Looking for John P. Salamone

The notion of 'thousands of victims' was crucial to generate universal public outrage. However, having 3000 angry families breathing down their necks was never part of the perps' demented plan. Our ongoing analyses and investigations suggest that NO one died on 9/11.
lux
Member
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by lux » Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:52 pm

blindedbyscience wrote:
The dates on the photos are accurate.
What are the dates? (They are barely legible, that is why I asked)

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6929
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by simonshack » Wed Feb 06, 2013 11:56 pm

*

Blindedbyscience,

I will have to ask you once again:

Who is Kathleen O'Donnell?

Image

blindedbyscience
Banned
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:36 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by blindedbyscience » Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:51 am

To Lux: I can't see the dates any better than what is on the scan. Two of them have '82, and one is 10/83. I haven't looked to see if any others in that album have better markings, as the photos are stuck for 30 years to the page of an album and they are getting damaged when I try to peel them off the sticky backing.

To Simon: I do not know who she is. I've not been working on this. I've contacted Oglethorpe friends to address John's existence, as I have no more photos to offer. I never met anyone else in his family, and I certainly cannot remember so many details from 30 years ago.

I have received several more notes of support from other members of the forum. Unfortunately, most have mentioned that they can't speak out on this post for fear of being banned for defending my position that some of the vicsims were real people who have new identities since 9/11. What a shame. You mentioned it was logic, not dogma. I'm going to counter the logic argument with paradigm. A paradigm shift to the possibility that not all people were "made up" is something that many on this board are not yet willing to consider without more evidence. I cannot offer you any more evidence at this time. If I receive additional info from other OU friends, I'll let you know.

It's a shame, really, that I have info on other topics, but have been banned from all other threads.

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6929
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by simonshack » Thu Feb 07, 2013 1:32 pm

blindedbyscience wrote:
I have received several more notes of support from other members of the forum. Unfortunately, most have mentioned that they can't speak out on this post for fear of being banned for defending my position that some of the vicsims were real people who have new identities since 9/11. What a shame. You mentioned it was logic, not dogma. I'm going to counter the logic argument with paradigm. A paradigm shift to the possibility that not all people were "made up" is something that many on this board are not yet willing to consider without more evidence. I cannot offer you any more evidence at this time. If I receive additional info from other OU friends, I'll let you know.
Dear BBS,


FYI - I posted this back in 2010 - and keep linking back to it whenever this old, re-hashed issue resurfaces :

FRANK AHEARN
t h e *e s c a p e *a r t i s t
http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p2349063

I beg you (and anyone else) to stop bringing up the 'dogma' word when referring to our continuous efforts to make sense out of the whole vicsim puzzle. I hope your presence here won't be limited to questioning our research methodology - and dropping 'what a shame' laments. Yes, my working postulation is that all the 9/11 victims were simulated and I, for one, have never ruled out the possibility that a few might have been given new identities and are currently sipping vodka-martinis in Polynesia. This wouldn't make such alleged '9/11 victims' any less simulated, would it? So, by any means, keep us updated on your future findings - but make sure that you keep your John P. Salamone research as sharp as possible. I hope you have appreciated my help so far in determining that he is NOT listed on the SSDI (as you erroneously believed), that his name is to be found as (apparently) 'alive and well at age 49' on people-search engines - and that there exists an umpteenth, bogus-looking fundraising foundation in his name - something that you seem to have been unaware of.

I trust you are as excited as me to read what the foundation has to say about John P's absence from the SSDI. <_<
I'll keep you posted about that (no reply so far).

blindedbyscience
Banned
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:36 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by blindedbyscience » Thu Feb 07, 2013 2:05 pm

Simon: I did agree with you with regards to the use of the word "Dogma", but I countered with "Paradigm", which I believe is even more correct than "Logic".

I found JPS's birth and death notice in ancsestry.com along with his residence report. I never claimed to have found an SSDI entry, so I never erroneously believed it. The death registry is not the same as the SSDI. At first, you were not able to find ANY entries for JPS, which is why you asked me to post the links to the ones I found. The people-finder may be based on the SSDI, and since JPS's SS number was not reported to the SSDI, his age may still ticking upward with the last known address. I've found this to be the case with other reported victims as well. I have known FOR YEARS about the numerous fund-raising/memorial sites for John. That information is not new to me. I've never had any reason, until now, to question them. Oglethorpe even has an annual soccer event held in JPS's memory, and they have named their stadium after him.

I'll continue my efforts, and I do appreciate your support and help on this. However, trust me when I say that I'm NOT doing it to gain the approval of those who have been snide and verbally abusive to me. Questioning the information? Fine. Name calling and slurs? Not Fine. It IS a shame that I cannot post on any other thread. Excluding me from other threads is child-like. Period.

I had really thought that someone would find an interest in the photo of Peter Galinas, who looks just like the John Salamone listed on IMDb. That was in no way meant as a diversion. Research always filters through a lot of fertile soil, often picking up clues and nuggets of information along the way. These should never be simply discarded as nonsense.
Last edited by blindedbyscience on Thu Feb 07, 2013 2:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Thu Feb 07, 2013 2:13 pm

Not that this is information that I need to provide anyone on this board, but I've got 2 kids, a house, a husband who is working 400 miles from home, and we are preparing to move to where he is working at the end of the school year. A phone call from him Sunday night that the housing market was picking up and I should get the house ready to go on the market by March 1, 2013, added a bit of pressure to my normal schedule, and I spent most of Monday starting to sort through and pack up things that we aren't currently using.
Your continual backstopping of the character you play on the forum is noted. You make me sick. You exploit your own children to claim you are legit (who in their right mind would do such a thing except as a cheap exploitative emotionally manipulative action?) and you act in exact contradiction to your statement in bold above. And that is if you aren't a lying sack of shit. If the information does not need to be provided, why do you act exactly as though you are assigned to provide it?

As for it being "child-like" to restrict a highly suspicious new member to a topic of paramount importance to the subject of the forum and for which they themselves claim intimate knowledge (this pertains to you, in case that isn't clear enough) you are confused about what a child actually is, which makes me further doubt your backstopping story. Did someone hand you those statements on a post-it note?

As for feeling "insulted" that people think you are full of shit, perhaps you should consider how insulted we must be for being told to swallow it. You could be generating more photoshopped pictures or buying time for your cubicle friend to do so instead of increasingly acting as though you've been shortchanged by the Identity Generation Department.

blindedbyscience
Banned
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:36 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by blindedbyscience » Thu Feb 07, 2013 2:17 pm

Simon, I appreciate your help and hope to remain your friend, but Hoi just insulted me for the last time. So long.

Flabbergasted
Moderator
Posts: 864
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:19 am

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by Flabbergasted » Thu Feb 07, 2013 2:18 pm

hoi.polloi wrote:[To BBS]: You have posted your story about this connection to an alleged life and death of what for eleven years has been nothing more than a photoshopped picture and you need to get cracking and post better proof.
Hoi,

Can you give examples of postable material that could vindicate BBS's claims of being personally acquainted with John P. Salamone back in 1983? When I say postable, I mean something that can be shared on a forum, with no actual personal contact. For the sake of argument, let's suppose BBS had plenty of time and money to explore the matter plus an array of Salamone memorabilia stowed away in a closet. What would constitute "better proof" within the restrictions imposed by the format of forum-based research?
I think this would help everyone focus on truly relevant information.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Thu Feb 07, 2013 2:22 pm

First of all, I am not going to inform the perps that read this forum (or are already registered ???) on how to act like a genuine person interested in the truth. It will look like truth if it is truth. blindedbyscience was acting like a squirming perp using every psychological tactic in the book to avoid presenting further evidence. I, for one, would love to have seen a more fighting spirit and I would love to have been digitally clobbered with an enormous stream of evidence that someone was real, in which case I would have to eat some humble pie. But this topic's content is a pathetic offering to John Putrigard Salamaloney and it obviously doesn't cut it.

A person is not a set of data equivalences. They are a constant, dynamic real-life event. The simulation is catching up to the realism of real people, but it's not there yet. And if you want to base the standard on blindedbyscience it's apparently not much past the level of a TV sitcom character.


Second of all:
When I say postable, I mean something that can be shared on a forum, with no actual personal contact.
How can anything on an Internet forum be enough to prove a person is real? Stuff on an Internet forum can only convince one that an investigation is worth making in real life. So far, I am quite far from being convinced that anyone I've ever encountered in real life who said they knew someone related to 9/11 has shown actual interest in doing much more than poo-pooing and shaming those who ask questions. Not very real stuff for people who actually lost a loved one if you ask me.

By the way, I happen to have done a fully fledged interview with someone who claims to have had knowledge of a 9/11 family and they turned out to be a rather shady character, so I have some pretty high standards for these perps coming on here and claiming a 9/11 victim is real. As for mere Internet users who act like we should be taking their posts at face value as though we really were "child-like", they're not even close to the liars I've met face-to-face. How can you expect me to lower my psychological defenses in the virtual world (where anybody is anybody) in comparison to the nonsense I've had to deal with in person (where people are slightly more what they seem)?

Seriously? On the Internet? Are you mad? Where streams of everything are posted everywhere daily? It would just be stupid.

Is this forum even the best place for doing detective work? I would argue not. This forum is best at identifying when media is questionable. We've done a tolerable job so far, but if you haven't "figured that out" yet, we apparently haven't done well enough.

blindedbyscience
Banned
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:36 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by blindedbyscience » Thu Feb 07, 2013 2:53 pm

hoi.polloi wrote: You make me sick.
The feeling would be mutual, if I cared at all what you think.
hoi.polloi wrote:A person is not a set of data equivalences.
In your case, I think it is:
Hoi polloi (Ancient Greek: οἱ πολλοί, hoi polloi, “the many”), a Greek expression meaning "the many" or, in the strictest sense, "the majority", is used in English to refer to the working class, commoners, the masses or common people in a derogatory sense. Synonyms for hoi polloi which also express the same or similar contempt for such people include "the great unwashed", "the plebeians" or "plebs", "the rabble", [1] "riff-raff", "the herd", "the proles" and "peons".[2]

-From Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoi_polloi

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:04 pm

I see you are trying to continue your act instead of use your registration to blow my argument out of the water. I suppose it just might be because you don't have any more data, because there is no more data for Johnny Salmon. It needs time to be created and any excuse to look "innocently insulted" is rife for your exit. Isn't that rather fair to guess?

The feeling would be mutual, if I cared at all what you think.
Well - right - I meant if I actually believed your story it wouldn't seem so disgusting to be telling stuff about your "children" to an Internet forum about identity fabrication, etc. - it would just seem as though you're not the main caretaker of your offspring. But seeing as how I don't believe you and I think you are using the story of "your children" - real or fabricated - as fodder for a professional lie ... I guess I find that to be rather reprehensible. And a rather transparent way to garner anonymous sympathy.

If this is your job, you're really terrible at it. You might want to hide this site from your superiors so they don't see how you did absolutely nothing to argue against my point. I said people are not data and you retort that my username (i.e.; not a real person - though I guess you would have trouble distinguishing after a while in your line of work?) is derived from data. Which demonstrates my point rather effectively.

Are you trying to continue your act as an ignorant fool (who just "happened" to know a 9/11 victim)? Oh, I get it. You need to be seen as ineffectual but banned so you can look like a cyber-martyr. Very well, have it your way. Banned. Good bye!

omaxsteve
Banned
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 12:44 am
Contact:

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by omaxsteve » Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:55 pm

Seems to me that Blinded by Science came here in good faith. She answered every question as best she could, and showed remarkable tolerance for abuse.

Is the position of this board's moderators that she did not attend Ogelthorpe University at the time as the Salomone VicSim character? Or is teh position that she did attend, but someone named John Salamone did not?

It seems to me at least that there is enough evidence that Salomone did attend the university and played on the soccer team.
BBS never stated that she believed the fellow died in the towers on September 11, only that she knew him in college.

While the vicsim theory is a stroke of genius and without a doubt there is ample evidence that the great majority of the alleged deaths on 911 were totally fabricated personalities that never took a human breath, I don't understand the need to to believe that it covers 100% of the vicsims. I would be shocked if the perps were not smart enough to add few real victims to the mix .whether as Simon says they were "plucked"from the street and given new identities and/or are living in some tropical paradise, or they died natural deaths totally coincidentally very near to the date of the 911 hoax. Perhaps even some were murdered that day ( Like the Ashworth fellow who was starting his first day on the job as head of security at the trade centers?)

We have a number of members, for example, that saw Garnet "ace" Bailey play hockey and who really knows what happened to him? He most assuredly did not die in a plane that did not crash that day. Could he have perhaps been diagnosed with terminal cancer and accepted an offer of a few million dollars for his heirs and the chance to spend his dying days in Shangri-la in return for him to simply disappear?

My point is we DON'T know what happened to the supposed victims. We DO know that many of them (ALMOST all) never existed , we also DO know that at least some of them DID exist bud DID NOT die as reported. The best chance to "solve" the crime and nail the perps is by exploring and investigating the disappearance of those few vicsims that actually did exist pre 911.

When someone comes to this board, in good faith, and offers to help in the pursuit of the truth I don`t see how anyone benefits by bullying them until they leave. There is nothing that anyone can say , do, or demonstrate that would disprove the crux of the vicsim theory that NEARLY all of the approximately 3,000 911 deaths were manufactured and completely fabricated entities. Trying to stretch that theory to account for 100% of the vicsims is, in my opinion, counterproductive. It make us look like the "any of the other forums" where certain issues are not allowed to be discussed and anyone who crosses the line is immediately banned.

The only thing that I now for sure is that if,my brother or sister, or parent or child, or someone I loved was said to have died on one the planes that didn't crash, or to have died in a tower that was said to have collapsed because of a fake plane crash, I would not sleep until I exposed the perpetrators of this hoax. We need to get a brother or sister, if one exists, to come here and explain why they are not seeking answers and explanations for the deaths of their loved ones. Perhaps BBS, if treated properly, could have made that happen.

With the way she was treated there is no longer a chance that she would ask,or invite anyone else she knows who may have crossed paths (or had a closer relationship) with this Salomone character to come here to offer proof and suffer this level of personal abuse.

I truly love this Forum and appreciate all that I have learned and discovered here. I think it would be better served if we lost the hostility and treated newcomers with the respect that they deserve. If it turns out that they cannot handle the scrutiny or fail to address legitimate questions raised then by all means , they SHOULD be banned and ridiculed without mercy. On the other hand, if the position of this board when faced with someone who claims to have known a victim is welcoming, yet rightfully suspicious at the same time perhaps we can flush out some more truth. Maybe we can find a link, something in common, between the victims whose deaths were faked, as compared to the faked people who never lived in the first place.

For example , a good line of investigation is always to follow the money. Who received the vicsims compensation money that was doled out for each of the vics? Hoi has done a great job pursuing the airline passenger manifests through the FOI act. Is that recourse available (FOI) for getting information about the compensation fund ? How did the next of kin prove their relationship to the vicsims?

In my humble opinion , everyone should be considered innocent until proven "guilty". Treating everyone as if they are guilty, trolls, or shills, without evidence of same does nothing to advance the cause, or the search for truth. It does nothing to make the vicsim theory more believable, in fact it does the opposite.

I do not remember any other case where someone who claimed to have personally known a vicsim actually provided this forum with any evidence to support that contention. BBS did so, and calling her names, and treating as if she was a threat to the very existence of the Forum is both misguided and inappropriate.

Just my two cents, for whatever it's worth.

regards,

Steve O.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Thu Feb 07, 2013 4:58 pm

I am getting so tired of this unsteady reasoning. First of all, why does your typing continue to get more scattered as you continue to post on this forum? But anyway, I need to address your two rather hefty cents.
Seems to me that Blinded by Science came here in good faith.


Not to me.

She answered every question as best she could, and showed remarkable tolerance for abuse.
I disagree. "She"(He/It) showed hesitation in answering questions, protested any questions of good faith immediately, and ultimately went out - just minutes ago - with three posts acting "hurt" instead of posting evidence. One of a few different recycled tactics/performances by much more obvious shills of the past. Please go back and look where this has happened before, you will see I am exactly right about this being a repeating pattern with greater and greater weight placed on "new evidence" of sims, with increasing technical quality.

Is the position of this board's moderators that she did not attend Ogelthorpe University at the time as the Salomone VicSim character? Or is teh position that she did attend, but someone named John Salamone did not?
Why do we need a collective position?

It seems to me at least that there is enough evidence that Salomone did attend the university and played on the soccer team.
I disagree. Call me cynical if you wish.



I would be shocked if the perps were not smart enough to add few real victims to the mix .
Why?

Perhaps even some were murdered that day ( Like the Ashworth fellow who was starting his first day on the job as head of security at the trade centers?)
Perhaps so. Prove it. Start a thread.

We have a number of members, for example, that saw Garnet "ace" Bailey play hockey


We have a number of members who claim they saw a lot of things. Are you so willing to believe them so readily? It doesn't speak highly of blindedbyscience if you are.

My point is we DON'T know what happened to the supposed victims. We DO know that many of them (ALMOST all) never existed , we also DO know that at least some of them DID exist bud DID NOT die as reported.
Sorry but my bolds of the above passage of your text is all I can agree with.

The best chance to "solve" the crime and nail the perps is by exploring and investigating the disappearance of those few vicsims that actually did exist pre 911.
I don't think so. I think it's pretty "case closed" or "case open perpetually". We'll never really know. To claim otherwise, or to claim we can find important details in the enormous scam is a waste of our time while the world moves on, more than eleven years later, and new more (and less) sophisticated PsyOps continue to plague the news media.

When someone comes to this board, in good faith, and offers to help in the pursuit of the truth I don`t see how anyone benefits by bullying them until they leave.
The goal isn't to make people in good faith leave. If people in good faith leave, the egg is on our face. I disagree that this entity was in good faith.

Trying to [...] to account for 100% of the vicsims is, in my opinion, counterproductive.
There we are in agreement. If someone not suited to the forum falls by the wayside, pursue them. Do you want their e-mail address? Start a blog. Start a forum. Who cares?


The only thing that I now for sure is that if,my brother or sister, or parent or child, or someone I loved was said to have died on one the planes that didn't crash, or to have died in a tower that was said to have collapsed because of a fake plane crash, I would not sleep until I exposed the perpetrators of this hoax. We need to get a brother or sister, if one exists, to come here and explain why they are not seeking answers and explanations for the deaths of their loved ones. Perhaps BBS, if treated properly, could have made that happen.
No. That's really the last thing we need. Explanations from insane, hypnotized people that might just be actors anyway? What we need is a real life whistle-blower, but none seems to exist.

With the way she was treated there is no longer a chance that she would ask,or invite anyone else she knows who may have crossed paths (or had a closer relationship) with this Salomone character to come here to offer proof and suffer this level of personal abuse.
Why is this forum even expected to be a place for such people to appear? If she/he/it is legit, find her/him/it and start a blog about her/his/its evidence. Why do you need us? Simon has offered his e-mail plenty of times for personal contact. Yet instead we get "casual researchers" pretending to be like us, mocking us, insulting the premise of our board - which is to ask very difficult and offensive questions that nobody is asking - and then randomly introducing critical information as if it were not the very focus of the entire fucking web site, then leave in a flurry of tears or insults when they "discover" what the site is about, even though it's quite plain what it's about from the first moment.

I think it would be better served if we lost the hostility and treated newcomers with the respect that they deserve.
Thanks for the idea, we tried that. Look at how many shills we've had to uncover and boot because of our assumption of good faith. Perhaps you haven't been paying attention?



For example , a good line of investigation is always to follow the money. Who received the vicsims compensation money that was doled out for each of the vics? Hoi has done a great job pursuing the airline passenger manifests through the FOI act. Is that recourse available (FOI) for getting information about the compensation fund ? How did the next of kin prove their relationship to the vicsims?
Go for it. Seems unrelated to this perp to me.

In my humble opinion , everyone should be considered innocent until proven "guilty".
Naw. I'd rather everyone assume "hoi.polloi" was a perp than everyone fall for the seduction of a traitorous, sociopathic bunch of really creepy real perps using technology and the Internet to gain a foothold in their mind and in their community. Fuck scams and schemes. We've seen enough of those. It's time to sharpen our senses and learn some defensive critical thinking.


Treating everyone as if they are guilty, trolls, or shills, without evidence of same does nothing to advance the cause, or the search for truth. It does nothing to make the vicsim theory more believable, in fact it does the opposite.
First of all, I disagree that's what we're doing. It's just our site has a high proportion of shills and trolls. Second of all, believability is in the eye of the beholder. If I am no longer an admin, you won't have to worry about me protecting you from your naivete anymore, you can believe anything you want. But as long as I am admin, I will continue to make strong demands of people with extraordinary claims who dis the premise of the forum just because they are in the limelight at the moment.

I do not remember any other case where someone who claimed to have personally known a vicsim actually provided this forum with any evidence to support that contention.
Interesting observation. Do you consider anecdotes evidence? We've gotten pleeeeeeenty of that shit. Have you noticed how the simulation gets closer and closer to our door? Have you noticed how long-term members turn out to have simmy cousins or seem simmy themselves?

BBS did so, and calling her names, and treating as if she was a threat to the very existence of the Forum is both misguided and inappropriate.
No, it's totally appropriate to demand more and more as the simulation gets more and more sophisticated. Anything less is misguided and inappropriate - and illogical. And a little dumb, actually. We need some pretty extraordinary posts to ensure readers of the future (if there will be any) that we did our task well, and didn't settle because we suddenly decided the simulation passed the "uncanny valley" and seduced us all into "the Matrix".

Thanks.

lux
Member
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: Looking for John P. Salamone

Unread post by lux » Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:53 pm

blindedbyscience wrote:To Lux: I can't see the dates any better than what is on the scan. Two of them have '82, and one is 10/83. I haven't looked to see if any others in that album have better markings, as the photos are stuck for 30 years to the page of an album and they are getting damaged when I try to peel them off the sticky backing.
I don't understand. You said, "The dates on the photos are accurate" but now you can only see the year? Do you not remember what time of year you took the 1982 photos?

antipodean
Member
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:53 am
Contact:

Re: 9/11 ACTORS

Unread post by antipodean » Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:15 pm

blindedbyscience wrote:
simonshack wrote: What if your old friend is still alive and well, at age 49? Would you kiss him again? :)
Here's a John P. Salamone / age 49 - from Caldwell, NJ : http://www.lookupanyone.com/results.php ... cusfirst=1
Holy cow! How did I miss this when you first posted it??!! He WOULD be 49 now, and his wife is named Maryellen... There's a Mary listed, but the kids names aren't there. The plot thickens. :wub:
The same could be said for Elizabeth Wainio, according to a people finder site she is still alive & kicking.
http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?p=2363386#p2363386

The bottom line is that the Photo of the younger John P Salamone doesn't look to be the older John P Salamone posted on the memorial sites.
Image
Image

Locked