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

    61
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Cory Santos

  1. I agree, anyone have more substantive info on this?
  2. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    Well, after reading these points and both sides, while interesting, respectfully, my thoughts are: 1) Paul/Jason, you cannot say show me documents and then discredit an opinion by then not showing any documents to support your opinion. 2) Paul/Jason, you cannot say that Ruby pointed the finger in his testimony at the JBS and Walker based on one paragraph. His whole testimony must be considered. He did not say black and white it even was JBS and/or Walker as being responsible "for the assassination" and you are discounting the rest of his testimony. You are speculating as to what he meant. Interpretation. That is it. 3) you cannot claim the W.C. lawyer was in on a conspiracy or knew of a conspiracy simply because he asked questions that I (or any other competent trial lawyer) would have asked as well had I been in his shoes. 4) you cannot say that because questions were answered in the negative, that somehow that means they really were in the positive. The testimony is clear by Ruby and Walker. I find your theory interesting, but, using your logic at its most basic level, I could point the finger at many other people and back it up with half documents/facts and speculation. Last year when I spoke about the assassination in Reno, I discussed my perspective of "strange coincidences" of which there are many in this case. The problem with some conspiracists (overall not you) in many areas is they take these as pure direct evidence of a fact. It is not. Alone, strange coincidences do not prove a fact. While they can be used to weaken the Oswald did it theory in front of a jury by putting doubt in a jurors mind, it does not prove a fact generally without other facts/documents/evidence which the "strange coincidence" supports or, alternatively is supported by the fact/document/evidence. You cannot prove with documents that the cabinets did not exist it seems and they cannot prove they exist with documents. You are both then at a stand still. So, I disagree, respectfully. . . as a trial lawyer I need more. But I applaud you trying to fill in gaps and having a theory and actually looking at evidence in the case. Keep researching, etc. I find nothing wrong with that. I do think rather than looking for documents or cabinets that might not exist or were destroyed, the best option at this point is to contact people alive that were in the DPD and try and get someone to talk that has first hand information. If enough people with first hand knowledge speak out, then you have more substantial proof. But time is ticking. That is perhaps one main reason these documents were not released decades ago when people were still alive-and now not letting out the unredacted documents merely because some people are living. That is the true evidence at this point that is needed to show what really happened. Perhaps the release will be of some benefit, I think it already has been in many ways. I am going to go watch the fights on TV.
  3. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    Why lie about cabinets that dont exist? How does that do anything? What evidence do you have that the guy lied other than the alleged lack of a document confirming the existence of the cabinets?
  4. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    Paul, I did not see it. Can you provide the exact quote Ruby allegedly made? Or show where in the testimony it is?
  5. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    I think you missed the point on this. But the question for Paul is still there.
  6. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    I have read it. Many times actually. I found it rather odd. The questions lacked proper direction. Certainly any good trial attorney would have asked much more detailed questions and NEVER would have let follow up questions not be asked. But, he was clearly a difficult person to depose. Please tell me though, you said he named the organization and man who "curated" the assassination. Please tell me you are not referring to this: Months back had I been given a chance--I take that back. Sometime back a police officer of the Dallas Police Department wanted to know how I got into the building. And I don't know whether I requested a lie detector test or not, but my attorney wasn't available. When you are a defendant in the case, you say "speak to your attorney," you know. But that was a different time. It was after the trial, whenever it happened. At this moment, Lee Harvey Oswald isn't guilty of committing the crime of assassinating President Kennedy. Jack Ruby is. If the above is not what you meant, to save time, please be exact, who are you referring to?
  7. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    So you agree with what I was told. Now, the other view is that this makes him easy to manipulate, but... the problem is if he messes up, if the plan is not full proof, then you have a problem because now he is in on it, Oswald is alive and knows he is a marked man. See the problem? Of course, Ralph Cinque apparently is stating that the real Ruby was not in the Dallas Police basement, it was someone else. Based on pictures. Ruby does have connections and a history of doing dirty deeds, but, I fail to see how any of that even remotely makes sense, but, assuming Ralph Cinque's theory was correct, they did not rely on Ruby, but a look a like? So now there are 2 Rubys running around? Seems so far out their, especially when I hear from a credible source about Ruby. He was trouble yes, but, deeply involved in a government plot and associated with several key players, no. Unless it was only a Dallas conspiracy and no one else was involved. But then, why did LBJ act the way he did, and records get destroyed, manipulated, lost etc. His association with Marcello is the biggest concern however as it shows he could be used. I just question whether he would be used for something as important as taking out the key person in this whole thing, i.e. Oswald. I dont agree he is, as you put it, a "low rent guy".
  8. I have not seen the film yet. One of my clients, Dan Hewitt Owens, plays Abe Fortas. As such, I plan on watching it. It was a small release and, at some level, an attempt to get Woody Harrelson some Oscar contention. Reviews seem mixed but overall, good. What matters more is whether it is released nationally to more theaters this week and gets any traction. I think historical pieces like this are going to be harder to present because they are very expensive to create and the younger generation seems to not watch them. I think this interview is a good read and will give you insight into the film. http://collider.com/rob-reiner-interview-lbj/
  9. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    Well, and there is the missing spy camera. Paul, if you think the radical right did it, and police were involved, you must admit it is possible that an honest officer documented the filing cabinets and then, due to a cop "in on the conspiracy", most likely a radical right type of guy, took the filing cabinets to support the conspiracy. Do you admit that is a possibility?
  10. https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/jfk-assassination-files/release-jfk-assassination-file-delayed-deadline-looms-n814691
  11. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    There is a lot to go over to respond to. Thank you for giving me the basis of your opinions. Well I know people very very close to Ruby, they would laugh at the idea he would be selected for such a task. In fact, while eating dinner in the Egyption Lounge, otherwise known as Campisi's , as a guest of someone who had invited my father to dinner as he was in town judging a fight on national television, I brought up several issues with him. His opinion, which I respect, surprised me as Ruby- while having many quirks and having a mob attitude, was not as . . . lets say. . . appropriate for such a task as killing the accused patsy in a huge plot to kill the president. So, I was taken aback and have struggled with the information I received because it was difficult to throw away a first hand account from a prominent person with knowledge while enjoying great Italian food. One thing I am greatly concerned with. If Oswald was not an intelligence operative, then he most certainly would have been under close surveillance in Russia. Now, that is not proof or a fact, it is my opinion. But, where is all the information on it? I did not see it in the release-though I am certainly not even halfway through them yet. But lets think this through. If the radical right, as it is called, was responsible for the assassination, logically, LBJ or Earl Warren, or several other Dems. or note, would have loved to pin this on the radical right, especially before the 1964 election. Assuming so many people knew about the assassination, as on another post notes so many involved it is amazing, then several Dems did know about the assassination beforehand. That would make them complicit, some perhaps afterwards if they conspired to cover things up. Ergo, it was not the radical right, but power brokers in both parties. As for the White allegations, I am concerned with the whole story. However, I am greatly interested in research in the matter. The document release had a memo which was a report from an informant stating Tippit was part of it. I have not yet seen a report with White's name. Of course if I am wrong, correct me. I too appreciate polite discussion of the matter. CAS
  12. Who had advance knowledge?

    Well since we are adding names without PROOF, I will add Captain Kangaroo, the Great Pumpkin- a little John Lear humor, and Oscar the Grouch. They all had advance knowledge of the JFK assassination. This is why we need proof. Some names, sure, there is some proof. Milteer is a huge example although to be fair, he never mentioned Dallas as far as I recall so, technically, his name should not be on the list. Correct me if he mentioned Dallas specifically. Others listed, just speculation without proof. Some, their own story without verification. Many people can say they knew before, what is needed is proof they knew before other than their own statements... many times decades after.
  13. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    Paul, For fun, give me any evidence you have that actually proves Oswald and White were associates. Proof, not third hand accounts from friends of friends. Something like the Ferrie Oswald photo from Frontline would suffice. Also, do I understand you correctly? You believe Oswald did not apply for Russian citizenship? What proof do you have that Ferrie, Shaw, Crisman, Martin, etc. all those you mention were "far right". Do you believe Oswald was an associate of Ruby? If so what party did Ruby belong to? Was Oswald connected to Hunt? Perhaps his tour guide in Dealey weeks prior to (this is a serious question). If so what proof do you have? Thanks.
  14. Short and to the point. I wonder how many people he has employed looking through the records? He must be grinning a little to know his work was influential in getting the records released this far. Oliver Stone 2 hrs · My Statement on the JFK Files Release: Yesterday, over 3,100 files were supposed to be finally released, 25 years after the JFK Act was passed and 20 years after the Review Board closed its doors. The page count is reportedly in the tens of thousands. But yet the CIA is still trying to hold up the process by claiming they want redactions in these declassified documents, 54 years after JFK was killed. They waited until the last day to file an appeal when they knew 3 months ago that today was the deadline. President Trump should stay true to his word. Declassify everything. Sincerely, Oliver Stone
  15. I am sure this is proof of what Jim and others have been saying. How these "experts" used by the MSM did not know this is beyond me. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2017/11/02/tantalizing-mystery-of-missing-jfk-file-solved-23-years-ago/ I would add the Enquirer and a few other websites are citing the Rowley McCone memo as if it was some new piece of evidence. I am glad though the Washington Post actually published this story.
  16. Did the Dallas Radical Right kill JFK?

    For your enjoyment. I post for you to read, I do not endorse the article. http://dailysignal.com/2017/11/02/narrative-right-wing-hate-killed-jfk-false/
  17. Delay in release of records.

    Well, this article seems to confirm some of my prior comments about the situation in Washington as to what actually happened. Then again, if we dont want to play in facts land, for those who think President Clinton would have released all of these records this week, had she won, please explain, why did President Bill not do something more in the 1990's about JFK when lots of relevant people were still alive and could have given testimony? Or, why in he powerful position did she not push President Obama to release the records? Certainly there were other legal avenues available to them to do so under the power of the President and a Democrat controlled congress. Well? . . . Crickets. Ok, so there was a great deal of internal infighting Thursday I was told. This was not some easy situation in Washington. Read this article and realize President Trump made a very strong move on the chess board. To suggest anything else shows a lack of understanding into what is really happening. http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/26/politics/trump-unhappy-with-government-redactions-to-jfk-files/index.html
  18. Oliver Stones take on the records.

    But I am having a good day despite yesterday. My dad Herb Santos, Sr. was announced as a 2018 inductee into the National Boxing Hall of Fame. Party time! http://www.nationalboxinghalloffame.com/2018-inductees.html
  19. Oliver Stones take on the records.

    I wrote to Neil Cavuto today about it, his round table was terrible. I suppose elementary school children would have had a better understanding.
  20. Rachel Maddow, JFK and Easy Money

    Agree Jim.
  21. Delay in release of records.

    Well I can respect your opinion. Though, I think it strange someone who does not know me (I dont know perhaps you did a google search on me or something but still...) is assuming what I believe. Perhaps it is a smokescreen lol-I read that in one of the documents. My point is based on experience. . . Let me say, some people think that there are no bad guys out there trying to come to the U.S. and cause trouble. Or worse yet, some people dont realize that right now, people are on computers trying to hack bank information or shut down U.S. power grids. Scary stuff. These things sometimes need to be fought with strong people. Without them, the U.S. is in trouble. I get, what your saying though. But, this is the real world, lots of bad guys out there, we need defense and offense to keep our country and world stable. I agree peace is always best, diplomacy, etc. Perhaps my viewpoint is jaded based on my experiences, as I am sure yours is. Yet, here we are trying to solve the worlds problems by talking. If we both had a drink, we could give a toast to peace together. Regardless, I understand the viewpoint you are expressing.
  22. Delay in release of records.

    Well, fourth branch accounts for administrative agencies, not merely CIA/Military, if I understood your post. I understand your frustration and comments. But, in the real world, Washington has procedures. Whatever the reason was for the delay, as I said above, we have another day next year where this will be in the news . If you feel the way I think you do, then, you should view that as a good thing. I fail to understand though about bring "these guys under control". If you want to explain I will listen. One last thought, these guys do keep us safe from a lot of bad guys out there. But go ahead and explain your thought a little more. Thanks. CAS
  23. Where were you?

    Saw this on Tippit today. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5023235/Dallas-police-officer-JD-Tippit-JFK-s-REAL-assassin.html
  24. Delay in release of records.

    Thank you for your question. I will not address whether anyone violated the Act. However, I think you answered your own questions very well. A document for example might have several agencies involved. You would be amazed at how many actual administrative agencies there are, even just in the intelligence/defense world. In law school, many many years ago, my professor who is now a 9th circuit appellate court judge, said administrative agencies were the actual fourth branch of U.S. government. So each agency has to write their petition, many overlapping. Can you imagine that paperwork on your desk? Just to get that paperwork there would have taken many hours. So, I am not trying to excuse anything, nor attack anyone or entity. It is what it is. But saying this is the President's fault, I find that intellectually dishonest and incorrect. He certainly could have just said he was extending ALL documents! Arguably, now there will be another MSM blitz regarding this subject next April. . . which is good!
  25. Delay in release of records.

    Truth is, they waited until the last minute for several reasons I understand. One is attorneys need to write these petitions, that takes time. Then they need to be reviewed several times. I can assure you as a former government attorney, documents take a long time to create because of the oversight on what you write. (it can be frustrating sometimes but your superiors usually provide great insight on the document which you apply - if the agency head is good). To blame it on Trump (other posts not Jim's-Jim's post I agree with) is not intellectually satisfying and shows lack of understanding of the procedure. Trump did the right thing going on Twitter announcing he would release these documents, giving them a warning to get any petitions to him asap. Of course, when agency heads go the the White House in person, as I understand they did, he has to listen to them- they are his advisors. He listened to them, and apparently he was unhappy so he punted and gave them an extension to present their case rather than approving their petitions. So, blaming those who should have had these documents to him earlier seems logical. Of course, it might have been excellent strategy by very smart people in our intelligence agencies too.
×