Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

Cory Santos

Members
  • Content count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Cory Santos

  • Rank
    Member
  1. I would be interested in reviewing these documents. http://www.wfaa.com/features/14-boxes-of-jack-ruby-records-become-public-next-week/477719764
  2. OSWALD IN D.C. 9/27/63 !

    One has to wonder, assuming this report is true, could this document have been utilized by the W.C. and if not, why? If Oswald was in D.C. in September, this document could have been proof of two things for the W.C. First, that he has a problem with authority and was not afraid to publicly confront someone over his views (see how he confronted the driver and continued to linger around). Second, that he was in D.C. in September, perhaps to stalk JFK? Yet, this report, to my knowledge, was not utilized by the W.C. As a trial attorney, I must ask "why" because it would have made sense to include it. Now, unless I am incorrect and it was cited by the W.C., then that answer to that why might be relevant to determine if he was being set up to look the part of the W.C. theme. Jim or Vince, perhaps you can elaborate?
  3. The Discoveries of Jim Garrison

    Is there a document or report which confirms that it was "Lee" who reported one of the alleged teams? In other words, is this based on a government document or someone stating it? Thanks.
  4. LBJ -- the movie trailer

    I actually worked on a Woody Harrelson movie, "Kingpin". He is a really good actor, was very nice on the set, and yes, he will be considered for his role in LBJ.
  5. David Ferrie alias

    Is anyone aware of any alias David Ferrie might have utilized? Thank you.
  6. OSWALD IN D.C. 9/27/63 !

    This is very very interesting on so many levels.
  7. LBJ -- the movie trailer

    Actually, the reviews from critics have been excellent. I represent actor Dan Hewitt Owens who plays Abe Fortas in the film. He directed a movie, "Project: Puppies for Christmas" last year and my daughter and I acted in it. Considering the cast, I think it is a must see and is getting early award considerations. If you only want to see conspiracy films, well, you can wait for a sequel to JFK I suppose but if you are open to other films, this should be on your list of good movies to see.
  8. Do we know who the witnesses were? Investigating a criminal case is not easy as one thinks. I can think of many reasons not to interview a witness. First, a known credibility issue. Second, maybe they interviewed the witness previously and saw no reason to interview them again. Third, they probably asked what the alleged witness knew and then decided against interviewing them. Perhaps, in reality, the witness knew nothing. If they investigate some aspect of the case and decide it is not relevant and then someone offers information on that same aspect of the case, perhaps they did not feel it would produce anything. I think before jumping to conclusions as to what happened we need to know who the witnesses are, what information they can provide, and answer why they said nothing decades ago (assuming this is the first time they brought forward any information). Simply saying they did not interview everyone and thus the investigation was somehow rigged, that is not a logical leap, at least, not in the legal system. If this author feels he has such strong evidence, he has the ability to make his case, release the information and maybe the office will change its opinion. I am not sure what young prosecuting attorney would not enjoy obtaining information on a high profile cold case and make the headlines by prosecuting it with solid evidence. Makes no sense.
  9. JFK was killed due to a UFO conspiracy?

    Actually, not just gold, a mountain of gold! You got that right but remember, they even connected Marilyn to it!
  10. JFK was killed due to a UFO conspiracy?

    Douglas (if I may call you by your first name), Thank you for your information. I find that very interesting. But one thought I would like you to respond to, if there was an "alien presence" and JFK knew about it and then worked with the soviets, many have argued that an "independence day" type event brings the world together and unites us. That would involve more spending on military if there was a known threat. So logically, why not present that to the world because it would help the military industrial complex visa increased spending. Seems to kind of not make sense then. I am sure there can be other reasons though, such as mass hysteria. Please feel free to add more information as your comments are highly relevant. Having said that, my intent here was to bring attention to this documentary to this group and have people watch it and give their opinions. I was hoping for perspective. I feel kind of like I just argued a case in front of a jury but rather than look at the evidence and then hear my argument, the jurors relied on their own ideas rather than look at the evidence.I have several good friends retired from the Secret Service that when we sit around and talk about JFK, they discredit anything about the assassination. I ask them if they knew this fact or that fact or watched this or that. The response is "no, I don't watch that trash". But I wanted to have dialogue with them having this information so they can think about it and then give their opinion. My point is how can researchers not consider all points and arguments by ignoring a documentary or film or book, etc. without having looked at it. It is like the juror who has a decision on day one of the trial. You have to look at it and then give your thought. As a trial attorney I would never just ignore something, I need to look at it and then determine the relevance thereof. I do appreciate the lively debate I just would like people to watch it and then tell me its wrong or right, etc.
  11. ONI & the Assassination of JFK

    Not sure if you are still looking for an answer on this but, probably no, they could have had a satellite office, but, generally they were combined. There was also an Arthur J. Sullivan. He was in Texas. Make sure he is not confused with Arthur C. Sullivan.
  12. New to Netflix is a documentary from Dr. Greer regarding UFO's titled "Unacknowledged". I had heard about it so I watched it last night. Interestingly, it wove into the theme the theory that the JFK Assassination and the unfortunate events regarding Marilyn Monroe were connected to UFO's. I will not expand on the theory because I do not want to spoil it for you. Of course, I do not give an opinion on the overall conspiracy presented, but, will say as a documentary, it was much better than the usual UFO documentary one finds on youtube or netflix as Dr. Greer presents somewhat more credible witnesses and documentary evidence. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt6400614/ Watch it and feel free to give me your thoughts as I am interested to see if this documentary hit the mark for all of you or was a miss, especially as it relates to JFK. Regards,
  13. 16 mind-blowing facts about who really killed JFK

    Jim, I think what he is trying to catch you in is this: Jim, since you believe an intelligence conspiracy killed JFK, do you think the same group is conspiring to get rid of President Trump visa a fake Russian hack of the election. Then if you say "no" he has you, but you punted, you said you dont have all the evidence. So he swings his bait to Ruth Paine. . . implying that you speculated in your books about her. . . so alas, you can do so on Trump. Certainly, if you have been watching CNN, you would know President Trump has done lots of bad things. So if you continue to not take the bait and say you dont have the evidence, he will use that to destroy your theory on Ruth Paine. At least that is what I got out of it. It was a clever bait. He knew what he was doing. Jim, you did not fall for it.
  14. Strange, I keep seeing politicians trying to utilize the records release to support their political views. To some, its the "right wing zealots" behind the assassination. To others, as Mike Huckabee stated recently:
  15. To elaborate on my prior post, now the media has been reporting quite a bit on the Russian alleged link. https://www.usatoday.com/videos/news/nation/2017/07/27/-russia-involved-assassination-jfk/104059566/ http://www.newsweek.com/cia-releases-secret-interviews-russian-spy-imprisoned-jfk-assassination-642486 several others were found. Again, the media seems to be focusing on a Russian link which coincides with other current events.
×