (though one should indeed hear more completely what the ME has to say in her defense of this).

The ME was not known to have interviewed the plane's occupants, but it's rumored she got the passenger information via the NTSB.

And yet... by the time the autopsy report was filed, there was only a mention of these fleeting, invisible mentions on other passengers' lips of stress and hyperventilation that somehow were able to overcome the positive evidence stated to have been present at autopsy--while viewing the body.

The NTSB story about Ms. Fuddy wearing only a partially-inflated infant life jacket has been debunked via video imagery that shows Ms. Fuddy wearing an unmistakable adult life jacket on which both upper and lower chambers were filled, indicated both CO2 cartridges had been expended.

That's quite something.

It would seem claims of stress, hyperventilation, infant life jackets and horrible 6-to-8-foot waves are the stuff of a concerted plan, rather than reality.

Then there are the images of Ms Fuddy and her unique-and-curvy (5'2", 220#) figure and shoes, compared to another male figure (6'+ and 170#) with very different shoes and a red wig a mere 37 seconds later.

[PAR35]

So you are changing your story now? Post 6 you said, “The authors of the book did the investigation”, now you say, “the logical exposition of the conclusions the NTSB has made”

When you settle on a position, maybe we can move the discussion forward. I’m not going to interact with a moving target.

[rx]

If you believe there's some kind of contradiction in those two statements or believe it's impossible that both of those could be simultaneously true, I apologized that I misjudged your capabilities too highly. I will try to lay it out for you using language you can understand.

The authors did indeed do the investigation of the crash as I said, and they also considered what the NTSB had to say about the crash evidence that both groups had at their disposal for possible conclusion. As for your claim of the authors making (inappropriate) accusations, note carefully that it's nonsense to somehow claim the authors should not have pointed out (time and again) that the NTSB misconstrued unmistakable evidence. They did it with such regularity and bravado when any qualified aviation investigator would quickly have seen their conclusions were false. If you wish to suggest the authors went beyond propriety to bring such facts forth, I suggest you're missing the service these authors have done for the Republic. I don't believe the authors have in any way been inappropriately accusatory. Their conclusions are the result of careful investigation and consideration of the evidence. Then, seeing what the NTSB did with the evidence, by contrast, they engaged in a logical exposition that the NTSB conclusions were more than problematic or trifling among vagaries. As long as we can understand that NTSB aviation investigators and their support personnel are extremely well-qualified in the aviation field, we have a clear problem, inasmuch as the contradictions they repeatedly resolved incorrectly would have to show extreme incompetence, which is just not possible, given their previously demonstrated expertise.

Since the authors have for this partial portion brought forth the evidence and merely showed that the NTSB conclusions were repeatedly contradicted by the evidence, something that capable investigators would not be able to mistake, my saying so does not make me a moving or changing target.

The excerpt (there, fixed it for you) does not make a final (or otherwise) determination about whether outside influences caused the skewed NTSB results or whether one or more self-interested employees determined to work the mischief. I might have an opinion about that--and do-- but I don't believe the authors have said the evidence on that is clear or sufficient to definitively point to the source.

On the other hand, it's difficult to imagine (though that's hardly the evidence that would be required) how one or more NTSB employees would find it in his or her interest to coordinate cover-up mischief with say, a Medical Examiner or the Maui County Fire Department, or an FAA Assistant Administrator. How does an NTSB employee cause a USCG rescue swimmer to not do CPR on Ms. Fuddy before the NTSB investigation has officially (or otherwise) begun?

How does an NTSB employee arrange for a $2B nuclear submarine with a squad of contractor divers to appear within seconds of the ditching and cause them to supply hardware, underwater network electronics and communications gear to link with a circling, data-receiving aircraft whose 3,000' airspace reservation 24,000' up was made with the National Transportation Manager some ten hours in advance? How does that or those NTSB employees see to bringing special life jackets for the 73+ year-old couple from Illinois? The list could go on and on.

Though that suggests outside influence, it's still a hypothesis to suggest who otherwise sits high enough on the governmental food chain to have arranged authorized and coordinated all of this inter-agency mayhem. Doesn't it? Would you care to make your accusatory stab at--or ahem, come to a logical conclusion as to--who's responsible?

[humblegunner]

“Replacement Fuddy”???

You seem to have caught Butter’s lunacy.

Probably got injected by a Ninja Frogman.