Pages Menu
TwitterRssFacebook
Categories Menu
  • Clayton Flesher

    This is the hard-hitting skeptical analysis we should expect over here at SIN, eh? Alright then.

    I don’t know enough about this case to have a strong opinion one way or another, but a defense attorney claiming a widespread conspiracy involving federal, state, and local government, along with collusion by the media, is about as credible as well…a defense attorney claiming a widespread conspiracy involving federal,
    state, and local government, along with collusion by the media.

    A wait and see approach seems the reasonable case here for the broader public.

    • ncovington89

      A jury of twelve agreed with the defense attorney. That speaks for itself.

      • Gingerbaker

        It was a civil case, not a criminal case. It proves nothing, and it certainly doesn’t prove what you assert it proves – that the U.S. government assassinated MLK.

        Grow up. Better yet, stop representing skepticism.

  • Chill Chick

    A 13-year-old news story about a jury decision? Sorry, doesn’t prove anything.

  • Giuoco Piano

    What – like the OJ trials? Are you being sarcastic? This DOJ report also
    “speaks for itself” –
    http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/mlk/part1.php#toc – I’m not saying
    there are no outstanding questions here, but for a “skeptic” you seem
    strangely glib about this.

  • RandomReason

    This “network” has become a self-parody.

  • ThePrussian

    This strikes me as fairly weak. On the other hand, it is not to be doubted that the FBI tapped King’s phone and tried to badger him into suicide. I’d have thought that’d be the correct place for a civil suit.

  • f_galton

    I guess our government isn’t entirely bad.

    • Breshvic

      I see you troll on here as well.

  • Dave Johnson
  • opsarche

    what’s the harm of little idi*ts?

    monstrous.com/forum/index.php?topic=13908.0

    ……