One Million!

[Robert Harris]

It was the first JFK presentation I ever did on Youtube, back in 2007. The
production values weren't very good, and using a crappy webcam, I looked
even fatter than I really am. But just minutes before midnight on Sunday,
11/22/2009, it passed one million views.

Yes, I know. That is far from being number one and in fact, the original
"secret service stand down" has over two million, which proves that the
number of views has nothing to do with how accurate a video is.

But based on a LOT of responses, I know that it made a large number of
people aware of the massive damage in the back of JFK's head, which we see
in frames after 330 (335 and 337 are the clearest), and that the damage
was inflicted sometime well after the explosion at 313.

The video also explains the presence of a large protrusion in the back of
the President's head, which was the result of a piece of skull being blown
to the rear, which remained suspended in the scalp. The link to it is
here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVfIh-8nXyQ

There is a followup video response I posted, which is linked just below
it, that includes citations from Dr. Thornton Boswell, who fully confirms
the nature of that damage. Its URL is here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYaoBB1rwkc

Robert Harris

[Sandy McCroskey]

I like what you say here: "which proves that the

number of views has nothing to do with how accurate a video is."

Truer words were never spoken!
Sandy

[bigdog]

On Nov 23, 8:32 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:

You mean one million people have stumbled across your video while
searching for internet porn?

[jas]

Congrats...

...however, I hate to burst your bubble, but there were millions of views
on the Phoenix Lights videos too. Doesn't mean there was a giant UFO, in
fact, and beyond all doubt, hanging there.

[Robert Harris]

In article
<c35e0320-4244-466e...@m13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
Sandy McCroskey <gwmcc...@earthlink.net> wrote:

Thank you Sandy. I'm glad to see that you found nothing in that video to
disagree with.

Robert Harris

(snipped insignificant drivel)

[Robert Harris]

In article
<682ddc69-0432-4ccf...@31g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
bigdog <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Nothing warms my heart more than the tears of a nutter:-)

Robert Harris

[Nobody]

On Nov 25, 9:13 am, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article
> <682ddc69-0432-4ccf-abe5-ce8151156...@31g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,

Though I can't agree with your theory I feel you are to be commended
for the effort. Good going and don't give up! Stan

[Sandy McCroskey]

On Nov 24, 9:53 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article
> <c35e0320-4244-466e-9d89-c4c597f7f...@m13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,

That's not what I said at all. Which speaks to your interpretive
abilities.
Your snipping the gist of my message evinces your willingness to alter
records to justify your point of view.
/sandy

[Robert Harris]

In article
<2653507f-cb56-4ee9...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
Sandy McCroskey <gwmcc...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On Nov 24, 9:53?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <c35e0320-4244-466e-9d89-c4c597f7f...@m13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,

> > ?Sandy McCroskey <gwmccros...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Nov 23, 8:32 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > It was the first JFK presentation I ever did on Youtube, back in 2007.
> > > > The
> > > > production values weren't very good, and using a crappy webcam, I
> > > > looked
> > > > even fatter than I really am. But just minutes before midnight on
> > > > Sunday,
> > > > 11/22/2009, it passed one million views.
> >
> > > > Yes, I know. That is far from being number one and in fact, the
> > > > original
> > > > "secret service stand down" has over two million, which proves that the
> > > > number of views has nothing to do with how accurate a video is.
> >
> > > > But based on a LOT of responses, I know that it made a large number of
> > > > people aware of the massive damage in the back of JFK's head, which we
> > > > see
> > > > in frames after 330 (335 and 337 are the clearest), and that the damage
> > > > was inflicted sometime well after the explosion at 313.
> >
> > > > The video also explains the presence of a large protrusion in the back
> > > > of
> > > > the President's head, which was the result of a piece of skull being
> > > > blown

> > > > to the rear, which remained suspended in the scalp. ?The link to it is

> > > > here:
> >
> > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVfIh-8nXyQ
> >
> > > > There is a followup video response I posted, which is linked just below
> > > > it, that includes citations from Dr. Thornton Boswell, who fully
> > > > confirms
> > > > the nature of that damage. Its URL is here:
> >
> > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYaoBB1rwkc
> >
> > > > Robert Harris
> >
> > > I like what you say here
> >
> > Thank you Sandy. I'm glad to see that you found nothing in that video to
> > disagree with.
> >
> > Robert Harris
> >
> > (snipped insignificant drivel)
>
>
> That's not what I said at all. Which speaks to your interpretive
> abilities.
> Your snipping the gist of my message evinces your willingness to alter
> records to justify your point of view.

Damn! Nothing gets past you, does it:-)

Robert Harris

[ShutterBun]

On Nov 25, 8:32 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article
> <2653507f-cb56-4ee9-ab6f-417d84739...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,

I'll sidestep the snarky comments and give Bob a "grats" on hitting the
platinum certification. Obviously we don't often agree on the issues, but
you've been what I'd consider a "stand up guy" on a professional level.
I daresay any of us here would be glad to have a video that generated that
amount of attention on a subject we consider important.