Exact words Steve Barber hears; i.e. the Decker crosstalk ( for the umpteenth time)
Steve
Tony Marsh, I want you to copy and paste this, or do whatever you have
to do -- so that I don't ever have to read--or hear-ever again that I
have not been "clear enough" when describing the words I hear from the
ch. 2 transmission made at 12:30/31 by Dallas County Sheriff Bill
Decker.
Are you ready, Tony?
Have you got your computer ready to make this a permanent fixture in
your files?
Okay...
Here goes:
The entire ch.2 transmission, the second of two made by Decker after
the dispatcher couldn't "quite understand all of it" reads as follows:
"Have-um station 5 to move all **men available** out of my department,
back into the railroad yards **in an effort** to try to determine --
just what and where it happened down there and **hold everything secure
until the homicide and other investigators can get there** ."
The words with ** around them are the words I have been pointing out
over the years that I can hear buried beneath the noise.
The words "men available" and "in an effort" are MUCH fainter and more
difficult to hear than the words "hold everything secure until the
homicide and other investigators can get there."
Now, have you got that, Tony?
Steve Barber
Anthony Marsh
No, again you answer a different question than the one I asked you. I
asked you exactly which words you heard crosstalked onto channel 1. I am
not that interested in YOUR emphasis and interpretation of the way you
thought Decker was speaking on channel 2. Maybe after 25 years we have
been able to squeeze out of you one or two additional words. Now, what
accounts for the idea that you can only hear small fragments of the
complete message from Decker on channel 1?
> Steve Barber
>
>
--
Anthony Marsh
The Puzzle Palace http://www.boston.quik.com/amarsh
Steve
> Are you ready, Tony?
> Okay...
> Here goes:
> Steve Barber
Unbelievable. Absolutely Un-believable.
What part of my post did you not get, Tony?
I'll tell you what. I am so fed up with trying to talk in a language
that you understand when it comes to this case-without having to spell
it all out for you that here is what I want you to do.
You do a google seacrh, and you find where I went through all this a
coupl of years ago and answered your question. If you can't understand
a simple explanation of what exact words I hear crosstalked over onto
channel one by my putting these ** around the words I hear crosstalked
over-then I give up. I don;t have time for this crap, and yes, it *is*
CRAP!
Michael O'Dell
"Anthony Marsh" <ama...@quik.com> wrote in message
news:%ozFe.57$1E.15@trndny04...
Tony, he is answering your question. See the part where Steve says, "The
words with ** around them are the words I have been pointing out over the
years that I can hear buried beneath the noise."
He didn't say anything about the way he thought Decker was speaking.
BTW, I can hear the same fragments Steve hears.
Michael
Russ Burr
So can I.
RB
>
> Michael
>
>
>
rob.s...@gmail.com
Rob
jwrush
Note to Steve,
I don't think these "conspiracy" people really want to try to find out who
shot the President. I think many of them probably realize that Oswald did
it, but they are just trying to take the blame off of him for some reason.
They seem to be pretending they are his "defense attorneys", and they are
trying to convince a "jury" to acquit him.
Steve
Steve writes:
What I find completely baffling is, no matter *what* I tell you,Tony, or
how I try to explain this, it is never to your satisfaction. And you are a
person who brags about IQ's.
You take take a cheap shot at me saying: "Maybe after 25 years we have
been able to squeeze out of you one or two additional words". Let me
point out that as far back as 1981, or 1982, I pointed out that I can hear
the words " "men available" "in an effort" and "hold everything secure
until the homicide and other invstigators can get there". Since you said
it though, please humor us with "the other words" that you ay you "have
managed to sqeeze out of me" that I hadn't alrerady mentioned when this
came up before. I would like to see the source, the date, and I would
like for you to post it/them right here within this NG. I am calling your
bluff! ***
This was printed in an issue of Penn Jones' "The Continuing Inquiry"
(TCI), as I recall, when trying to explain to Gary Mack what words I hear
besides "...hold everything secure..." on channel 1. TCI was the main
newsletter at the time dealing with conpsiracy oriented articles, and I am
quite positive Marsh subscribed to it and saw it.
Tony wrote:
Now, what accounts for the idea that you can only hear small fragments
of the complete message from Decker on channel 1?
Steve writes:
I don't honestly believe that I should dignify this question with an
answer in light of the fact that no matter how I try to explain things to
you, it is never to your satisfaction, outside of the fact that what you
asked me is irrelevant. You didn't even see that I was describing to you
exactly what words I hear as crosstalk in the above post-and five others
who read it *did* see exactly what I was saying, and they took the
initiative to let you know it. Why in the world should I answer any
qestions you put forth to me? They are never, ever "good" enough-even
though to others they are answers that are fully understood.
*** A side note to this:
I probably won't get these any sooner than the "notes" you said you have
that you have yet to produce over the "Take off, Buddy!" nonsense, that
you were supposed to post in the NG MONTHS( I belive it was back in Marsh
/aPril we were discussing this) ago telling the reader EXACTLY where this
can be heard since you claim that I am wrong in stating that what you hear
is actually "Checked out on traffic", just before the sirens begin. You
conveniently got out of that one. Where are they? Are you ever going to
produce them so we can hear this"proof that McLain had the open mic" that
you say you have?
Cough them up,already, will you?
tomnln
Oswald Never had any "defense attorney".
Oswald Never had any "jury".
Welcome to the "New America".
His accusers were never challanged about "Destroying Evidence".
A Felony
"jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote in message
news:42e7...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
Anthony Marsh
What if some of them think that Oswald did do it, but that he was part
of a conspiracy, as the HSCA concluded?
jwrush
"Steve" <drumr...@wmconnect.com> wrote in message
news:1122497620.9...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Steve writes:
>
> What I find completely baffling is, no matter *what* I tell you,Tony, or
> how I try to explain this, it is never to your satisfaction.
Rush says:
That's the game they've been playing for 42 years. You can't satisfy these
people. You can satisfy some lurkers and historians, but not these people,
so don't worry about it. Just use this as an opportunity to explain what
happened to the students and historians.
Martin Shackelford
Martin