Sandy Larsen

And Saint Allah replied, that is correct my son. You may enter the pearly gates.

Al Jazeera just reported that, when asked why Mossad found it necessary to make a mountain out of a mole-hill, Eli Kopter replied that it prefers its helicopter crashes to be Sunni-side-up. In contrast, Shiite-side-down crashes are better suited for land vehicles.

Oswald was indeed manipulated. The assassination plotters manipulated Oswald into taking the role of patsy. Somehow they got him to take a job at the TSBD. Not only that, but the plotters manipulated Ruth Paine into facilitating Oswald into taking that job. What kind of plotters could possibly have this kind of power over people? The only people I can think of are CIA officers who have operations going. Larry, I fear that you don't place enough importance on circumstantial evidence. There's a ton of circumstantial evidence pointing to the fact that Oswald was a CIA operative. Just look at all those goings on in Mexico City by... NOT Oswald, but by Oswald impersonators! What was that all about?? The evidence points to it being an operation designed to have the assassination blamed on Cuba and Russia. Along with Oswald. This is a resolved issue IMO.

My apologies.

First, I'm pretty sure that you meant Dr. Clark, not Perry. Here is what Dr. Clark said in the news conference: "The head wound could have been either the exit wound from the neck or it could have been a tangential wound, as it was simply a large, gaping loss of tissue." He clearly was referring to a gaping exit wound on the back of the head and not the top of the head. Because he surmised the entrance wound for the gaping exit might have been the neck (throat) wound. Besides, all of his other early notes and statements support the back-of-head location. No, what Dr. Clark described is not what is seen in the Zapruder film. He saw a gaping hole in the back of the head. The Zapruder film shows a gaping wound at Kennedy's right temple. Now, what you yourself describe is indeed what the Zapruder film shows. Problem is, not a single witness saw what the Z-film shows... a gaping wound of the temple. Furthermore, the autopsy photos contradict the location of the Zapruder's gaping wound.

Your theory can be true only if: ...the Zapruder film has been altered, given that it shows the large blowout wound to be centered around the right temple, not above the right ear. (Which is what the Rydberg drawing shows.) ...the huge majority of ~45 gaping wound witnesses got the location wrong. Nearly every single one said the gaping wound was on the back of the head, not the top of the head above the right ear. So therefore your theory is ridiculous. Rather than trying to convince yourself that the WC didn't cover up the damning medical evidence which proves conspiracy, why not just accept the obvious fact that they did? Most CTers know that a gunshot from the front (or possibly side) caused the blowout in the back of the head seen by nearly every witness. Most CTers know that a few Z film frames were altered to remove the blowout wound from the back of the head and to create a new one near the right-temple area. Most CTers know that the autopsists misreported the gaping wound being above the right ear instead of the back of the head. Oops! these two alterations contradict each other. Mistakes occur in coverups, and in this one the autopsy report didn't place the gaping wound in quite the same place as the altered Z-film placed it!

Suppose a frame is removed to speed up the limo. Removal of the frame will result in a jerk in the image. The jerk could be camouflaged by introducing a fake camera jerk on the frame. (It will look as though Zapruder jerked the camera a bit.) Unfortunately, the edge of the frame will be jerked as well and this will reveal the alteration. However, that could be resolved by enlarging the whole film a bit, and then cropping the excess off of each frame so the frames are restored to their original size. The jerked motion around the edge of the jerk-added frame would also be cut off. Problem solved.

Yeah, according to himself. He also believes that Nostradamus could predict the future.

Chris, I have a great deal of respect for your work that challenges alterationists. Not because I'm an anti-alterationist, but because I do accept alterationism when warranted, but at the same time don't want to be mistaken in my alteration beliefs. Because of that, I want to know precisely your position on the items we've discussed. Please bear with me. I know you have already answered my questions. Like with this one: That is very clear and so I understand your position. Thank you. But the next one appears ambiguous to me: Because when you say, "The 4 bike cops all mistakenly thinking the limo almost fully stopped or fully stopped for a brief moment is very compelling," it sounds like you're saying that it is compelling that the cops are mistaken. But when you say, "Can't fathom all of them making such a huge miscalculation," it sounds like you're saying that it's hard to believe the cops are mistaken. Do you see how the two bold phrases are contradictory? I considered the possibility that you intended for your two sentences to contradict, meaning that possibility A is compelling, but possibility B also had its merits... where A and B are opposites. But I'm not sure. So will you make your position on this more clear for me? Just one more thing: What is your position on the gaping wound centered at the right temple as seen developing in the Z-film? The wound that no witness ever saw?

Chris, I appreciate the work that you do. And I certainly would never discourage it, nor discourage others from considering it. But just like there can always be a flaw in somebody's insistence of there being a film alteration, there could just as well as be a flaw in one of your (or anybody else's) debunkings. Or, for that matter, in one of your accepted possibilities of an alteration. Here's the way I think about alterations: When 45 witnesses see a gaping wound in the back of the head... there is indeed a gaping wound in the back of the head. And if the Z film doesn't show it, it is because of something wrong with the film. For example, perhaps the head is turned in a way that the shading from the sun makes it impossible to see the wound. Or, maybe the film has been altered to cover the wound. Next, the Z film clearly shows a huge wound centered around Kennedy's right temple. Not a single witness saw this wound. Even the autopsy photos don't show such a wound. What this tells me is that the wound was somehow painted onto in the Z film. I wouldn't care if 1000 Chris Bristows had debunked every conceivable way such an alteration would be made, I would still insist that there is an alteration... that somehow it was made. Because of the overwhelming evidence that there was no such actual wound of the head.

I agree with everything you say, William. We disagree only on Biden's response to Netanyahu's actions. I also have conservative friends who hate the way Biden is handling the war. They are upset about Biden threatening to pull the military aid from Israel. When I point out how immoral the war is (my point being the 35,000 dead innocent civilians compared to 1200 lost Israeli lives, and the 1.5 million refugees in humanitarian crisis), their attitude is that Israel has every right to fight Hamas. They say that what is happening to the Palestinians is awful, but that that is just the cost of war. Just another reminder why I am not a conservative. BTW, shame on them. They claim to be followers of Christ. (Which ironically is probably the reason they support Israel.) Christ taught us to love our enemies, not to kill them. Which I know is not a very practical teaching. But it certainly means that we should favor innocent civilians over the war plans of those getting revenge on their enemies.

I currently am in favor of the MSM reporting broken poll numbers that favor Trump. Because I am afraid that without them, Democrat voters will get lazy and not bother to vote... thinking that Biden is a shoo-in. I still recall feeling that Hillary was a shoo-in against bozo candidate Trump in 2016. Could she have lost due to Democratic overconfidence?

Kirk, Netanyahu hasn't yet crossed the red line that Biden set out for him. Biden said he would stop the shipment of military aid if Netanyahu crossed the line. Though I don't recall if Biden specified the type of aid, offensive vs. defensive. Biden did delay that one shipment of 2000 lb bombs. Maybe because he fears Netanyahu can no longer be controlled. Or maybe to show Netanyahu that he is serious.

I was never under the impression that IDF was using targeted bombing prior to the Rafah portion of the war.

William, Why are you posing that question toward me? I happen to agree with you that the war is a Netanyahu genocide and that it's horrible. I don't know how that got lost on you. Is it because I pointed out that one graphic that turns out to be fake news? I get my news from a variety of sources, including from links you provide.

This is fake news. There is no carpet bombing in Jabalia or Rafah. There is only targeted bombing, and fighting between IDF and Hamas forces. Meanwhile, I just read that nearly 500,000 refugees have fled Rafah. Which surprises me because I thought they'd be in no condition to leave given their lack of basic necessities of life. Maybe the humanitarian shipments aren't as bad as they've been made out to be.

Israeli tanks push deeper into Rafah, battles rage in northern Gaza This isn't a large scale invasion of Rafah.

Does this guy go around talking about the "power of three?" Question: What are 3, 9, and 27? Answer: The first three powers of three.

Biden Moves Forward on $1 Billion in New Arms for Israel Netanyahu hasn't begun his large scale invasion of Rafah. That has been Biden's red line for the last two months. So you are attempting to move the goal posts. To be clear, Biden threatened to quit sending offensive weapons to Israel if Israel invaded or began large scale bombing of Rafah, unless Israel first took measures to provide humanitarian aid to the refugees in Rafah, AND to protect the refugees from Israel's bombing. As of now, Biden still has the means to threaten Netanyahu into not invading or large-scale bombing Rafah. Had Biden done what you think he should have done -- actually stopped sending military aid -- Biden would have lost his leverage over Netanyahu. Without that leverage, Netanyahu would do as he pleases and bomb the hell out of Rafah. There would be no warnings for the refugees, and a loss of humanitarian aid. It would be a blood bath. But, oh well... at least you could say that Netanyahu didn't get any of the new bombs from you.

Chris, What more needs explaining in the extant Z film other than the following: The gaping wound in the back of the head seen by nearly every witness, but not seen in the Z film. The gaping wound in the right temple as seen in the Z film, but not seen by any witness. The stop or near-stop of the presidential limo seen by dozens of witnesses, but not seen on the Z film. Regarding #1, the color logarithmic scans proves for a fact that the hole in back of the head was painted over. Regarding #2, it seems likely that the "blob" and gaping wound in the temple area were simply painted in. IMO, there is no question about this. Regarding #3, it seems that in the commotion, several witnesses could have gotten wrong what the thought they saw. For example, maybe the limo slowed down but didn't stop. Maybe some witnesses thought they saw people run between the limo and the car following it, when in reality no such thing happened other than Clint Hill running and jumping on the back of the limo. And that, finally, to remove the slowdown, all that we needed was to remove a few frames and touch up some motion blur to make it look natural. Or, ADD motion blur to the whole frame to hide anything that looked unnatural. Don't you think that those three things were the only things needed to explain the known major discrepancies?

We shall see, won't we. In the meantime, since Biden began threatening Netanyahu against a large scale invasion and bombing of Rafah over two months ago, the collateral killing of civilians has dropped from an average of 250 per day, to 50 per day. But people like Ken Klippenstein don't care because their emotions cloud their thinking. I wouldn't be surprised if Klippenstein sees something negative in the reduction of civilian killings. Just so he can continue blaming bogeyman Biden for Netanyahu's depravity.

William, I was using common English definitions when I made the phrase"emotional reasoning". I had no idea that the phrase is used in a branch of cognitive theory. Absolutely.

Cyril was my favorite commentator on the documentaries. What a giant among men. RIP Dr. Wecht. Today is a sad day for me.

I merely noted the fact that, due to that rapper's emotional response, he made an irrational choice of not voting for Biden. His non-vote for Biden would in effect be a vote Trump! Trump is all for Israel's attack on Gaza! The only criticisms I've seen Trump dish up against Netanyahu are that Netanyahu has allowed photos of the destruction be revealed. That's right... the only thing that bothers Trump is the negative PR Israel is getting. My diagnosis is correct. Well I would certainly hope that they be affected emotionally by the massacre and destruction! On the other hand, I find it unfortunate that it negatively affects their reasoning and decision making. Biden could lose a whole lot of votes to Republicans due to these irrational decisions. This despite the fact that Republicans are the worst people to turn to if you want Netanyahu to stop the fighting. Of course. And then we should allow those with cooler heads make the important decisions on solving the problems.

Update of list of General LeMay alibis: On a hunting trip. (In Wisconsin?) At an official NATO meeting in (Wiarton?) Canada. Aboard a C-130 transport plane.