question about the kennedy assassination i've never seen asked

[freepcrusher]

does anyone notice that the area where kennedy was shot had less spectators than earlier in the motorcade route? I could be wrong, but that's my intuition. If you believe there was some sort of conspiracy (and i believe there was), it makes sense to have it done in a less crowded area:

1) less people filming and catching something on camera/video that they don't want to get out
2) easier for a shooter or shooters to read the signals being given to "go" or to "abort"
3) not as much risk of accidentally shooting someone in the crowd
4) less variables in general that could cause the plan to go awry

[freepcrusher]

Counter-point : maybe the shooter chose THAT grassy knoll because that general area was less crowded which makes it easier to stay hidden and undiscovered. Basically your #4. It helps support the "not a conspiracy" argument just as much or little as it helps the "conspiracy" argument.

so are you saying its possible to believe there was a shooter in the grassy knoll but that it wasn't a conspiracy? I thought that by definition, if you believe there was another shooter, you believe there was some sort of conspiracy.

[freepcrusher]

are you guys (gerald) posnerian in your outlook? I at one point thought he made sense, but there are simply too many coincidences to ignore. I feel there are a lot of plausible theories that make 90% sense but there is a piece of the puzzle that doesn't fit. Here are the two most plausible theories:

Johnson/Estes/Wallace connection - there is a lot of shady stuff going on there. Lyndon Johnson was the Bill Clinton of his time as far as having a lot of shady cronies such as Billy Sol Estes and Mac Wallace. Wallace was sort of a triggerman for Johnson going back to 1952 (where he somehow gets off with probation for a murder case). Lyndon was likely getting dropped from the ticket so he has some motive.

Permindex/Bronfman/Bloomfield connection - there is also some evidence going in this direction as Clay Shaw had ties to Permindex which was some sort of intelligence cutout. The motive in this case was foreign policy. The powers that be didn't like Kennedy's fopo outlook so they got rid of him.

The big thing here is that this was a heavily compartmentalized event with a lot of the people in on it not knowing other people involved. The thing that makes it hard to reconcile is that Theory 1 is somewhat mutually exclusive from Theory 2.

But I don't want to get bogged down in theories on this post. What I'm asking is - does anyone else notice that the location of the shooting seems more sparsely populated by onlookers than earlier in the route?

[freepcrusher]

One of my relatives (now deceased) was convinced that Jackie shot JFK with a handgun concealed in her purse.  Yes, yes, I know; you don't need to tell me all the reasons why this is absurd.

Well there is the conspiracy that the second shot came from a secret service agent discharging by mistake, kind of a slightly saner version of that? If the thrust of your relative's theory was that the second shot came from another direction, not that Jackie was in on it (and perhaps Lee Harvey Oswald was really Leo Stavros Onassis?)

I remember hearing that theory and while it sounded plausible - I've heard a lot of people say that that was an argument that was put forth as a way to discredit the zapruder film.