Cory Santos
-
Posts
1,549 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Cory Santos
-
-
Interesting interview.
-
21 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:
That's a pretty deep question Cory. While many on the right hated many of JFK's polices, economically, internationally (Russia, Cuba, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Mid-East), the oil men of Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana, as well as investors on Wall Street did not like his proposed elimination of the Oil Depletion Allowance. One possible benefit of JFK's death. GHWB was in the Oil Bidness as Molly Ivins would say, Shrub benefited from it too.
I did a quick google search for an article by Jim. I came up empty. I've not looked at K & K yet. Do you have a link?
Perhaps this is what you are referring to?
https://www.universalroyaltyco.com/john-f-kennedy-texas-oil/
-
8 hours ago, David Von Pein said:
No, I did not.
There are some CTers who think George H.W. Bush was hanging around the front entrance of the TSBD shortly after JFK was shot, which prompted me to create the webpage below and ask this question:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / Why Would A Plotter Do This?
Correct he was not there at that time and the photos are not of him. He was there the night before and early that morning which is nothing more than what I have written about being a “strange coincidence”.
-
1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:
Cory,
You, obviously, need to do some remedial homework on this subject. The "Mr. George Bush of the CIA" referenced in the 11/29/63 J. Edgar Hoover memo was, in fact, George Herbert Walker Bush.
GHWB and the CIA tried to claim that the memo referred to a low-level CIA accountant named George Bush, but that ruse has been debunked. See Russ Baker's article (above) for full details.
Again, I know this already so no I do not need to do anything. What you need to do, respectfully, is provide proof that it was him instead of just your opinion.
-
5 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:
Hiding in plain site. FOS photo collection (unindexed):
The Dallas Morning News. Wednesday, November 20, 1963CLUB ACTIVITIES
American Association of Oilwell Drilling Contractors,
8:30 p.m. Thursday, November 21.
Sheraton-Dallas Hotel:
George Bush, president Zapata Off-Shore Co.
Thank you Leslie. I do not think DVP knew he was in Dallas. David did you know this?
-
3 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:
Bam! Outta the park! I'd been looking again at Baker's end notes, hard to figure out his source from there.
This is great. Documentation now that on the evening of Thursday November 21, 1963 George Herbert Walker Bush was in Dallas speaking to the AAODC. Introduced by Zeppa?
While Richard Nixon was in town as a lawyer for the Pepsico convention/ Frito Lay merger, along with Joan Crawford, and somebody else important (?)
Nixon stayed the night for sure. Likely the Bushes and Zeppa too as the speech was at the Sheraton and probably later in the evening.
Two future president's who eventually benefited from JFK's demise.
The next morning there was One President in Dallas with three or four future ones there, maybe not all at the same time.
At 12:30 that changed.
Too strange for a coincidence for me.
Please explain how in your mind Pres. Bush benefitted from the JFK assassination. Btw actor Bill Paxton was there that day and he later starred in Terminator, Aliens, and Twister but died young. Did he also benefit from the assassination and then get silenced? This is all indeed merely a coincidence and nonsense to suggest it is not without any proof other than them being in Dallas. Again, I believe Jim D did not think highly of Baker’s book so I am not sure why it is being cited as indisputable authority here.
-
1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:
Cory,
If you're interested in the subject, check out Russ Baker's research on the subject, indicating that GHWB was, apparently, involved with the CIA as early as 1953, when Zapata Oil was founded. * Leslie Sharp's article about Dresser Industries and Allen Dulles' crony, Neil Mallon, (on the previous page) is also relevant here, because GHWB was a Mallon protege. He even named his son, Neil, after Mallon.
In 1985, Joseph McBride found the Hoover memo about J. Edgar briefing "Mr. George Bush of the CIA," on 11/29/63, about JFK's assassination. So, GHWB was, obviously, working for the CIA in 1963.
* Classic Who: GHW Bush and the JFK Assassination - WhoWhatWhy
And he was asked about it and it was looked into. It is not the same Bush. There is zero evidence it was. If there was please share.
-
2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:
Cory,
We now know that "Houston oil man" GHWB was working for Allen Dulles and the CIA since 1953, and that he was in Dallas on 11/22/63. Thanks to Joseph McBride, we also know that, "Mr. George Bush of the CIA" was personally briefed by J. Edgar Hoover on 11/29/63 about the status of the FBI's "investigation" of JFK's assassination.
We also know that there have been several peculiar narratives about GHWB's whereabouts on 11/22/63-- including the 11/22/63 GHWB phone call to the FBI about one of Poppy's campaign staffers, and the anomalous Barbara Bush letter to her young children on 11/22/63-- the day she returned home to Houston.
So, it seems like a stretch to claim that GHWB's presence in Dallas on 11/22/63 was a "mere innocent strange coincidence" -- especially considering GHWB's alleged association with Zapata Offshore and the Bay of Pigs op.
Russ Baker has written about this subject at length.
Classic Who: GHW Bush and the JFK Assassination - WhoWhatWhy
Thank you but I have heard these points before.
I have yet to see evidence of anything. Just people’s opinions and interpretations of the above. What you call “suspicious” I call a coincidence. If you think former Pres. Bush was in the CIA prior to 1976 then prove it with evidence, not “well he was associated with X and X was in the CIA so….” Associations like that are not proof.
Moreover, I think, though could be wrong, did not Jim DiEugenio give Baker’s book a bad review? -
On 1/22/2024 at 11:47 AM, David Von Pein said:
You're a little mixed up, Cory. I was talking about George Bush, not Nixon.
And, btw, that first article you linked to above is wrong when it says no President has driven through Dealey Plaza since 1963. Gerald Ford did, in 1976. (See photo below.)
But former Pres. Bush was in Dallas the night before and the morning of 11-22-63 (this is a mere innocent strange coincidence which means nothing.) Then he went to Tyler for his speech earlier on the morning of 11-22-63. As for the article it was the Dallas news and I believe the article addresses the Pres. Ford visit.
-
6 hours ago, David Von Pein said:
You're a little mixed up, Cory. I was talking about George Bush, not Nixon.
And, btw, that first article you linked to above is wrong when it says no President has driven through Dealey Plaza since 1963. Gerald Ford did, in 1976. (See photo below.)
Dallas morning news article I thought addressed this.
Also, coincidence? Lol, I think not.
https://bushofficial.com/tour_moreinfo&event_id=144233665&site_id=bush2020 -
2 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:
@Cory Santos Cory, let me know if you would prefer I launch an independent thread related to this recent exchange focused on GHWBush whereabouts on 11.22.63. I don't mean to hijack Nixon! 🙂
No it’s fine.
-
8 hours ago, David Von Pein said:
I didn't think he was.
I am surprised you did not know this
https://www.nixonfoundation.org/2013/11/richard-nixon-november-22-1963/
-
8 hours ago, David Von Pein said:
What disinfo was that?
You posted that letter and did not note that he had, though innocently, been in Dallas that morning before going to Tyler. Your post makes it look like he was never in Dallas. You know better as to where he was but some people might come on here and not know this. Context and perspective are important don’t you think?
-
7 hours ago, David McLean said:
I would not be surprised if Robert Maheu was found to be lurking around…
He was not because he had nothing to do with it and no one has any evidence that he did.
-
10 hours ago, David Von Pein said:
Doesn't matter to me where he was.
Then why did you post disinformation?
-
2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:
I think the idea that Diem's assassination was related to the Chicago attempt is pure fantasy. Even most of the South Vietnamese generals who took part in the coup against Diem did not know he would be killed--in fact, they joined the coup on the condition that Diem would not be harmed. When they learned that Big Minh and a handful of other plotters had had Diem executed, they were furious. This fury led to the January 1964 coup that overthrew Big Minh and his junta.
What time were they killed approximately?
-
Reiner just addressed this on the 11th episode by explaining how Biden’s administration really is the reason the records will never be seen by the public.
-
2 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:
In all my years engaging on the forum, I have never been absolutely convinced that LHO wasn't involved in some way with the murders of JFK and Tippit.
Ruby whacking Oswald ( the most important and threatened criminal suspect in American history ) with impossible access into the police packed DPD building basement and getting within just a few feet from Oswald unnoticed tells me Oswald had to die.
Why? Because he knew things that would have rocked our society to it's core.
If Oswald was an innocent nobody, he wouldn't have been whacked within hours of JFK.
The appointment of JFK hater Allan Dulles, his long time buddy John McCloy and the FBI plant Gerald Ford to the Warren Commission is the first most obvious fact that proves in my mind it was a corrupt sham.
Don’t forget the wedding ring Joe. There is no way Oswald had no clue.
-
5 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:
There is no such thing as unbiased, there is only a question of which side you are biased against, and for what reasons.
Your response avoided my question and point but okay.
-
5 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:
With all due respect, what is your extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claim that mental healthcare workers know more about the human mind than the average person? The human mind is one of the most extraordinary phenomena in the universe that "we" know of, so it must follow that somebody claiming to understand the human mind better than most will need to provide some very extraordinary evidence to corroborate them. Virtually all of what modern mental healthcare claims to be science is just witness evidence. Witness evidence is notoriously unreliable. On it's face, it is obvious how psychology is just another cult, albiet one that has convinced virtually every government in the world of it's importance. Those papers are just pretentious and circular - not worth the paper they are (sometimes) printed on. Just try reading a random new paper from a mainstream psychology journal, and notice how any truly skeptical reader will understand how truly stupid and hollow the research is. This is the circus that decides prison sentences and executions.
I never made that claim. Please do not attribute words to me which I did not state. Clearly, you have a bias against psychology. I assume perhaps psychiatry and sociology as well?
-
4 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:
But is LHO's devastatingly neglected and heart breaking childhood the main psychological reason he could become such a hate filled cold blooded murderer just 20 years later.
How does LHO's childhood trauma figure into a hatred of JFK to a brutal murder degree? And/or a sadistic over-kill shot execution of DPD officer JD Tippit?
Sometimes a "Manchurian Candidate" Oswald scenario fits into the mystery motivation story as much as any other, imo.
Well there is more to it than just childhood trauma and yes, childhood trauma can cause a disposition towards criminal choices as an adult. Let me find that article for you to read.
QUOTEProfessional Psychology is equally as stupid as armchair psychology. You shouldn't listen to anything these "professionals" claim. Weren't they doing labotomies then?
END QUOTE
Micah, please tell us more. What is your basis for such an observation?
-
On 1/14/2024 at 7:49 PM, Joe Bauer said:
So much has been written about Oswald and his childhood to young adulthood anger and hatred issues.
Obviously Oswald's childhood from infancy was devastating to him emotionally.
Total disruption in parental care and nurturing as a child. Shipped out to foster care for a time?
No father. A crushingly domineering mother. Unstable living situations with many moves.
Dirt poor.
Some bullying and beating of him in elementary and junior high school.
Hardly any close friends.
He acted out at what 13? Pulling a knife on a relative in a shared cramped apartment in NYC.
Truancy so frequent he was evaluated by a school psychologist.
Dying to get away from his sad life with his mother, he joins the Marines at the earliest age possible.
In the Marines he has more than the normal confrontations with fellow Marines and in one physical fight incident gets demoted in rank.
A number of his fellow soldiers describe him as offish and unfriendly.
Upon Oswald's release from the Marines he leaves to go to Russia. Lives there three years?
Has anyone ever read of Oswald having any confrontational anger issue episodes with anyone there?
Did Marina ever state that she saw Lee exhibit anger or rage in anyway there? Throwing things, threatening words?
I'm trying to establish a historical pattern of anger and even rageful violence on Lee Oswald's part showing itself from childhood on through his final young adult life years.
By late 1962 and into early 1963 Lee Oswald was reportedly expressing extreme violence thoughts and actually exhibiting alleged acts of extreme violence.
His attempt to shoot and kill General Edwin Walker.
He talked of violently hijacking a plane to Cuba with Marina's help?
Lee gets into a violent confrontation with Cuban expatriates on a busy downtown NO street in broad daylight?
Lee is accused of being physically abusive toward Marina. They fight often.
Had Lee begun to lose it emotionally in his two years of financial and marriage stress and struggling back here in the states?
So then we come to 11/22/1963.
The official finding of the Warren Commission is that Oswald alone shot JFK from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book depository building.
Less than one hour later, he is charged with shooting to death Dallas PD officer J.D. Tippit.
Both the JFK killing and Tippit killings were what many would categorize as "rage" killings.
Oswald allegedly shot at JFK not once, but three times.
He misses the first shot, but nails JFK in the back with a second shot.
Oswald or whoever could see JFK was seriously injured with the second shot.
But the shooter isn't satisfied just wounding JFK... he must blow JFK's head off to be sure he will die. And knowingly taking that last head exploding kill shot with Jackie's horrified face just inches away reflects a person who is driven with something deeper than most killers.
A rage.
Jealousy can drive a man into that kind of rage. Abuse as a child can also.
And the Tippit killer also killed with rage.
It wasn't enough to hit Tippit 3 times and bring him down on the ground, obviously dying. The shooter also had to then walk up close and finish Tippit with a coup de grace head shot.
That last head shot was unnecessary except to satisfy a rage impulse.
Oswald pulled his revolver and tried to shoot Officer MacDonald in the Texas theater. He fought with a ferocity when it misfired. There was a hand knife found near the seats the fighting took place. It has been speculated that it was Oswald's knife and he would have used it if it hadn't dropped down during the fight.
Oswald was acting out in the most extreme violence way. Again, in a rage?
There were millions of JFK ( and RFK ) haters in America by 1963 who hated them both "with a rage."
Segregationist - KKK types.
Cuban expatriates. American covert ops intelligence types. The Bay Of Pigs revenge types.
The Mafia.
Probably big oil and corrupt Texans and even LBJ and J. Edgar Hoover themselves.
Maybe even some of our top military people?
But Oswald wasn't connected to the JFK raging hate mind set of those other groups.
Yet, if Oswald did JFK and Tippit, he did so with a brutal rage.
It is a perplexing conundrum imo, to come up with how he could have harbored such rage toward JFK.
Can anyone offer a different Oswald JFK rage explanation?
LBJ protege Mac Wallace was in a drunken rage when he over-kill shot Austin, TX pitch and putt manager Doug Kinser in broad daylight in front of witnesses. He was jealous because Kinser was sleeping with his ex-wife and reportedly LBJ's sister Josepha who Wallace was also intimate with.
Now there's a rage we can understand.
However, I can't understand Oswald's rage toward JFK and even J.D. Tippit.
Your thoughts?
Joe, you bring up a good point. Twenty plus years ago during law school I spent two years researching and drafting a paper on Jim Garrison. During that research I came across an interesting article in academia regarding LHO. Basically, it was a psychological and sociological analysis of Oswald and his environment. The author determined Oswald was a ghost in the machine, shuttered from broken home to foster home with no father as a role model, Oswald was the result of a broken American system that allowed him to fall through the cracks. I cannot recall the article but I will look it up for you.
-
2 hours ago, Roger Odisio said:
That's not the point, Denny. It's the political point, which is beside the point. It turns the important discussion about the failure to implement the JFK Act into a political discussion. And risks the wrath of a moderator or two in their attempts to separate "politics" from the murder.
I can lament Biden's atrocious "transparency plan" without any thought to what Trump or anyone else will do following Biden.
I agree. Moreover, I simply cannot explain this any more elementary. These are two distinct legal issues.
-
I think what many people are missing is that while President Trump failed to release all the documents the truth is the door was still open for disclosure under his actions. President Biden, however, effectively shut the door by his actions. He therefore went beyond merely not releasing records temporarily as he actually made the decision not to release the records permanent. This is the legal distinction Ben is trying to make which most people here are failing to understand because they interpret it wrongly as a political attack. Closing the records off from further disclosure is a distinct legal issue from failing to disclose the records pending further review. Both of these legal issues appear to be under litigation. Whether the Act allows for either scenario is interesting as there are credible arguments on both sides.
Lisa Pease on RFK on Fox LA.
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Will DVP take the time to watch and consider?