(PART 1136)


In her article in CAR CRASH CULTURE (Mikita Brottman, ed., New York: Palgrave, 2001), our own Pamela McElwain-Brown claims that Oswald was downstairs watching the motorcade at the time of the assassination:

QUOTE ON -------------------------------------

"Lee Harvey Oswald, after taking a look at the motorcade from the front door of the Texas School Book Depository, ambles casually into the lunchroom to buy a bottle of Coke. He's waiting for a telephone call that never comes." (p. 169)

QUOTE OFF ------------------------------------

Pamela, I notice you don't cite sources for these novel claims in your published article. Would you kindly do so now? I'd hate for anyone to think you just made them up out of thin air.


It's pretty clear that "Pam's" source for her claim that LHO was "taking a look at the motorcade from the front door of the Texas School Book Depository" is the Altgens photograph. (What else could she possibly be relying on for such a statement?)

Of course, as all reasonable researchers know, the "Doorway Man" in the James Altgens photo is not Lee Oswald--it's Billy Lovelady, just as Lovelady HIMSELF told the Warren Commission in 1964, and just as Buell Wesley Frazier confirmed on camera in 1986 [see video below].

The part about Oswald "waiting for a telephone call that never comes" is straight out of Oliver Stone's 1991 fantasy film. So, I have a good idea where "Pam" got that silly and wholly unsupportable idea.


If a source isn't credible enough to be cited, then it's no source at all. And if a source is a work of fiction, well, enough said (except for some possible issues involving copyright infringement, which is not my concern). With fictional sources or no sources at all, Pam's published claims about Oswald and concerning the assassination itself (see my post, "Pamela McElwain-Brown takes the wheel") are nothing more than fiction.

I asked Pam a couple times last year if, when she sold her essay to the editor of the CAR CRASH CULTURE book, she'd represented it as a work of non-fiction. She never answered me. She knows she can't defend her work.


"DVP" is not much of a mind-reader, so as a result creates strawmen.


"Pam's" pot/kettle gene is on full display here. If anyone has created a "strawman" regarding the whereabouts of Lee Harvey Oswald at 12:30 PM CST on 11/22/63, it is "Pamela" Brown.


But then, the mindset of the WC apologist tends to place limits to thinking on one's own, much less following the evidence.


Pot/Kettle #2!

"Pam" has no more "[followed] the evidence" regarding Lee Oswald's whereabouts and movements on 11/22/63 than Oliver Stone or Jim Garrison have.

She merely pretends that Oswald was outside on the front steps of the Depository "watching the motorcade", when there is documentary evidence to indicate Oswald was not on the steps (e.g., the Altgens photo, Buell Wesley Frazier's testimony, and Billy N. Lovelady's testimony).

You're doing great so far, "Pam". (If a .000 batting average is your goal.)


It probably has not occurred to "DVP" that it may have been no coincidence that LHO went to the Texas Theater, and that perhaps he was waiting to be told where to go or what to do.


What was "Pam" saying about creating "strawmen" a second ago?

Pot meets kettle for the third time.


It would also not occur to "DVP" most likely to accept the fact that LHO had nothing to do with the M/C [Mannlicher-Carcano] after his return from Dallas...


Yeah, I guess Oswald went out to Irving for his unusual Thursday-night visit so that he could take a 38-inch-long submarine sandwich to work with him the next day.

What was "Pam" saying a second ago about "following the evidence"? Four pots and kettles so far.

Since "Pam" just said that it's likely LHO had "nothing to do with the M/C after his return from Dallas" [sic; "Pam" no doubt meant to say New Orleans here, instead of Dallas; or maybe "Pam" doesn't know what city Oswald was in at various times in 1963], maybe "Pam" thinks (i.e., pretends) that some evil "Let's Frame Oswald" conspirator broke into Ruth Paine's garage prior to the assassination and stole Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.

Perhaps "Pam" would like to tell us just exactly WHO stole Oswald's rifle and WHEN that theft took place.

As an alternative (and wholly unsupportable) conspiracy theory, "Pam" will probably claim that nobody needed to break into Paine's garage to steal the rifle, because the Carcano was never found in the TSBD at all on November 22, a Mauser was found.

And, therefore, "Pam" might just want to pretend that the DALLAS POLICE were the ones who placed Oswald's C2766 rifle into evidence -- even though, according to some researchers who are better at identifying rifles than I am, various frames of Tom Alyea's film prove that the rifle discovered on the sixth floor was a Mannlicher-Carcano and not a German-made Mauser.

So, regarding Oswald's rifle, whichever way "Pamela" chooses to go, she's got to rely on her own vivid imagination and/or a lot of crooked cops who couldn't have cared less about allowing the real killer(s) of the President to get away scot-free.


...and that no unfabricated evidence has ever put him [Oswald] in the SN [Sniper's Nest] during the assassination.


Yeah, come to think about it a little bit more, "Pam" probably likes "The Cops Planted The Carcano" scenario better than the "Rifle Was Stolen From The Paine Garage" tripe.

In other words, when you've got absolutely NOTHING of a physical nature to back up your silly conspiracy theories -- just say that all the evidence has been fabricated/faked/manufactured/planted/manipulated. And then--you're home free.

Great work, "Pam". You're doing a fine job of showing your true "Everything Was Fabricated" colors today.

And, incredibly, per "Pamela", it is the lone-assassin believers who have failed to "follow the evidence" in the JFK case.

Why is it that in the world of a JFK conspiracy theorist, white is ALWAYS black, and up is ALWAYS down, and a guilty person is INEVITABLY an innocent patsy?



So, for those who wish to reason logically, the question then becomes, "where was LHO and what was he doing?"


Looks like it's time for Pot/Kettle #5 here.

If "Pam" really wanted to think and reason logically, she wouldn't be so willing to sweep tons of Oswald-Did-It evidence under the rug and she wouldn't be pretending that ALL of that Oswald-Did-It evidence had been "fabricated" by evil plotters.


But we won't wait with bated breath for "DVP" to research that; it isn't a picture, or a movie, or the WCR, but something he would have to figure out on his own.


The Dallas Police Department figured out who killed John F. Kennedy and J.D. Tippit on Day 1 -- and that person was definitely Lee Harvey Oswald.

The fact that "Pam" cannot figure out something so incredibly easy to figure out is certainly not my fault. It's hers. (But I still have a feeling that Ollie Stone and Jimbo Garrison might have helped "Pam" to reach her strange conclusions--just a touch. Right, "Pam"?)

I'll close this post by repeating the following excellent common-sense quote from author and ballistics expert Larry Sturdivan, although "Pamela" undoubtedly would qualify these words as coming from a person who possesses no common sense or logic whatsoever:

"While one of the pieces of physical evidence could conceivably have been faked by an expert, there is no possibility that an expert, or team of super-experts, could have fabricated the perfectly coordinated whole. This brings to mind the recurrent theme in most conspiracy books. All the officials alternate between the role of "Keystone Kops", with the inability to recognize the implications of the most elementary evidence, and "Evil Geniuses", with superhuman abilities to fake physical evidence that is in complete agreement with all the other faked evidence." -- Larry M. Sturdivan; Page 246 of "The JFK Myths" (2005)



"FYI / BTW --- For those who care...the reason that "Pam" and I always place quotation marks around each other's names in our posts is due to the fact that "Pam" has a crazy idea that "DVP" (that's me) probably really isn't the person he says he is. I'm apparently supposed to be a collection of various aliases and unknown persons, posing as this person called "DVP". So...I have decided that "Pamela" deserves the same kind of reciprocal (albeit silly) "quotation mark" treatment." -- DVP; August 3, 2009

David Von Pein
April 30—May 5, 2010