Discussion:
The Man in the Fedora Hat was Jack Ruby
(too old to reply)
Ralph Cinque
2015-07-30 01:59:51 UTC
Permalink
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
bpete1969
2015-07-30 18:44:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
From 2 years ago...

Fedora man...a Jack of all trades

http://bpete1969.blogspot.com/2013/07/fedora-mana-jack-of-all-trades.html
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-01 01:04:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by bpete1969
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
From 2 years ago...
Fedora man...a Jack of all trades
http://bpete1969.blogspot.com/2013/07/fedora-mana-jack-of-all-trades.html
Shouldn't Man also be capitalized if you are going to invent a new meme?
Did you hear about Glassman or Hatman? I invented Black Dogface Woman.
Marcus Hanson
2015-08-02 01:17:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
From 2 years ago...
Fedora man...a Jack of all trades
http://bpete1969.blogspot.com/2013/07/fedora-mana-jack-of-all-trades.html
Shouldn't Man also be capitalized if you are going to invent a new meme?
Did you hear about Glassman or Hatman? I invented Black Dogface Woman.
Why'd ya do that ? Aren't you the one who rails against cutesy
nomenclature?
Alex Foyle
2015-08-02 23:30:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marcus Hanson
Why'd ya do that ? Aren't you the one who rails against cutesy
nomenclature?
Excellent point and observation.
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-03 14:31:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marcus Hanson
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
From 2 years ago...
Fedora man...a Jack of all trades
http://bpete1969.blogspot.com/2013/07/fedora-mana-jack-of-all-trades.html
Shouldn't Man also be capitalized if you are going to invent a new meme?
Did you hear about Glassman or Hatman? I invented Black Dogface Woman.
Why'd ya do that ? Aren't you the one who rails against cutesy
nomenclature?
Exactly! I did it to make fun of Black Dog Man. I don't know whether
that's called irony, ridicule or an homage. But I did it to make fun of
Martin's claim that it was a black woman.
I don't remember the exact time I invented it, but I think it was at
about 4:31 between panel discussions.
Marcus Hanson
2015-08-04 03:17:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Marcus Hanson
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
From 2 years ago...
Fedora man...a Jack of all trades
http://bpete1969.blogspot.com/2013/07/fedora-mana-jack-of-all-trades.html
Shouldn't Man also be capitalized if you are going to invent a new meme?
Did you hear about Glassman or Hatman? I invented Black Dogface Woman.
Why'd ya do that ? Aren't you the one who rails against cutesy
nomenclature?
Exactly! I did it to make fun of Black Dog Man. I don't know whether
that's called irony, ridicule or an homage. But I did it to make fun of
Martin's claim that it was a black woman.
I don't remember the exact time I invented it, but I think it was at
about 4:31 between panel discussions.
Ah - I see ! Sounds plausible , as I am one of the few who acknowledges
your latent sense of humour.Maybe the only one , actually.

Talking of a sense of humour , I was looking through an old thread on
Duncan's forum the other day. I noticed you added a photograph . Now , you
once said here that you have been told you resemble Glen Campbell.But that
profile photo looks more like Wilfrid Brambell, the old man from Steptoe
and Son.

So,is that really you ? I know you do not subscribe to any theory of
altered photographs , so my money is on an affirmative response. Go on ,
Tony - do tell us !
Alex Foyle
2015-08-05 16:44:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marcus Hanson
So,is that really you ? I know you do not subscribe to any theory of
altered photographs , so my money is on an affirmative response. Go on ,
Tony - do tell us !
Wow, I just saw that, thanks for the hint, Marcus.

Please tell if the avatar_535 photo is really of you, Tony.
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-07 15:47:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Marcus Hanson
So,is that really you ? I know you do not subscribe to any theory of
altered photographs , so my money is on an affirmative response. Go on ,
Tony - do tell us !
Wow, I just saw that, thanks for the hint, Marcus.
Please tell if the avatar_535 photo is really of you, Tony.
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.

Yes, this one is the real me:

Loading Image...
Mark Florio
2015-08-08 01:08:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Marcus Hanson
So,is that really you ? I know you do not subscribe to any theory of
altered photographs , so my money is on an affirmative response. Go on ,
Tony - do tell us !
Wow, I just saw that, thanks for the hint, Marcus.
Please tell if the avatar_535 photo is really of you, Tony.
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
http://vampsaga.at.ua/avatar/535c6c342315e6ec1f3537237143e5d9.jpg
Damn, Tony. I knew it. Mark
Mark OBLAZNEY
2015-08-09 01:27:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Florio
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Marcus Hanson
So,is that really you ? I know you do not subscribe to any theory of
altered photographs , so my money is on an affirmative response. Go on ,
Tony - do tell us !
Wow, I just saw that, thanks for the hint, Marcus.
Please tell if the avatar_535 photo is really of you, Tony.
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
http://vampsaga.at.ua/avatar/535c6c342315e6ec1f3537237143e5d9.jpg
Damn, Tony. I knew it. Mark
Take a selfie of your belly, Anthony........ my, how you've grown, uh.......
Alex Foyle
2015-08-08 23:53:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I did not want to share this without your consent, but since you ask for
it. Here is the photo from your profile at Duncan's JFK assassination
forum:

http://share.pho.to/9crn1

Is that a photo of you, Anthony Marsh?
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
I downloaded the PNG file directly from your profile and the file was
named:

avatar_535.marsh.png

After checking other profile pictures at Duncan's forum and my own it's
clear that all profile pictures are automatically named avatar_number and
some, like yours, with the surname. So that's solved.
Mark Florio
2015-08-09 18:00:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I did not want to share this without your consent, but since you ask for
it. Here is the photo from your profile at Duncan's JFK assassination
http://share.pho.to/9crn1
Is that a photo of you, Anthony Marsh?
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
I downloaded the PNG file directly from your profile and the file was
avatar_535.marsh.png
After checking other profile pictures at Duncan's forum and my own it's
clear that all profile pictures are automatically named avatar_number and
some, like yours, with the surname. So that's solved.
You're kidding right? If not what is the point in doing this? What are
you hoping to accomplish? Mark
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-11 20:14:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Florio
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I did not want to share this without your consent, but since you ask for
it. Here is the photo from your profile at Duncan's JFK assassination
http://share.pho.to/9crn1
Is that a photo of you, Anthony Marsh?
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
I downloaded the PNG file directly from your profile and the file was
avatar_535.marsh.png
After checking other profile pictures at Duncan's forum and my own it's
clear that all profile pictures are automatically named avatar_number and
some, like yours, with the surname. So that's solved.
You're kidding right? If not what is the point in doing this? What are
you hoping to accomplish? Mark
Cheap insults. It's not even from Duncan's forum.
And where's the beard? Everyone knows I have a beard. There are various
trolls who pretend to find me, but are never able to understand how this
Internet thingie works. I had one punk who said he did a Traceroute
which said I live in Cambridge. I haven't lived in Cambridge since 1981.
But I do live close enough that the Comcast node is on the border. I can
leave my apartment and walk one block in any of 4 directions and end up
in a different city. Even McAdams knows that I live in Somerville.


I told one punk that if he was really smart he might be able to find my
picture with Google Images.
Try: Tony Marsh Somerville
Alex Foyle
2015-08-13 13:11:50 UTC
Permalink
Who are you replying to? Learn to quote properly.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Cheap insults. It's not even from Duncan's forum.
The photo was taken from your profile at Duncan's forum, stop denying the
obvious.
Post by Anthony Marsh
And where's the beard? Everyone knows I have a beard. There are various
trolls who pretend to find me, but are never able to understand how this
Internet thingie works. I had one punk who said he did a Traceroute
which said I live in Cambridge. I haven't lived in Cambridge since 1981.
But I do live close enough that the Comcast node is on the border. I can
leave my apartment and walk one block in any of 4 directions and end up
in a different city. Even McAdams knows that I live in Somerville.
To be honest, Tony, I couldn't care less.
Post by Anthony Marsh
I told one punk that if he was really smart he might be able to find my
picture with Google Images.
Really? Just a few posts further up you said: "Forget Google Images. It's
useless."
Post by Anthony Marsh
Try: Tony Marsh Somerville
I did, you still don't show up and I still don't care. I was just curious
about that photo at Duncan's forum, but again you can't clarify the matter
nor even admit that the photo is from your profile at Duncan's forum,
useless discussion as usually with you most of the time.
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-13 22:32:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alex Foyle
Who are you replying to? Learn to quote properly.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Cheap insults. It's not even from Duncan's forum.
The photo was taken from your profile at Duncan's forum, stop denying the
obvious.
No, it wasn't. Some is hoaxing you.
Stop making false accusations.
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
And where's the beard? Everyone knows I have a beard. There are various
trolls who pretend to find me, but are never able to understand how this
Internet thingie works. I had one punk who said he did a Traceroute
which said I live in Cambridge. I haven't lived in Cambridge since 1981.
But I do live close enough that the Comcast node is on the border. I can
leave my apartment and walk one block in any of 4 directions and end up
in a different city. Even McAdams knows that I live in Somerville.
To be honest, Tony, I couldn't care less.
Some kooks do. Like those who claim to have seen a picture of me as if
that is important.
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
I told one punk that if he was really smart he might be able to find my
picture with Google Images.
Really? Just a few posts further up you said: "Forget Google Images. It's
useless."
As I said in that sentence, "if he was really smart" he "might."
Obviously not someone like you.
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
Try: Tony Marsh Somerville
I did, you still don't show up and I still don't care. I was just curious
Of course I don't. That's the point. But you may find another picture
which looks more like me and then you can brag to everyone that YOU
found my picture.
Post by Alex Foyle
about that photo at Duncan's forum, but again you can't clarify the matter
Duncan's Forum is a hoax.
Post by Alex Foyle
nor even admit that the photo is from your profile at Duncan's forum,
It's not.
Post by Alex Foyle
useless discussion as usually with you most of the time.
Alex Foyle
2015-08-14 19:09:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Alex Foyle
Who are you replying to? Learn to quote properly.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Cheap insults. It's not even from Duncan's forum.
The photo was taken from your profile at Duncan's forum, stop denying the
obvious.
No, it wasn't. Some is hoaxing you.
Stop making false accusations.
I don't and you are the one falsely accusing me of not getting this photo
from your profile As of yesterday it still graces your profile at Duncan's
forum, see this screenshot:

http://share.pho.to/9diLu

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,11413.msg351879.html#msg351879

Apparently somebody is hoaxing you if you didn't put that picture on your
profile there. But then again, all of Duncan's forum is a hoax to you.
Marcus Hanson
2015-08-09 22:14:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I did not want to share this without your consent, but since you ask for
it. Here is the photo from your profile at Duncan's JFK assassination
http://share.pho.to/9crn1
Is that a photo of you, Anthony Marsh?
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
I downloaded the PNG file directly from your profile and the file was
avatar_535.marsh.png
After checking other profile pictures at Duncan's forum and my own it's
clear that all profile pictures are automatically named avatar_number and
some, like yours, with the surname. So that's solved.
Just this once , I'd be pleased to learn that the photo has been altered
!:-).
Alex Foyle
2015-08-10 20:21:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marcus Hanson
Just this once , I'd be pleased to learn that the photo has been altered
!:-).
Me too, although this might just be our man ... waiting for confirmation.
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-11 00:50:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marcus Hanson
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I did not want to share this without your consent, but since you ask for
it. Here is the photo from your profile at Duncan's JFK assassination
http://share.pho.to/9crn1
Is that a photo of you, Anthony Marsh?
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
I downloaded the PNG file directly from your profile and the file was
avatar_535.marsh.png
After checking other profile pictures at Duncan's forum and my own it's
clear that all profile pictures are automatically named avatar_number and
some, like yours, with the surname. So that's solved.
Just this once , I'd be pleased to learn that the photo has been altered
!:-).
Do you understand what an Avatar is?
Very few people post real photos on themselves in a JFK discussion
group. For obvious reasons.
Marcus Hanson
2015-08-11 22:41:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Do you understand what an Avatar is?
Very few people post real photos on themselves in a JFK discussion
group. For obvious reasons.
Well OF COURSE.It's somebody who flies a 'plane , like Charles Lindbergh ,
isn't it ?

If folks DO post a photo , why not a real one? You're not saying the JFKA
boards are packed with weirdos who'd bother to track you down,are ya ?
Perish the thought !
Mark Florio
2015-08-12 01:50:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Marcus Hanson
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I did not want to share this without your consent, but since you ask for
it. Here is the photo from your profile at Duncan's JFK assassination
http://share.pho.to/9crn1
Is that a photo of you, Anthony Marsh?
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
I downloaded the PNG file directly from your profile and the file was
avatar_535.marsh.png
After checking other profile pictures at Duncan's forum and my own it's
clear that all profile pictures are automatically named avatar_number and
some, like yours, with the surname. So that's solved.
Just this once , I'd be pleased to learn that the photo has been altered
!:-).
Do you understand what an Avatar is?
Very few people post real photos on themselves in a JFK discussion
group. For obvious reasons.
That was kind of my point in my previous post. I would hope we respect
each other at least enough to not post photos of another poster. For, as
you say, obvious reasons. IMO, the only person who should post a photo of
him/herself is the person in the photo. Mark
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-13 02:03:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Florio
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Marcus Hanson
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I did not want to share this without your consent, but since you ask for
it. Here is the photo from your profile at Duncan's JFK assassination
http://share.pho.to/9crn1
Is that a photo of you, Anthony Marsh?
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
I downloaded the PNG file directly from your profile and the file was
avatar_535.marsh.png
After checking other profile pictures at Duncan's forum and my own it's
clear that all profile pictures are automatically named avatar_number and
some, like yours, with the surname. So that's solved.
Just this once , I'd be pleased to learn that the photo has been altered
!:-).
Do you understand what an Avatar is?
Very few people post real photos on themselves in a JFK discussion
group. For obvious reasons.
That was kind of my point in my previous post. I would hope we respect
each other at least enough to not post photos of another poster. For, as
you say, obvious reasons. IMO, the only person who should post a photo of
him/herself is the person in the photo. Mark
That is not true. I can and have posted photos of other researchers.
Maybe just to prove that McAdams is really not ugly enough to be
mistaken for Bigfoot.
Your mistake was believing someone else's lie that the photo was a
picture of me.
That's why I had to explain why they call it an Avatar.
Mark Florio
2015-08-13 20:18:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark Florio
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Marcus Hanson
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I did not want to share this without your consent, but since you ask for
it. Here is the photo from your profile at Duncan's JFK assassination
http://share.pho.to/9crn1
Is that a photo of you, Anthony Marsh?
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
I downloaded the PNG file directly from your profile and the file was
avatar_535.marsh.png
After checking other profile pictures at Duncan's forum and my own it's
clear that all profile pictures are automatically named avatar_number and
some, like yours, with the surname. So that's solved.
Just this once , I'd be pleased to learn that the photo has been altered
!:-).
Do you understand what an Avatar is?
Very few people post real photos on themselves in a JFK discussion
group. For obvious reasons.
That was kind of my point in my previous post. I would hope we respect
each other at least enough to not post photos of another poster. For, as
you say, obvious reasons. IMO, the only person who should post a photo of
him/herself is the person in the photo. Mark
That is not true. I can and have posted photos of other researchers.
Maybe just to prove that McAdams is really not ugly enough to be
mistaken for Bigfoot.
Your mistake was believing someone else's lie that the photo was a
picture of me.
That's why I had to explain why they call it an Avatar.
Now I really give up. No, I did not think any of the pictures shown on
this thread were of you. Excuse me for trying to help. Mark
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-15 00:52:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Florio
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark Florio
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Marcus Hanson
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I did not want to share this without your consent, but since you ask for
it. Here is the photo from your profile at Duncan's JFK assassination
http://share.pho.to/9crn1
Is that a photo of you, Anthony Marsh?
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
I downloaded the PNG file directly from your profile and the file was
avatar_535.marsh.png
After checking other profile pictures at Duncan's forum and my own it's
clear that all profile pictures are automatically named avatar_number and
some, like yours, with the surname. So that's solved.
Just this once , I'd be pleased to learn that the photo has been altered
!:-).
Do you understand what an Avatar is?
Very few people post real photos on themselves in a JFK discussion
group. For obvious reasons.
That was kind of my point in my previous post. I would hope we respect
each other at least enough to not post photos of another poster. For, as
you say, obvious reasons. IMO, the only person who should post a photo of
him/herself is the person in the photo. Mark
That is not true. I can and have posted photos of other researchers.
Maybe just to prove that McAdams is really not ugly enough to be
mistaken for Bigfoot.
Your mistake was believing someone else's lie that the photo was a
picture of me.
That's why I had to explain why they call it an Avatar.
Now I really give up. No, I did not think any of the pictures shown on
this thread were of you. Excuse me for trying to help. Mark
You never try to help. Only attack. So was I trying to HELP when I told
you to search on Google Images for Tony Marsh Somerville? Of course not.
It's called ridicule.

If you can't figure out how to use Google Images maybe you should try
using BING.

Anthony Marsh
2015-08-10 13:03:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alex Foyle
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't even know what the Hell you are talking about.
How come you can't show the photo here? No Google skills?
I did not want to share this without your consent, but since you ask for
it. Here is the photo from your profile at Duncan's JFK assassination
http://share.pho.to/9crn1
Is that a photo of you, Anthony Marsh?
Post by Anthony Marsh
I don't have any Avatars, but I did see the movie.
I downloaded the PNG file directly from your profile and the file was
avatar_535.marsh.png
After checking other profile pictures at Duncan's forum and my own it's
clear that all profile pictures are automatically named avatar_number and
some, like yours, with the surname. So that's solved.
Jesus CHrist! How the Hell did you figure that out all by yourself?
Someone must have put you up to it. Look at some of the ridiculous
pictures the Trolls there have used. Now you know why I didn't post an
Avatar. If you want to know what I look like ask any of the thousands of
other researchers who have met me in person, even Steve Barber and John
McAdams. But don't believe Steve when he says I weigh 410 pounds.
Ask Steve how much he weighs.
Now, if you were a real researcher you might be privy to video of the
conferences I have attended and spot me there.

Forget Google Images. It's useless. No, I am not the actor.
But I was NAMED after a very famous actor.
Alex Foyle
2015-08-11 02:58:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Jesus CHrist! How the Hell did you figure that out all by yourself?
Ok, I'll take it that's not a photo of yourself, but only some goofy fun
image you put up to show what a grumpy old man you are, got it.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Now, if you were a real researcher you might be privy to video of the
conferences I have attended and spot me there.
You totally overestimate my desire to know what the hell you look like.
But I can easily imagine that you look somewhat like the guy you put up at
your profile at Duncan's forum. Here are some more suggestions from the
not so useless Google Images:

https://www.google.com/search?q=grumpy+old+man+face&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0CB4QsARqFQoTCOSZ-ouTn8cCFYaNDQodayoDIA&biw=1536&bih=738

Don't blame Google Images for not finding you, you're just not that
important.
Mark OBLAZNEY
2015-08-02 02:15:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
From 2 years ago...
Fedora man...a Jack of all trades
http://bpete1969.blogspot.com/2013/07/fedora-mana-jack-of-all-trades.html
Shouldn't Man also be capitalized if you are going to invent a new meme?
Did you hear about Glassman or Hatman? I invented Black Dogface Woman.
Raff's men are always in caps, Anthony, especially swarthy ay-rabz'.
OHLeeRedux
2015-07-30 18:44:16 UTC
Permalink
Hey Ralph. Have you found Waldo yet?
Marcus Hanson
2015-07-30 18:45:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
We went through this a couple of years ago.
I do not see much point in re-hashing the old arguments.

Permit me though to ask you one question,Ralph :

Do you believe that "Fedora Man" in A-6 is the same individual as "Fedora
Man" captured by Dave Wiegman? Yes or no? I suspect it might be,but I
really do not know.

Here's the photo I reference :
http://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?pid=1968&fullsize=1

And here's the full gallery , with other images of "FM".
http://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/thumbnails.php?album=13

Credit to Robin Unger (and Dave Wiegman!): we can all agree that Robin's
galleries are a treasure trove,regardless of opinions on the case.

I make no claims about identifying "Wiegman Fedora Man" by his face : the
quality is just not there to determine the man's identity that way.

Anyway,do you think A-6 FM is the same man as WFM?

Thanks
Ralph Cinque
2015-07-31 13:56:46 UTC
Permalink
No, the Fedora Man on the corner there in Wiegman is not Jack Ruby. He's
too short, for one thing. And he would not have been standing with those
women either. Where we see him the Altgens6 was the perfect place for Jack
Ruby to be because he could keep an eye on the action on Elm Street for
the kill, and he could keep his eyes on the TSBD.

And the fact that there other men in Dallas wearing Fedora hats means
nothing because none of them had their faces covered up with a phony Woman
and Boy. That was Ruby.
bigdog
2015-07-31 20:49:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
No, the Fedora Man on the corner there in Wiegman is not Jack Ruby. He's
too short, for one thing. And he would not have been standing with those
women either. Where we see him the Altgens6 was the perfect place for Jack
Ruby to be because he could keep an eye on the action on Elm Street for
the kill, and he could keep his eyes on the TSBD.
And the fact that there other men in Dallas wearing Fedora hats means
nothing because none of them had their faces covered up with a phony Woman
and Boy. That was Ruby.
If the face was covered up, how do you know it is Ruby? Just asking.
Ralph Cinque
2015-08-01 18:47:04 UTC
Permalink
It is a very reasonable assumption that it was Ruby. Right after the
assassination, Victoria Adams rushed down the stairs and went outside, and
she claimed to see Jack Ruby, "barking orders and acting like a cop." She
went to her grave maintaining that. And then there was the woman who
worked at the Seamstress shop across the street who told Dallas Police
that her daughter and friends saw Jack Ruby interacting with Oswald out
front after the assassination. So, Ruby was definitely there in upper
Dealey Plaza for the motorcade. And that spot by the monument was the
perfect place for him to be. He wasn't going to go to lower Elm because he
would have been too visible. He needed to keep his eye on the action on
Elm and on the TSBD, so that spot where we see him in the Altgens photo
was perfect. And if that man was just some guy in a Fedora hat, not Jack
Ruby and not anyone connected to the assassination team, why cover him up?
It is a very reasonable and logical assumption that he was Ruby. I've been
saying it for 4 years, and my conviction about it has only grown stronger.
bigdog
2015-08-02 02:58:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
It is a very reasonable assumption that it was Ruby. Right after the
assassination, Victoria Adams rushed down the stairs and went outside, and
she claimed to see Jack Ruby, "barking orders and acting like a cop." She
went to her grave maintaining that.
At least you acknowledge it is an assumption. Did Victoria Adams even know
who Jack Ruby was on 11/22/63 when she saw him "barking orders and acting
like a cop." Did she tell anyone on that day she saw Jack Ruby doing
that. Or was it only after Jack Ruby shot Oswald and became famous she
decided it was Jack Ruby. It is easy for a person to fool themselvels like
that. I had a similar experience myself. In 2008 I visited Dealey Plaza
for the first and only time. I saw Bob Groden hawking his latest self
published book at a table near Zapruder's spot. There was another man next
to him wearing wire rimmed glasses whom I did not recognize. That man was
doing most of the talking to the prospective customers. Several years
later I saw the late Gary Mack on TV for the first time and thought to
myself he looked like the guy I saw sitting next to Groden. I told myself
that guy I saw probably was Gary Mack. Then a few years ago someone posted
a YouTube video of Groden and I got another look at the guy and other than
the glasses, he didn't look much like Gark Mack at all. But in my mind I
had conflated the two.
Post by Ralph Cinque
And then there was the woman who
worked at the Seamstress shop across the street who told Dallas Police
that her daughter and friends saw Jack Ruby interacting with Oswald out> front after the assassination.
Again, did she tell anybody that the day of the assassination or did she
decide that after Ruby had shot Oswald?
Post by Ralph Cinque
So, Ruby was definitely there in upper
Dealey Plaza for the motorcade.
People who had known Jack Ruby for some time said he was placing ads with
the DMN at the time JFK was shot. It is truly amazing how many Jack Ruby
sightings we had everywhere except that nobody said anything about them
until Ruby shot Oswald and then everyone claims to have seen him
somewhere.
Post by Ralph Cinque
And that spot by the monument was the
perfect place for him to be. He wasn't going to go to lower Elm because he
would have been too visible. He needed to keep his eye on the action on
Elm and on the TSBD, so that spot where we see him in the Altgens photo
was perfect. And if that man was just some guy in a Fedora hat, not Jack
Ruby and not anyone connected to the assassination team, why cover him up?
It is a very reasonable and logical assumption that he was Ruby. I've been
saying it for 4 years, and my conviction about it has only grown stronger.
If Jack Ruby was part of a conspiracy, why would he even be in DP?
Ace Kefford
2015-08-03 00:02:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by Ralph Cinque
It is a very reasonable assumption that it was Ruby. Right after the
assassination, Victoria Adams rushed down the stairs and went outside, and
she claimed to see Jack Ruby, "barking orders and acting like a cop." She
went to her grave maintaining that.
At least you acknowledge it is an assumption. Did Victoria Adams even know
who Jack Ruby was on 11/22/63 when she saw him "barking orders and acting
like a cop." Did she tell anyone on that day she saw Jack Ruby doing
that. Or was it only after Jack Ruby shot Oswald and became famous she
decided it was Jack Ruby. It is easy for a person to fool themselvels like
that. I had a similar experience myself. In 2008 I visited Dealey Plaza
for the first and only time. I saw Bob Groden hawking his latest self
published book at a table near Zapruder's spot. There was another man next
to him wearing wire rimmed glasses whom I did not recognize. That man was
doing most of the talking to the prospective customers. Several years
later I saw the late Gary Mack on TV for the first time and thought to
myself he looked like the guy I saw sitting next to Groden. I told myself
that guy I saw probably was Gary Mack. Then a few years ago someone posted
a YouTube video of Groden and I got another look at the guy and other than
the glasses, he didn't look much like Gark Mack at all. But in my mind I
had conflated the two.
Post by Ralph Cinque
And then there was the woman who
worked at the Seamstress shop across the street who told Dallas Police
that her daughter and friends saw Jack Ruby interacting with Oswald out> front after the assassination.
Again, did she tell anybody that the day of the assassination or did she
decide that after Ruby had shot Oswald?
Post by Ralph Cinque
So, Ruby was definitely there in upper
Dealey Plaza for the motorcade.
People who had known Jack Ruby for some time said he was placing ads with
the DMN at the time JFK was shot. It is truly amazing how many Jack Ruby
sightings we had everywhere except that nobody said anything about them
until Ruby shot Oswald and then everyone claims to have seen him
somewhere.
Post by Ralph Cinque
And that spot by the monument was the
perfect place for him to be. He wasn't going to go to lower Elm because he
would have been too visible. He needed to keep his eye on the action on
Elm and on the TSBD, so that spot where we see him in the Altgens photo
was perfect. And if that man was just some guy in a Fedora hat, not Jack
Ruby and not anyone connected to the assassination team, why cover him up?
It is a very reasonable and logical assumption that he was Ruby. I've been
saying it for 4 years, and my conviction about it has only grown stronger.
If Jack Ruby was part of a conspiracy, why would he even be in DP?
Why was Ruby in Dealey Plaza? See the "answer" above by RC: to keep an
eye on the "action". I guess he was like Rodney Dangerfield always
seeking action.
j***@gmail.com
2015-08-10 02:04:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
It is a very reasonable assumption that it was Ruby. Right after the
assassination, Victoria Adams rushed down the stairs and went outside, and
she claimed to see Jack Ruby, "barking orders and acting like a cop." She
went to her grave maintaining that. And then there was the woman who
worked at the Seamstress shop across the street who told Dallas Police
that her daughter and friends saw Jack Ruby interacting with Oswald out
front after the assassination. So, Ruby was definitely there in upper
Dealey Plaza for the motorcade. And that spot by the monument was the
perfect place for him to be. He wasn't going to go to lower Elm because he
would have been too visible. He needed to keep his eye on the action on
Elm and on the TSBD, so that spot where we see him in the Altgens photo
was perfect. And if that man was just some guy in a Fedora hat, not Jack
Ruby and not anyone connected to the assassination team, why cover him up?
It is a very reasonable and logical assumption that he was Ruby. I've been
saying it for 4 years, and my conviction about it has only grown stronger.
Ruby was talking with him at the corner masterminding Oswald to the
nearest bus.
Ralph Cinque
2015-08-10 20:24:50 UTC
Permalink
Yes, and Ruby was also masterminding Oswald to the Texas Theater. George
Applin reported seeing Ruby in the Texas Theater, a few rows behind
Oswald. Ruby was right there, just like he was everywhere.

Of course, George Applin conveniently died.
Alex Foyle
2015-08-11 22:38:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
Yes, and Ruby was also masterminding Oswald to the Texas Theater.
Of course, Ralph, and he gave him the gun to kill Tippit, actually Ruby
gave Tippit the coup de grace in the head, because Oswald wouldn't.
Post by Ralph Cinque
Applin reported seeing Ruby in the Texas Theater ...
Yes, many years later, another Earl Golz whopper from 1979:

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/A%20Disk/Applin%20George%20Jr/Item%2001.pdf
Post by Ralph Cinque
Ruby was right there, just like he was everywhere.
No, he wasn't, only your imagination is everywhere. In addition to the
books I already recommended to you re Marguerite please read the following
re Ruby over the summer:

"Jack Ruby" by Garry Wills and Ovid Demaris
"The Jack Ruby Trial Revisited" by Max Causey and John Mark Dempsey
"Dallas and the Jack Ruby Trial" by Diane Holloway Ph.D.
"Moment of Madness: the People Vs. Jack Ruby" by Elmer Gertz
"Dallas Justice: The real story of Jack Ruby and his trial" by Melvin M Belli
Post by Ralph Cinque
Of course, George Applin conveniently died.
Do you even know how and when Applin died? It must have been after 1979,
extremely convenient ... of course there is no bs you won't throw around
here.
bigdog
2015-08-12 02:07:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
Yes, and Ruby was also masterminding Oswald to the Texas Theater. George
Applin reported seeing Ruby in the Texas Theater, a few rows behind
Oswald. Ruby was right there, just like he was everywhere.
Amazing man, that Jack Ruby was. He apparently had solved the riddle of
teleportation. He was popping up all over the place. Would this have been
before or after he planted the bullet at Parkland?
Post by Ralph Cinque
Of course, George Applin conveniently died.
The bastard!!!
Ralph Cinque
2015-08-13 20:21:30 UTC
Permalink
Jack Ruby went from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital to the Texas Theater
to the Dallas PD. Ground transportation accomplished that. No teleporting
was needed.
bigdog
2015-08-14 01:25:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
Jack Ruby went from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital to the Texas Theater
to the Dallas PD. Ground transportation accomplished that. No teleporting
was needed.
Jesus, couldn't "they" have given the poor guy some help. Did he have to
do everything? You'd think such a vast conspiracy could shake somebody
loose to do some of the grunt work. It's a wonder Ruby didn't have a heart
attack with all the running around "they" made him do.
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-14 23:54:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by Ralph Cinque
Jack Ruby went from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital to the Texas Theater
to the Dallas PD. Ground transportation accomplished that. No teleporting
was needed.
Jesus, couldn't "they" have given the poor guy some help. Did he have to
do everything? You'd think such a vast conspiracy could shake somebody
loose to do some of the grunt work. It's a wonder Ruby didn't have a heart
attack with all the running around "they" made him do.
You are making up a lot of crap from your imagination.
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-11 00:40:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Ralph Cinque
It is a very reasonable assumption that it was Ruby. Right after the
assassination, Victoria Adams rushed down the stairs and went outside, and
she claimed to see Jack Ruby, "barking orders and acting like a cop." She
went to her grave maintaining that. And then there was the woman who
worked at the Seamstress shop across the street who told Dallas Police
that her daughter and friends saw Jack Ruby interacting with Oswald out
front after the assassination. So, Ruby was definitely there in upper
Dealey Plaza for the motorcade. And that spot by the monument was the
perfect place for him to be. He wasn't going to go to lower Elm because he
would have been too visible. He needed to keep his eye on the action on
Elm and on the TSBD, so that spot where we see him in the Altgens photo
was perfect. And if that man was just some guy in a Fedora hat, not Jack
Ruby and not anyone connected to the assassination team, why cover him up?
It is a very reasonable and logical assumption that he was Ruby. I've been
saying it for 4 years, and my conviction about it has only grown stronger.
Ruby was talking with him at the corner masterminding Oswald to the
nearest bus.
Oswald did not take the nearest bus.
And at that time Ruby was in the newspaper office.
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-01 00:00:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
No, the Fedora Man on the corner there in Wiegman is not Jack Ruby. He's
too short, for one thing. And he would not have been standing with those
women either. Where we see him the Altgens6 was the perfect place for Jack
Ruby to be because he could keep an eye on the action on Elm Street for
the kill, and he could keep his eyes on the TSBD.
And the fact that there other men in Dallas wearing Fedora hats means
nothing because none of them had their faces covered up with a phony Woman
and Boy. That was Ruby.
There was another man in a fedora seen in a photo of the TSBD whom the
kooks claim was Jack Ruby. But it wasn't Jack Ruby. It was a different
man. So the same may be true of the guy you are thinking about. It may
be the other guy who LOOKED LIKE Jack Ruby. So give him a nickname like
Fedora Man.
Ralph Cinque
2015-08-01 18:56:01 UTC
Permalink
We can see that other guy's face in the Altgens photo, and he definitely
was not Jack Ruby.
Bud
2015-08-01 18:51:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
No, the Fedora Man on the corner there in Wiegman is not Jack Ruby. He's
too short, for one thing. And he would not have been standing with those
women either. Where we see him the Altgens6 was the perfect place for Jack
Ruby to be because he could keep an eye on the action on Elm Street for
the kill, and he could keep his eyes on the TSBD.
And the fact that there other men in Dallas wearing Fedora hats means
nothing because none of them had their faces covered up with a phony Woman
and Boy. That was Ruby.
The old "child on the face" disguise, I think the Barker gang used that
when they robbed banks. It`s tricky because you have to keep the child up
in front of your face all the time, because you never know when someone
might take your picture.

So, to recap, Oswald took his rifle to his work and shot some people and
hobbyists are still fifty years later scouring the crowd who came out to
see his victims looking for clues. Possibly the silliest hobby imaginable.
Ralph Cinque
2015-08-02 23:27:27 UTC
Permalink
Bud, the child wasn't there. The child was installed into the picture. And
I can see why they would go with a child. Actually, it was a mother and
child, or you might say, Madonna and Child. And what could be more
soothing, more innocent, and more free from suspicion than Madonna and
Child?
Bud
2015-08-03 00:05:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
Bud, the child wasn't there. The child was installed into the picture.
I disagree. I think the child was there and the man in the fedora was
installed.
Post by Ralph Cinque
And
I can see why they would go with a child. Actually, it was a mother and
child, or you might say, Madonna and Child. And what could be more
soothing, more innocent, and more free from suspicion than Madonna and
Child?
But luckily you were too clever to be fooled.

Has anyone assassinated any of your tomatoes lately?
bigdog
2015-07-31 01:22:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
It is a well known fact Jack Ruby was the only man in Dallas in 1963 who
wore a fedora.
Anthony Marsh
2015-08-01 00:05:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
It is a well known fact Jack Ruby was the only man in Dallas in 1963 who
wore a fedora.
In fact some kooks claim that a man in a Fedora standing in front of the
TSBD is Jack Ruby, but it's not.
t***@gmail.com
2015-07-31 01:23:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
What a heap of GARBAGE of a blog post, Cinque.

Informative Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.

And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm

X marks the spot where SENIOR OIC MEMBER Mark Lane lied!

Stop the LIES! Oswald INSIDE!! Disband the OIC!!!
b***@gmail.com
2015-08-12 19:46:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
That's not Jack Ruby. That's a man who was made up to look like Joseph
Kennedy, JFK's father. There is a picture of him after the shooting
wearing those same round glasses Joe wore and smiling that smile. You can
also see him wave to JFK in the Towner film, if you study it carefully.
JFK is looking right at him and he waves. The JFK turns to Jackie and says
something, but she is just looking away, and doesn't look back until just
before he is shot in the throat. I know I'm right about this because I'm
an assassination hobbyist.
OHLeeRedux
2015-08-13 13:17:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
That's not Jack Ruby. That's a man who was made up to look like Joseph
Kennedy, JFK's father. There is a picture of him after the shooting
wearing those same round glasses Joe wore and smiling that smile. You can
also see him wave to JFK in the Towner film, if you study it carefully.
JFK is looking right at him and he waves. The JFK turns to Jackie and says
something, but she is just looking away, and doesn't look back until just
before he is shot in the throat. I know I'm right about this because I'm
an assassination hobbyist.



"I know I'm right about this because I'm an assassination hobbyist."

And a fine one you are, sir. Your fascinating theories keep me on the edge
of my seat. I look forward to reading more from you and your fellow
hobbyists here.
b***@gmail.com
2015-08-13 22:06:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph Cinque
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/07/look-at-black-within-circle.html
Here you go, Ralphie!

Here's the picture of the fake Joe Kennedy after the assassination.
http://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?pid=1517&fullsize=1

And here's the Towner frame where you can see the fake Joe Kennedy waving
to JFK.
http://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?pid=1742&fullsize=1
Ralph Cinque
2015-08-14 18:55:11 UTC
Permalink
For goodness sake, Man, it is not Joe Kennedy.

"On December 19, 1961, at the age of 73, Kennedy suffered another stroke.
He survived but was left paralyzed on his right side and with a language
disorder, aphasia, that severely affected his ability to speak. Despite
his severe disabilities as a result of the stroke, he was still mentally
alert. Kennedy did regain certain functions with the help of therapies;
most notably, he went to The Institutes for the Achievement of Human
Potential in 1964, a Philadelphia center that teaches therapies for people
with brain injuries."

Now, are you going to stop? It's Jack Ruby.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...