I'm not talking about the ones that have been bandied about during this election cycle. I'm talking about old ones--ones that I can kind of buy into.
I was just reading about James Earl Ray and how some say he was just a scapegoat--even the King family believes that Ray never shot MLK.
Then when you think about the other "lone" shooters of the 60s--Sirhan Sirhan and Lee Harvey Oswald--I just wonder what their motivation was? And the fact that Ruby shot Oswald--I don't buy it was an emotional response to his patriotism. I am open to the idea of more "motivated" suspects in both of those assassinations.
And then there's poor Pierre Salinger whose reputation went from respect to ridicule after maintaining that TWA 800 as shot down by "friendly fire"--which I think is another plausible alternative for what really happened.
Where do you stand on conspiracies--these or others? Do you think about them, or do you accept the findings of the various commissions that have ruled on them a long time ago?