Ralph / OIC

[Jason Burke]

Oh dear. This ought to be fun.

It seems that a dozen or so emails Joe Backes has received from Ralph,
Jim, retired CIA agents, retired FBI agents, etc. all come from the same
Czech remailer.

Decorum prohibits listing Mr. Backes' web site here. But it's worth
checking out. Very interesting. Can't wait to see how Ralph tries to
wriggle out of this one. I'm sure it will be great!

A good read with your Corn Flakes.

[John Fiorentino]

Oh yes, that is where the rather obnoxious e-mails from Cinque to my
personal e-mail address were from.

Incredible!

John F.





"Jason Burke" <Burke...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:kmtcgl$e3s$2...@dont-email.me...

[Ralph Cinque]

Are you people completely out of your minds? I have not sent any emails to
Joe Backes lately, and times in the past when I have written to him, I
have done so from my usual doctorcinque account. I am not responsible for
any of these bogus emails, and furthermore, I know nothing about the
origin of them. Whoever is doing it is not confiding in me. I could not
begin to tell you who is up to it.

I state the above categorically, and anyone who knows me knows I am
telling the truth. You people are like small children.

[Jason Burke]

On 5/14/2013 5:58 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Are you people completely out of your minds? I have not sent any emails to

And *this* got through?

> Joe Backes lately, and times in the past when I have written to him, I
> have done so from my usual doctorcinque account. I am not responsible for

Gosh, I hope Backes doesn't check the headers on *those* emails...

> any of these bogus emails, and furthermore, I know nothing about the
> origin of them. Whoever is doing it is not confiding in me. I could not

Um, okay. Sure thing.

> begin to tell you who is up to it.
>

Obviously someone who actually *is* in the Czech Republic, and not
someone using the *same* proxy over and over and over, huh, Ralph?
'Cause, you know, everyone in .cz land speaks English and has a burning
desire to threaten people over the Kennedy assassination.

Perhaps it's one of those CIA fellows deep, deep undercover?

> I state the above categorically, and anyone who knows me knows I am
> telling the truth. You people are like small children.
>

Oh, like small children who hold their breath when proven to be wrong
over and over again on the exact same points?

Oh, like small children who whine and cry when they're kicked off
*every* JFK forum?

Oh, like small children scream as loudly as they can in an attempt to
make folks think that by repeating something over and over again that
it's true?

Like those small children, Ralph?

[Canuck]

What's wrong with small children? Btw, I don't think I'm out of my mind. Are you? - prwhitmey

[John Fiorentino]

BS Cinque, it's you!


John F.



"Ralph Cinque" <buda...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0ac4b885-b64b-4647...@googlegroups.com...

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/14/2013 8:08 PM, John Fiorentino wrote:
> Oh yes, that is where the rather obnoxious e-mails from Cinque to my
> personal e-mail address were from.
>
> Incredible!
>
> John F.
>
>

Not exactly FROM. It is just an anonymous rerouting service. Based in a
Balkan country because they don't have any Internet laws.
Try doing a deep traceroute sometime as well as a Ping and maybe even a
Whois.

[Ralph Cinque]

I just heard from a Certified Network Engineer. He both e-mailed me and
called me on the phone. He said that he tracked those email letters that
were sent to Joseph Backes, for which Backes is accusing me of sending,
and the engineer said:

"Ralph, here are the results of my investigation of ip address
46.167.245.116 using linux programs traceroute and whois. The ip is
legitimately out of Czech Republic and is not spoofed or masked."

He included the traceroute results which can be seen below. I'll admit
that this is way over my head, but he tells me that it proves, beyond any
doubt, that I had nothing to do with it.

1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 2.980 ms 0.564 ms 0.716 ms
2 host-198-245-104-1.cable.onelink.net (198.245.104.1) 14.731 ms 9.401 ms 10.480 ms
3 host-198-245-104-1.cable.onelink.net (198.245.104.1) 12.723 ms 10.448 ms 9.978 ms
4 10.65.2.58 (10.65.2.58) 15.229 ms 10.708 ms 9.480 ms
5 10.65.1.122 (10.65.1.122) 9.981 ms 10.65.1.114 (10.65.1.114) 10.216 ms 10.65.1.122 (10.65.1.122) 10.204 ms
6 xe-7-0-0.101.usa.pr-edge01.columbus-networks.com (63.245.23.37) 9.960 ms 20.196 ms 63.245.91.61 (63.245.91.61) 10.228 ms
7 xe-2-0-1.usa.nmi-teracore02.columbus-networks.com (63.245.5.170) 37.198 ms 36.685 ms 36.214 ms
8 xe-4-0-0.usa.nam-core02.columbus-networks.com (63.245.5.68) 39.948 ms 37.978 ms 49.593 ms
9 xe-9-2-0.mia10.ip4.tinet.net (216.221.156.89) 70.446 ms 37.157 ms 40.209 ms
10 xe-7-3-2.fra23.ip4.tinet.net (141.136.110.97) 193.606 ms 184.819 ms xe-0-0-0.fra23.ip4.tinet.net (141.136.110.117) 185.094 ms
11 as6830.fra23.ip4.tinet.net (141.136.102.82) 169.082 ms 170.013 ms 184.089 ms
12 84.116.132.165 (84.116.132.165) 174.628 ms 84.116.132.157 (84.116.132.157) 176.577 ms 175.839 ms
13 84.116.135.2 (84.116.135.2) 172.920 ms 174.559 ms 216.602 ms
14 84-116-131-158.aorta.net (84.116.131.158) 175.045 ms 176.294 ms 176.133 ms
15 84.116.222.45 (84.116.222.45) 177.551 ms 175.071 ms 176.356 ms
16 tachyon.finaltek.net (77.48.106.250) 175.862 ms 176.070 ms 189.894 ms
17 emkei.cz (46.167.245.116) 176.040 ms 202.790 ms 180.582 ms

He also sent the whois results, but it's too complex and protracted to put
up here.

He also asked me to withhold his name, so naturally, I am doing that. I
was very impressed with him, and he obviously knows what he is talking
about. He said he can track it every step of the way, and it didn't go
anywhere near my way. And I assure you that I have no connections, no
associates, no sources, no nothing in Czech Republic. I'd have trouble
finding it on a map.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/14/2013 9:44 PM, Jason Burke wrote:
> On 5/14/2013 5:58 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
>> Are you people completely out of your minds? I have not sent any
>> emails to
>
> And *this* got through?
>

It doesn't single out a specific individual poster. I am allowed to call
WC defenders liars, because most of them never post here. I am not
allowed to call you a liar because you post here.

>> Joe Backes lately, and times in the past when I have written to him, I
>> have done so from my usual doctorcinque account. I am not responsible for
>
> Gosh, I hope Backes doesn't check the headers on *those* emails...
>
>> any of these bogus emails, and furthermore, I know nothing about the
>> origin of them. Whoever is doing it is not confiding in me. I could not
>
> Um, okay. Sure thing.
>
>> begin to tell you who is up to it.
>>
>
> Obviously someone who actually *is* in the Czech Republic, and not
> someone using the *same* proxy over and over and over, huh, Ralph?

For future reference the Czech Republic is not a person. It is loosely a
country. In that country there are several operations which specialize
in Internet scams, but the country does not have the means or desire to
prosecute them.
Much like Nigeria with its fake e-mails.
In other countries you can backtrace all the viruses to one building.

> 'Cause, you know, everyone in .cz land speaks English and has a burning
> desire to threaten people over the Kennedy assassination.
>

The Czech operations are multi-lingual.

> Perhaps it's one of those CIA fellows deep, deep undercover?
>
>> I state the above categorically, and anyone who knows me knows I am
>> telling the truth. You people are like small children.
>>
>
> Oh, like small children who hold their breath when proven to be wrong
> over and over again on the exact same points?
>
> Oh, like small children who whine and cry when they're kicked off
> *every* JFK forum?
>

Who has the right to kick thek off **EVERY** JFK forum? Ever hear of
free speech?

> Oh, like small children scream as loudly as they can in an attempt to
> make folks think that by repeating something over and over again that
> it's true?
>

That's the WC defenders.

[Anthony Marsh]

Hey, man, you're not trying hard enough. Can't you think up some more
sophisticated insults? You could try calling them Cro-Magnons.

[John McAdams]

On 15 May 2013 22:54:11 -0400, Anthony Marsh

Cro-Magnons were homo sapiens. They doubless looked pretty rough, but
so do some people today.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John Fiorentino]

Your "Certified Network Engineer" (if he even exists) is full of it.

It's an anonymous e-mail rerouting service.

A tracer route is useless. That's why the service exists.

For those types of people who wish to *hide* their true identities,
motives, or worse.

John F.








"Ralph Cinque" <buda...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:7ad15f80-6e2e-4011...@googlegroups.com...

[Canuck]

It's right next to Slovakia, if that helps (LOL). - prwhitmey

[Jason Burke]

On 5/15/2013 3:35 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> I just heard from a Certified Network Engineer. He both e-mailed me and
> called me on the phone. He said that he tracked those email letters that
> were sent to Joseph Backes, for which Backes is accusing me of sending,

If they were sent to Backes (some months ago,) just how did your buddy
get hold of them?
And how about the other folks who've chimed in, saying that they
received emails from the same IP? Are they all Ops also, Ralph? Sure
they are!

> and the engineer said:
>
> "Ralph, here are the results of my investigation of ip address
> 46.167.245.116 using linux programs traceroute and whois. The ip is
> legitimately out of Czech Republic and is not spoofed or masked."
>

No kidding.

> He included the traceroute results which can be seen below. I'll admit
> that this is way over my head, but he tells me that it proves, beyond any
> doubt, that I had nothing to do with it.

How on EARTH does this prove you had nothing to do with it, Ralph?
I suggest that you stick with something you actually supposedly *do*
know something about. Like bending bones. Because analysis of pixellated
nth copies of out of focus photographs isn't your forte, Ralph. (Though
as I look up in the sky, I see a doggie in the clouds. Therefore, I'm an
expert in meteorology!)

>
> 1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 2.980 ms 0.564 ms 0.716 ms
> 2 host-198-245-104-1.cable.onelink.net (198.245.104.1) 14.731 ms 9.401 ms 10.480 ms
> 3 host-198-245-104-1.cable.onelink.net (198.245.104.1) 12.723 ms 10.448 ms 9.978 ms
> 4 10.65.2.58 (10.65.2.58) 15.229 ms 10.708 ms 9.480 ms
> 5 10.65.1.122 (10.65.1.122) 9.981 ms 10.65.1.114 (10.65.1.114) 10.216 ms 10.65.1.122 (10.65.1.122) 10.204 ms
> 6 xe-7-0-0.101.usa.pr-edge01.columbus-networks.com (63.245.23.37) 9.960 ms 20.196 ms 63.245.91.61 (63.245.91.61) 10.228 ms
> 7 xe-2-0-1.usa.nmi-teracore02.columbus-networks.com (63.245.5.170) 37.198 ms 36.685 ms 36.214 ms
> 8 xe-4-0-0.usa.nam-core02.columbus-networks.com (63.245.5.68) 39.948 ms 37.978 ms 49.593 ms
> 9 xe-9-2-0.mia10.ip4.tinet.net (216.221.156.89) 70.446 ms 37.157 ms 40.209 ms
> 10 xe-7-3-2.fra23.ip4.tinet.net (141.136.110.97) 193.606 ms 184.819 ms xe-0-0-0.fra23.ip4.tinet.net (141.136.110.117) 185.094 ms
> 11 as6830.fra23.ip4.tinet.net (141.136.102.82) 169.082 ms 170.013 ms 184.089 ms
> 12 84.116.132.165 (84.116.132.165) 174.628 ms 84.116.132.157 (84.116.132.157) 176.577 ms 175.839 ms
> 13 84.116.135.2 (84.116.135.2) 172.920 ms 174.559 ms 216.602 ms
> 14 84-116-131-158.aorta.net (84.116.131.158) 175.045 ms 176.294 ms 176.133 ms
> 15 84.116.222.45 (84.116.222.45) 177.551 ms 175.071 ms 176.356 ms
> 16 tachyon.finaltek.net (77.48.106.250) 175.862 ms 176.070 ms 189.894 ms
> 17 emkei.cz (46.167.245.116) 176.040 ms 202.790 ms 180.582 ms
>

I find it hard to believe a fellow in Puerto Rico would care...

> He also sent the whois results, but it's too complex and protracted to put
> up here.
>
> He also asked me to withhold his name, so naturally, I am doing that. I

Sure he did.

> was very impressed with him, and he obviously knows what he is talking
> about. He said he can track it every step of the way, and it didn't go

If he knows what he's talking about, then how on earth can he say
'beyond any doubt' that you had nothing to do with it?

> anywhere near my way. And I assure you that I have no connections, no
> associates, no sources, no nothing in Czech Republic. I'd have trouble

You aren't paying attention, Ralph.

> finding it on a map.
>

Of *course*. Did you not pay attention, Ralph? Backes made it quite
clear how to send a message "allegedly" to be from that IP. That it's a
legitimate offshore address was never in question. So easy a, uh,
*child*, could do it.

Amazing how many of those IP addresses in the hops don't show where they
are. Perhaps they're super secret CIA addys, huh, Ralph?

Of course, I *do* wonder just what piece of email you managed to get
your hands on to trace it.

Oops.

Honestly, Ralph, you don't understand the whole point of the original post.

[Anthony Marsh]

As expected. Then you have to do a business analysis of Emkei's Fake
Mailer.

Emkei.cz has 5 years old, it is ranked #115,151 in the world, a low rank
means that this website gets lots of visitors. This site is worth $59,863
USD and advertising revenue is $25 USD per day. The average pages load
time is 3.699 seconds, it is very slow. This site has a very good
Pagernk(4/10), it has 6,426 visitors and 6,555 pageviews per day.
Currently, this site needs more than 538.33 MB bandwidth per day, this
month will needs more than 16.30 GB bandwidth. Its seo score is 75%. IP
address is 46.167.245.118, and its server is hosted at Mesice, Czech
Republic. Last updated on Sat, 11 May 2013 21:48:02 GMT.

In their defense the Fake mailer administrator says: The service does not
violate EU law. We are not obliged to keep any logs.

Emkei.cz, also known as Emkei, looks to be located in Prague, Hlavni Mesto
Praha in Czech Republic based on our research.

This outfits are literally a dime a dozen. Here is a DYI tutorial:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO4LGCHgNRI

[Anthony Marsh]

So are small children. But that is not a very sophisticated insult.
My suggestion was a veiled reference to the TV show Sliders were
Cro-Magnons replaced human in a parallel universe.

> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>

[timstter]

It appears to me that it is EXACTLY what you would do, Ralph.

I think Burke is right on the money, given your track record.

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 Mark Lane lied!

[Sandy McCroskey]

A Nation copy editor was recently given a T-shirt that reads "MISUSE OF
'LITERALLY' MAKES ME FIGURATIVELY INSANE."

/sm

[timstter]

Certified network engineers write to you out of the blue. Retired
spooks write to you out of the blue. All on account of your <snicker>
*important* work with the Oswald Innocence Campaign, I guess.

Just how gullible do you think we all are, Ralph?

Fiorentino got it right.

It's YOU, Ralph!

Corrective Regards,

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/15/2013 11:09 PM, John Fiorentino wrote:
> Your "Certified Network Engineer" (if he even exists) is full of it.
>
> It's an anonymous e-mail rerouting service.
>
> A tracer route is useless. That's why the service exists.
>
> For those types of people who wish to *hide* their true identities,
> motives, or worse.
>
> John F.
>

It reveals where the e-mail came from. Which in this case was a
remailer. This indicates nefarious intent.

[timstter]

Ralph's *Gorilla Man* in the TSBD doorway comes to mind!

[Alex Foyle]

On Friday, May 17, 2013 12:06:50 AM UTC+2, timstter wrote:

> It's YOU, Ralph!

Of course it's him. Who else would call Cinque a "leading JFK researcher"
other than himself?

http://www.ralphcinqueisastupidbitch.blogspot.com

[Glenn V.]

On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 2:58:58 AM UTC+2, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Are you people completely out of your minds? I have not sent any emails to
>
> Joe Backes lately, and times in the past when I have written to him, I
>
> have done so from my usual doctorcinque account. I am not responsible for
>
> any of these bogus emails, and furthermore, I know nothing about the
>
> origin of them. Whoever is doing it is not confiding in me. I could not
>
> begin to tell you who is up to it.

>
>
>
> I state the above categorically, and anyone who knows me knows I am

I certainly hope, for your sake, that those "who knows you" are not aware
of the dark side of Ralph Cinque - that is, the side you repeatedly
displayed on the facebook page "JFK good and bad writings". When
challenged, you are constantly losing your temper, using words like
"whores" and such of your opponents. Remember?

The simple truth is that sending those emails to Backes fits your bill
perfectly, Ralph.

[timstter]

LOL! I think you got THAT one right!

Amusing to see the names of the feeble alter egos that Cinque concocts to
praise his <snicker> OIC nonsense.

Shows about as much imagination as Raph's *bathing in Kennedy's blood*
gibberish.

The only people who do/did that are Oswald and his apologists (like
Lane, Cinque, Fetzer, Baker etc) in my view.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/20/2013 1:28 AM, Glenn V. wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 2:58:58 AM UTC+2, Ralph Cinque wrote:
>> Are you people completely out of your minds? I have not sent any emails to
>>
>> Joe Backes lately, and times in the past when I have written to him, I
>>
>> have done so from my usual doctorcinque account. I am not responsible for
>>
>> any of these bogus emails, and furthermore, I know nothing about the
>>
>> origin of them. Whoever is doing it is not confiding in me. I could not
>>
>> begin to tell you who is up to it.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> I state the above categorically, and anyone who knows me knows I am
>
> I certainly hope, for your sake, that those "who knows you" are not aware
> of the dark side of Ralph Cinque - that is, the side you repeatedly
> displayed on the facebook page "JFK good and bad writings". When
> challenged, you are constantly losing your temper, using words like
> "whores" and such of your opponents. Remember?
>

Wow!
So you claim (without any proof) that he actually used the word "whores"
on the Internet? So you think he should be kicked off the Internet? Or
maybe get the death penalty. I can understand how he loses his temper
when constantly having to deal with people like you.

[Glenn V.]

On Monday, May 20, 2013 8:04:33 PM UTC+2, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 5/20/2013 1:28 AM, Glenn V. wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 2:58:58 AM UTC+2, Ralph Cinque wrote:
>
> >> Are you people completely out of your minds? I have not sent any emails to
>
> >>
>
> >> Joe Backes lately, and times in the past when I have written to him, I
>
> >>
>
> >> have done so from my usual doctorcinque account. I am not responsible for
>
> >>
>
> >> any of these bogus emails, and furthermore, I know nothing about the
>
> >>
>
> >> origin of them. Whoever is doing it is not confiding in me. I could not
>
> >>
>
> >> begin to tell you who is up to it.
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> I state the above categorically, and anyone who knows me knows I am
>
> >
>
> > I certainly hope, for your sake, that those "who knows you" are not aware
>
> > of the dark side of Ralph Cinque - that is, the side you repeatedly
>
> > displayed on the facebook page "JFK good and bad writings". When
>
> > challenged, you are constantly losing your temper, using words like
>
> > "whores" and such of your opponents. Remember?
>
> >
>
>
>
> Wow!
>
> So you claim (without any proof) that he actually used the word "whores"
>
> on the Internet? So you think he should be kicked off the Internet? Or
>
> maybe get the death penalty. I can understand how he loses his temper
>
> when constantly having to deal with people like you.

Another utterly studpid comment from the groups very own troll. Quit
putting words in the mouth of others.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/21/2013 11:11 PM, Glenn V. wrote:
> On Monday, May 20, 2013 8:04:33 PM UTC+2, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 5/20/2013 1:28 AM, Glenn V. wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 2:58:58 AM UTC+2, Ralph Cinque wrote:
>>
>>>> Are you people completely out of your minds? I have not sent any emails to
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> Joe Backes lately, and times in the past when I have written to him, I
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> have done so from my usual doctorcinque account. I am not responsible for
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> any of these bogus emails, and furthermore, I know nothing about the
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> origin of them. Whoever is doing it is not confiding in me. I could not
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> begin to tell you who is up to it.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> I state the above categorically, and anyone who knows me knows I am
>>
>>>
>>
>>> I certainly hope, for your sake, that those "who knows you" are not aware
>>
>>> of the dark side of Ralph Cinque - that is, the side you repeatedly
>>
>>> displayed on the facebook page "JFK good and bad writings". When
>>
>>> challenged, you are constantly losing your temper, using words like
>>
>>> "whores" and such of your opponents. Remember?
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Wow!
>>
>> So you claim (without any proof) that he actually used the word "whores"
>>
>> on the Internet? So you think he should be kicked off the Internet? Or
>>
>> maybe get the death penalty. I can understand how he loses his temper
>>
>> when constantly having to deal with people like you.
>
> Another utterly studpid comment from the groups very own troll. Quit
> putting words in the mouth of others.
>
>

You of all people calling me a troll? You don't even know what a troll
was. I've been here longer than everyone. I am the definition of a
regular. I never put words in your mouth. You just make false charges
because you can't debate.

[Glenn V.]

Ever since I caught you with your pants down by your ankles, ridiculously
denying having that you'd bought into Judyth Bakers fantasies, these
obsessed and juvenile attacks from you have kept coming. Time to grow up
and get a life, Marsh?

[Anthony Marsh]

More misrepresentation. I never "bought into" anything Judyth Baker said.
I helped others investigate her claims. I'd like to see you do some real
research some day instead of only making personal attacks.

[Glenn V.]

Well, I guess it's worth responding to such an incorrect statement only as
there may be newc omers in this group. Other than that, you are a
complete waste of time.

You claimed that Baker had been granted asylum in Sweden. Which was and
sti ll is, a blatant lie. You published a document on your site claiming
it rep resented proof of this asylum grant. Which, of course, was another
hilariou s lie. Only after I pointed out what that document really was,
you eventual ly removed it.

The fact is, you had bought into her fantasies - vigorously defending them
here in this group - up to your eye-balls, Marsh.

But I guess no one should expect you to be man enough to stand up for your
own mistakes. No surprise there.

[Anthony Marsh]

> there may be newc=mers in this group. Other than that, you are a

> complete waste of time.
>
> You claimed that Baker had been granted asylum in Sweden. Which was and

> sti=l is, a blatant lie. You published a document on your site claiming

Nice to see that McAdams allows and encourages you to violate the rules
and call me a liar. Too bad I can't do the same in return. What I said was
that she was granted "temporary" asylum while her case was being reviewed.
But of course you left out the "temporary." Is that because you don't know
what the word means or because it got in the way of attacking me?

> it rep=esented proof of this asylum grant. Which, of course, was another
> hilariou= lie. Only after I pointed out what that document really was,
> you eventual=y removed it.
>

Nonsense.

> The fact is, you had bought into her fantasies - vigorously defending them

> =ere in this group - up to your eye-balls, Marsh.
>

Slander.

> But I guess no one should expect you to be man enough to stand up for your

> =wn mistakes. No surprise there.
>

Slander.

[Walt]

Ok John.... Put down the mirror...... What you sees is what you gets.....
You are, what you are.


>
> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Anthony Marsh]

You've never seen John, have you? I have. I met him in person.
To me he looks more like Bigfoot. Cro-Magnons were shorter than
modern humans.

>
>>
>> .John
>> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>
>

[Sandy McCroskey]

Gee, I really wonder what Marsh looks like.
(Anybody can see pictures of me on my Facebook page. Never found one of
Tony.)

/sm

[elpdr...@gmail.com]

I have some photos of Marsh from the 1985 Washington D.C. conference,
somewhere.

[Anthony Marsh]

Jeez, you mean McAdams or Barber or Vaughan don't remember what I look
like? Before I grew my beard people used to tell me that I looked like
Glen Campbell. Then he went and grew a beard.
Now if you were really resourceful you could find a picture of me
online. Did you look at my FBI file?


> /sm
>

[Sandy McCroskey]

I didn't say anything remotely like that. I only said that I don't know
what you look like.

/sm

[Anthony Marsh]

In other words you don't know how to use a computer. Ask Homeland
Security for a copy.

[Sandy McCroskey]

Honestly, I'm not *that* curious about this.

/sm

[elpdr...@gmail.com]

Believe me Tony, you look **NOTHING** like Glen Campbell, with or without
your beard! And why you asked whether or not I "remember what you look
like" as if I asked the question that Sandy did? All I said was that I
have photos from the 1985 conference! Get it together, man!

[Anthony Marsh]

As I said before WHEN I WAS YOUNG many people told me that I looked like
Glen Campbell.

[elpdr...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 10:11:49 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 5/28/2013 10:38 AM, elpdr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, May 26, 2013 11:52:03 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>
> >> On 5/25/2013 9:01 PM, Sandy McCroskey wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>> On 5/25/13 5:49 PM, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>>> On 5/25/2013 12:36 PM, Walt wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> On May 15, 10:02 pm, John McAdams wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>> On 15 May 2013 22:54:11 -0400, Anthony Marsh
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>
>
> >>
>

Ever since I first saw you in Washington, I've always thought that in
the face, you strongly resemble actor/comedian Louie Anderson.