Jump to content
The Education Forum

Cory Santos

Members
  • Content count

    159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Cory Santos

  1. I was discussing JFK recently and a thought occurred to me. If someone who actually knew could answer fully one question, but you can only know: 1) Who (assuming more than one person) was behind it, or 2) Why (regardless if it was a conspiracy) it happened, or 3) How it was done (regardless if it was a conspiracy). Which one answer would you choose? Why?
  2. Cory Santos

    THE KENNEDY CULT BLINKERS THIS INVESTIGATION

    Let me add one thing for people to look into, Has anyone looked at LHO's Mexican Government Card #82408? Was anyone else issued this number? Research on that and get back to me with what you find.
  3. Cory Santos

    THE KENNEDY CULT BLINKERS THIS INVESTIGATION

    Thank you for the kind words. I notice Merv has not responded to the fact that I answered his question point blank about evidence but rather focuses on trying to antagonize or demean others. At first I assumed it was just a cultural difference, however, I see now it a personality flaw. To answer you question Jeffrey, I spoke at the OLLI institute at at the Univ. of Nevada, Reno in 2016, along with some private lectures. Coming out on this subject is not easy because it is quickly dismissed. It is not really considered polite dinner conversation if you will. I have had to deal with that since college but, in law school I had a well known professor who encouraged me to write a original paper on Jim Garrison as my professor saw my thesis as an angle that had not been written about or analyzed up to that point. So if you are in Nevada, feel free to come to let me know and we can sit down and talk over a coke. PM me. Being in the entertainment industry as an actor and lawyer, I am flirting with high quality youtube videos or alternatively a high quality documentary which could be sold to a potential platform like Netflix or Prime. Aw Bolivia..... Apparently, there is a rumor (could be false-I don't know) that there are files there in the government's possession which have not really been reviewed by U.S. researchers. I find the documents in the new release regarding Bolivia and Che very interesting. It is unfortunate that they are redacted. I do not want to get into much here, but, if anyone else is familiar with what I am talking about feel free to chime in. Also, feel free to chime in about Belize and LHO. But perhaps we are all chasing straws, for it is only the likes of Merv and others who have discovered the real truth. Thank you for your interest.
  4. Cory Santos

    THE KENNEDY CULT BLINKERS THIS INVESTIGATION

    Google him. His Facebook is easily found. He has also written a few notes here and there on the net, even apologized for some mistakes in his writings. I fail to see how someone can come here, literally insult everyone, and then act like he was the one being attacked. What a waste of time. He expects us to research who he is??? LOL. Ok.
  5. Cory Santos

    THE KENNEDY CULT BLINKERS THIS INVESTIGATION

    Well your reason for joining appears to be to argue with people. You failed to address any of my points in my comments.
  6. Cory Santos

    THE KENNEDY CULT BLINKERS THIS INVESTIGATION

    Regardless of why you are here, tact is the best method when dealing with others.
  7. Cory Santos

    THE KENNEDY CULT BLINKERS THIS INVESTIGATION

    I would like to know why British intelligence would have any interest in LHO prior to the assassination. Also, are you providing a suggestion that British intelligence could have been involved in the assassination? If so, lets hear it. I fail at this point to see the motive but I would listen to fact based evidence. If you are no longer commenting feel free to message me. Again, as I stated earlier, the fact that James Earl Ray somehow escaped America and went to Europe seems very strange. Lastly, are you aware that Bolivia has a potential gold mine of information on LHO that has never been really reviewed? To address your query point blank, the problem with wanting evidence provable in court that Oswald assassinated JFK or that someone else did is a very difficult thing. Feel free to google search my credentials. The problem with looking at only the evidence provable in court is that most of it would never be admissible. Chain of custody for bullets, the rifle, all a problem. The limo was immediately cleaned and repaired. This is destruction of evidence. As such, any evidence from the limo would not come into court- of course the person who ordered this would be considered for prosecution but that is another issue. The witness testimony is all over the place. The crime scene was not even cut off and evidence was destroyed, mutilated, etc. The snipers nest was rearranged. People walked all over Dealey Plaza, touching something in the grass, etc. Booking records were not consistent. Where is the list of cars parked behind the TSBD that were allowed to leave later in the day? Why were the cars not first inventoried and examined closely? This is not to mention the amazing way that LHO was interrogated. No transcript or recording? No attorney present although he had asked for one? Then, we start to look at the cover up which occurred. Yes, the CIA historian confirmed this is a true statement. Evidence was destroyed, mutilated, lost, just not provided, etc. So, when someone asks me to just talk about the evidence that would be admissible in court, I tend to smile a bit, because in this case, it barely exists. The Warren Commission did a huge disservice to this country-intentionally or negligently, although, to suggest Earl Warren was not aware of criminal procedure standards seems rather strange. So that begs the question, why was evidence destroyed, mutilated, lost. Why were witnesses harassed? Asked to change their testimony? Why were questions asked by the Warren Commission so lacking in actually trying to find the truth that any seasoned trial attorney would have said "wait a minute, you have to ask this question"? If you want evidence, I suggest that many researchers have placed themselves out there for scrutiny to get the evidence we have now. Some is ridiculous and has rightly been criticized. Others have provided solid research. Yet you demean them with your comments. In the last 50 years, we know the following: 1) LHO was not who the Warren Commission said he was 2) LBJ assisted in a cover up, regardless of motivation, of the true facts 3) there was a cover up after the fact which the CIA historian acknowledges 4) evidence was destroyed, mutilated and/or lost 5) the files are still not fully released which is odd if LHO acted alone 6) that the FBI taped a man who discussed a plot before Dallas 7) that many individuals involved who claimed no connection to intelligence agencies or who never acknowledged that they had connections did in fact have connections (some with LHO) and finally, 8 ) that Gerald Posner's book was so filled with so many holes that my law school paper was rather easy to write over two years. Now there are other things too that we now know. Plenty. I do not have time to enlighten you as to all that has been discovered, you need to attend one of my lectures for that. But, I do want to address one other point, I understand what you say about JFK worship and to an extent can agree that academically this can prevent a researcher from approaching the subject neutrally (of course the opposite is true if you are hostile to him which by your comments, you appear to be), but, your logic in your above statements appears to be faulty. Not all researchers engage in JFK worship. I certainly think the Bay of Pigs was terrible and certainly my background-feel free to google-comes from the opposite side of the political aisle. But, you suggest that for this forum, it is filled with JFK worshipers and therefore their research is faulty. That is faulty logic. Moreover, bias when researching a historical subject occurs in the historical field daily. Sometimes this allows us to consider two opposite points of view on a subject. That can be a good thing. Perhaps, if you had more tact in dealing with Americans, that is, instead of being aggressive, dismissive and, forgive my observation but, rather rude when commenting to others (not me), the discussions might be more advantageous and you might enjoy the forum more? Just a thought. But since you will not be commenting further, I suppose this is an unnecessary request. Either way, I think the LHO in England research is interesting and wish you the best with it.
  8. Cory Santos

    Trump and the Unspeakable?

    Kirk, are you with the Warriors or a fan?
  9. Well, I take 3 things away, 1) Hoover told RFK about JFK in a cold voice, no emotion. 2) RFK thought "they" would go after him 3) There was a conspiracy to protect the bureaucracy. It would be nice to ask, based on the new records, did you know A? or B? or C? Does that change your mind about if there was a conspiracy? https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=131457&page=1
  10. Cory Santos

    Trump and the Unspeakable?

    After reading the comments I am trying to stop laughing. . . except its really sad people believe some of this stuff. Are you suggesting that there was a conspiracy for Trump to beat Bush in the primary (strange, everyone seems to think his dad was behind the JFK plot lol), then to beat Hillary? If so, the comment show you with little to no connection, knowledge, or understanding of the federal intelligence agencies or how Washington works. Consider, you are an insider, why would you not support an insider like Cruz, Bush or Hillary? Makes no sense to go with a wild card like President Trump. But, interestingly enough, you then talk about a massive GOP purge which swung close states apparently. I assume you have gone to the appropriate authorities with the proof. No? Ok CNN then? No offense but really, people voted, some did not. Ultimately things affected votes, but this vote was not rigged in the voting booth. Come on! To Robert's first post, sure there appear to be connections which go from the JFK assassination and Watergate. Many people have stated that, including, Hunt. But for anyone to imply that the powers that be wanted Trump over Bush and Hillary and helped him win, that theory has no evidence at this point. It is just speculation. Hillary probably had her enemies in the intelligence community and sure they probably did not want her to win. But Trump was a wild card for them. As for JFK being hated, well, that goes beyond the government. Lots of people hated him. Business people, oil, most importantly, anti-Castro Cubans who did feel betrayed by him. Some of the ones I know who were at the Bay of Pigs could not even speak about the event because of how terrible it was. Few history books really explain what really happened over those couple of days.
  11. Cory Santos

    Interesting interview, ABC news

    I concur with Kirk.
  12. Cory Santos

    Interesting interview, ABC news

    Yeah, I read Khruschev Remembers studying history in college. I gained a lot of respect for what JFK had done. We were so close to war and his actions clearly saved this planet from a war where some thought there were justifiable odds to nuclear warfare. Scary. So when you discuss his policies, as Jim said what exactly are you referring to. Bay of Pigs? Yes, terrible. Missile Crisis, he saved everyone. Vietnam, clearly he was going to get us out, I am amazed people claim otherwise. I think President Reagan did a great job as well. Media is presenting what many people believe now. Was it happening then? Sure. But, JFK had some accomplishments. Some of those appear to have upset the wrong people. . . Do you mean he created a "mess" as you said, with his assassination?
  13. Cory Santos

    Interesting interview, ABC news

    Mervyn interesting points. I cannot agree on your comments about the KGB or MI6 because I need more facts to support that, but I realize you are just giving your opinion which is why we are here. Similarly, I find it odd that James Earl Ray was able to escape the country and get to Europe so easily apparently. I would like to know more about that and I think what you said about LHO being in England is worth a look.
  14. Is it accurate that at the other Texas stops Jackie was presented white roses while in Dallas she was presented red? Or is it a false story? Thanks.
  15. Very interesting. I had not heard this before. https://whowhatwhy.org/2017/10/06/navy-doctor-bullet-found-jfks-limousine-never-reported/
  16. Cory Santos

    Well...it happened

    Additionally, you state they left the money but took everything else. Yet, previously, you stated all that was in that safe was money and "non-important papers". So, they only took the "non-important papers"? Yet another post where the story makes little sense. You have no proof that the government did this. Which government, federal, city state? U.S., maybe Russia? I think DVP said enough. I agree with him. I am sorry I wasted 2 minutes of time regarding this.
  17. Cory Santos

    Identification of individuals

    Interesting, I see the similarity to President Bush. Thanks for the information. It tends to support what I said above about President Bush NOT being there at that exact time.
  18. Cory Santos

    Identification of individuals

    I see what David is submitting. As to what David is saying, at this point I agree, I do not see the correlation to the figure in the previous photos. One looks younger, relaxed, the other older, less relaxed. Are there more clear photos to compare? I have always had a problem however with people saying it was President Bush when 1) he was not in Dallas in the afternoon of 11/22/63 per his own call to the FBI-think about it, why would you risk a fake report to the FBI saying you are somewhere else and lounge around outside the TSBD with photographers everywhere? Makes no sense. Show more pictures of this so called individual people claim is President Bush. I dont buy it. LOL, I recall once seeing someone claiming they identified a young "W" there also. Yes the conspiracy runs deep for some.
  19. I was watching a video by Leroy Blevins Sr. He had what he felt was evidence of a shooter located on the County Records building and a shooter located on the Dal Tex building. He also stated that Zapruder film shows two distinct bullets hit the cement cover on the grass directly across from the grassy knoll. Has anyone watched his videos? Thoughts? I thought today I heard him suggest RFK was the surgeon general. I must have been tired when I heard that because that would be a pretty big mistake. Thanks for your opinions.
  20. Thoughts? https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/01/10/jfk-files-kgb-had-trusted-relationship-longtime-warren-commission-critic-mark-lane/1018691001/
  21. Cory Santos

    General Walker - for the rest of us

    When you are prosecuting a defendant, you have to control the picture painted of him. Steve, you are correct. The W.C. had to instill subliminally in the mind of everyone reading that LHO was capable of such a horrific act. The Tippit shooting did two things. 1) it gave LHO the appearance of a killer but 2) was a problem because I do not think the shooting was meant to happen as it did. I find it so so strange in reading Deputy Baker's testimony of how he went into the DBD and saw LHO on the second floor. What a strange coincidence indeed and perhaps it was, but I find it very strange. Everyone is running to the Grassy Knoll and he goes into the DBD. So they have to show this pattern of LHO being a killer, because it puts in the jurors mind-that being the American public-that this is a person that could perform this act without any issue. Making him the Walker shooter does that along with Tippit. My question, if I was writing a book-which I am not- I would go look at all the Walker shooting documents very carefully, if it was 30 years ago I would talk to people. I think this question of how LHO became the Walker shooter is very important. I doubt that it is merely a strange coincidence. But then again . . . Mr. Caddy, did General Walker have any connection or knowledge of UFO's ?
  22. Cory Santos

    General Walker - for the rest of us

    Mervyn, what Jim says is what I was getting at. Where is the evidence Oswald was arrested or a suspect in the Walker shooting prior to the assassination? I have never seen any. If there is any, show it. Otherwise, it is all speculation. More importantly, as a defense attorney, it looks like LHO is being tied to it merely to prove he shot JFK. If he shot at one person, he can shoot at another.
  23. Cory Santos

    General Walker - for the rest of us

    Hi Mervyn, no that was not what I was writing about.
  24. Cory Santos

    General Walker - for the rest of us

    I think you ask the correct questions, but again, I have sat on various boards, it does not mean that I am in close connection with other members. It merely means that I have access to that other member. I am in various organizations, yet, all that means is I have access to other people. When I spoke at the Univ. of Nevada OLLI Institute on the JFK Assassination-no it was never put up on youtube-I mentioned that just because I participate in the Infragaard program it does not mean anything more than that. What you are really getting at is this. As an attorney, I utilize physical direct and circumstantial evidence first. In this case, most of it was destroyed, manipulated, or "lost". So, what one is left with is evidence of connections, strange coincidences - some which are not coincidences- and speculation. LHO said he was a patsy. That is a fact. Clay Shaw lied on the witness stand. That is a fact. So did David Ferrie to Jim Garrison as to him knowing LHO. Of course he did. But, my concern with Paul's analysis (the other one) of Dallas connections to a possible conspiracy is that he devotes so much on Walker and connections. But we do not have direct evidence in most cases of anything other than connections and/or strange coincidences. I asked him and to his credit he answered, where is the day to day evidence of what Walker was doing. He admitted it really does not exist. Those were questions that needed to be asked decades ago. So to answer your question Paul, I like that Paul-the other one-is digging the way he is, but, I do agree that he seems to be ignoring the other connections which you mention. However, if that is to maintain focus, then perhaps it cold be good. But, just digging through the testimony will not solve anything. Showing inconsistencies is helpful. But the proof needs to come in evidence -which I would even consider credible second hand testimony from family members as now it is so late. If there was a conspiracy, I believe that there is still evidence out there. The LHO Ferrie photo from Frontline proved that. The trick is finding that information. I have always thought the photo of Walker's house with the license plate on the car blacked out was relevant. I would recommend you Paul keep asking the questions you are asking. These were questions that should have been asked decades ago by one of the worst Supreme Court Justices, no the worst, that ever stained the judiciary and who was charged with finding truth.
×