The jury–six blacks and six whites—found that King had been the victim of assassination by a conspiracy involving the Memphis police as well as federal agencies. [1]
The judge continued: “Do you also find that others, including governmental agencies, were parties to this conspiracy as alleged by the defendant?’ Your answer to that one is also ‘Yes.’” [2]
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Martin_Luther_...
[2] http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/Unspeakable/MLKconExp.ht...
I submitted reference 2 as a HN story. For further discussion of the MLK conspiracy go here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5891883
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Earl_Ray
Head down to the "denial of confession" section. Whether or not there was a conspiracy, I just wanted to bring up that it was still questionable about who actually shot Dr. King.
Here the message is "young narcissistic man, who ran away"
"But bob, you are only arguing the means, not the end. Do you think, the idea of a surveillance-free America should be stiffled ?"
That question, will never be asked with equal flair, in a one way propaganda.
What Bob is doing is, he is compressing the issue to a trifle.
It's the reporter equivalent of calling "LOL OP, you are such a short sighted faggot" and receiving precious HN karma for it.
When you can't win a debate, you win by stinking it up and making others leave.
That's how trolls killed love4eva-forum.
Every sell-out reporter is doing it, for quite some time actually.
Edit: Does anyone remember the sheer Debauchery of the press, during the Occupy movement ?