>Shane's conspiricism (as usual) blurs his argument -- but leaving that
>aside, I think he is substantially correct here. No conspiracy theory
>is needed, just the public record, to reveal the heavy repression that
>came down on Blacks, Indians, & Latinos in the late '60s.
Yes, which is why dragging in a conspiracy theory is so annoying. The effects of that repression are still with us and blurred arguments about James Earl Ray distract from looking at that head on.