How to succinctly respond to a JFK assassination conspiracy proponent

In My Humble Opinion
41

Johnny Bravo:
“You should care because the forces that covered it up 60 years ago are still pulling the strings! Just look at this website and…”

“Well good news! I’ve got evidence you for sure haven’t seen yet or else you’d be right there with me. Just look at this website and…”

When did you meet my husband?

I not only believe that LHO acted alone, I believe he was aiming at Governor Connally. Mr. Rilch will have none of it. Even when I showed him that diagram of Kennedy and Connally in the limo, and the perfectly straight trajectory the bullet had to have taken, he asked for the source and then scoffed at it.

Plus which, had Kennedy not been shot, he still might not have lived to be sixty. He was not the healthiest cat around.

And have you ever noticed, as I did during the 40th anniversary* of the assassination, that CTers never name anyone where it would be a disruption if they were arrested or lost their Senate seat or whatever. They’re always either dead, no longer in power, some schmo who was never in power, or a nameless “Cuban” or “mobster”. (And no one ever seems to bring Nixon into it. No, I don’t think he had anything to do with it! Just that he was in Dallas on 11/21/63, on Pepsi business, yet few people, if any, have tried to make something of that.)

*We really need a better term than that for things like this and 9/11 and other tragedies. An anniversary is a celebration, and we’re sure not celebrating these events. Honoring the people lost, hopefully, but even that shouldn’t be a party.

42

I tend to go with the idea that arguing with a conspiracy theorist is like wrestling with a pig. You both end up covered in mud, and the pig kind of likes it.

That is not original to me. It is just not worth engaging with a conspiracy theorist.

43

How about, the “40-year memorial?”

44

– Epilogue from Stanley Kubrick’s film Barry Lyndon (1975)

45

The closest I got to getting a CT’er to change his mind is when I pointed out that in the conspiracies we knew about publicly, we knew the who, what, when, where, how, why, and how much. Think Watergate, Iran/Contra, Bill Clinton’s affair, etc. We may not have had enough evidence to try or convict someone, or sue them, but we knew the shape and form of the conspiracy. Because people cannot keep their mouths shut. Particularly if they’re in legal jeopardy.

My CT’er friend said that was interesting. He stopped posting CT crap for almost 3 weeks. Then was right back into it, and I dropped him from my socials.

You really can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into. Which is a hard thing to accept on a board dedicated to fighting ignorance.