The Bush Earpiece

[Anileve]

I am at a loss for words. I did tell my friend during the second debate that Bush seemed to be able to answer various question which is uncharacteristic of his ignorant nature. So I said whouldn't it be funny if he had an earpiece? Well the idea bothered me for some time and I decided to Google it, and sure enough my intuition has once again proved itself to be very keen. Read on...

 

THE EARPIECE....The internet is your go-to medium for news of the weird, and this weekend's clear winner in the world of weird speculation was the buzz about George Bush's earpiece.

 

It all started when Bush looked up halfway though an answer during Thursday's debate and snapped petulantly, "Let me finish." This is a trademark Bush line and normally wouldn't draw any comment except for one thing: no one had interrupted him. He had plenty of time left, Kerry hadn't said anything, and Jim Lehrer hadn't said anything either. So who was he talking to?

 

The theory making the rounds is that he was wearing an implanted earpiece of some kind and was reacting to advice from whatever handler was on the other end. The hard evidence for this is approximately zero, but it did bring back memories of an odd incident a few months ago: Bush was at a press conference with Jacques Chirac and really was wearing an earpiece, and it appeared that his responses to questions were being fed to him a few moments before the words came out of his mouth. You could hear it on every network that carried the event.

 

And for even more weirdness, there's the mystery of the strange lump in the back of his jacket. It's been there before at press conferences, and it was there again at the debate (Digby has a picture). What is it?

 

Weird, weird, weird. But I'm sure there's a good explanation that doesn't involve tinfoil hats. Comments are open.

 

-Washington Monthly

 

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/...4_10/004835.php

 

and this

 

http://nyc.indymedia.org/feature/display/125819/index.php

 

I don't know if anyone of you noticed his strange snap "Now hold on, let me finish."

[Anileve]

Ok, so some of you would say..."But that's a mere speculation there is really no hard evidence." Granted. However after continuing my research I came across something that blew the roof off any current scams. I was completely unaware of this event. Did anyone of you watch the press conference with Jacques Chirac? Well here is a little somethin somethin...

 

 

I'm wondering if any one else caught this, President Bush met with French president Jacques Chirac around the second of June. Both men were in France at podiums in front of a large press core. Bush had an earpiece in, I thought nothing of this since Bush has not yet mastered English, him knowing any French is a long shot. Soon after turning on CNN, I noticed that some one else was carefully dictating Mr. Bush's exact words before he acually said them. At first I thought this simply must be a tech problem, like an echo of some sort, but that was not the case. I could distinctly discern that these were two seperate voices. The voice was diffrent, as was the annunciation. Okay, I thought, this is just weird, so I flipped it to MSNBC, same deal, Faux News(maja props to skunx), amazingly the same, but the first voice was much lower in volume on Fox.

 

It was sureal, Bush was being fed his lines through an earpiece, I could come to no other logical conclution. We all well know that Mr. Bush is not the best speaker, but if he can not even read his own speech, then he is not qualified to be a member in AA, let alone the president of the United States.

 

It did not end here however, Bush was going to take a few questions from the press, everyone always notes how well the president is with names, well the voice in the earpiece is much better with names, beacuse he told Mr. Bush who to call by name, and without fail the earpiece had all the answers to the reporters questions as well. I was just in awe at this point, some clever techy in France had exposed one of Bush's puppet masters. This would be all over the press in no time. I was exstatic.

 

http://theleftist.blog-city.com/read/652304.cfm

 

I am amazed that this was not exposed or blown out of proportion by the media. Strangely enough the death of Reagan was very convienient.

[DominO123]

Would be fun if at the last debate someone comes in with a frequencies "destroyer." Edited October 10, 2004 by Fadix

[Sip]

COME ON! We are talking about a guy that would have trouble chewing gum and walking at the same time. You seriously want me to believe he can hear someone on an ear peace, take their advice, incorporate it into his answer, while trying to keep that dumb ass smirk going and say thank you to whoever asked whatever question?

[Azat]

Eve, actually NPR talked about this after the first debate saying that because Bush had done so bad thatthere were rumors on the internet that Bush was going to have an ear peace. And yesterday they even mentioned that at the start of the second debate Kerry put his hand on Bush's back after they greeted. They were guessing that it could havebeen possibly to check for the receiver.

 

I personally do not think there was anything. Bush was at his best and he loves talking to the common folk.

[Anileve]

Eve, actually NPR talked about this after the first debate saying that because Bush had done so bad thatthere were rumors on the internet that Bush was going to have an ear peace.  And yesterday they even mentioned that at the start of the second debate Kerry put his hand on Bush's back after they greeted.  They were guessing that it could havebeen possibly to check for the receiver.

 

I personally do not think there was anything.  Bush was at his best and he loves talking to the common folk.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

Talking to the common folk is one thing, having knowledge is another. You cannot tell me that this dumbass knew squat about an embryonic stem cell research or that he actually knew what recession is. He drove his businesses into the ground with his inability to manage, he didn't know that he was a part owner of the country. He used the word ferocious not only with difficulty as if he just learned it but also in a wrong context. Also it would be difficult for me to believe, but the conference with Chirac presents a credible evidence which may lead to this conclusion. See the earpiece is not that difficult to accept, what is though.. is the fact that he is provided with questions (from the press) prior to the event. Now that is a serious scandal.

 

Also what is severly irritating is that Kerry is not strong enough of a litigator to offer him a vicious fight, he could have slaughtered him with style but every time he tried to do it he came off really weak. None of the questions were really directly answered and his plan was just full of unrealistic promises which were drawn along the same lines as Bush, he didn't emerge as a man of a distinct platform which is clearly different from Dubya. I bet that if Edwards was facing him he would shred him to pieces. It's really a sad moment for our country when the choices are "Bush" or "Not Bush." It only justifies world's perception of American stupidity and that's freaking embarrassing.

 

Sip, what is easier to teach a person in four years as an adult: An entire English language combined with eloquence, science, politics, geography, history and business; OR..... to continue his progress as a puppet and turn him into an skilled parrot? I'll go with the latter.

 

What puzzles me is how is it that people don't understand that it's his administration which is responsible for everything, the Bush mafia along with all of the people which are involved. Bush is too stupid to make any decisions at all, he is as ineffective and as insignificant as they come. The world sees this, did people of this country purchase horse blinders in massive quantities?

 

I think it's a matter of attacking the psychology of the scared minds. Aristotle used the idea of tragedy to arouse pity and fear in his readers to demonstrate a certain point. It is at the moment of those heightened senses where people are most vulnerable, make them frightened enough and you can slide a leash on them without much resistance.

[Azat]

Come on Eve, you can't be serious. Believe me I hate Bush(all of them) with passion, but he is not an idiot or anything.

 

I wish I was a dumb as he is. He is a graduate of an Ivy league school. Ran against a VERY popular incumbent governor in Texas and beat her to the office. Ran a state the size(economy and population) larger than many European countries. Then ran against an Administration that was incredibly good for this country and beat them fair and square.(I know about all the scandals. I don't care as not a single major news paper or news room can stand up and say that he cheated). Let me remind you that the democratic party(my party) could not even win the home state of the very popular vice president that we had.

 

In business, yes it is true that he was not successful with one business but he purchased a $700,000 share of the Astros and turned around and sold it for some 10-15 million. So yes I wish I was as lousy as he is with business as well.

 

As for the questions being given to any of them. It really does not matter. You and I can come up with 100 questions and practice for them for a debate and I bet of the 20 questions that get asked at these debates we would have cover over 90% of the questions asked.

[DominO123]

No! No! no! Bush has obviously earpieces... no one will make me believe otherwise after what I am hearing comming from him.

[DominO123]

Bush had his best debate. What angers me most is that I am SURE he had earpieces.

[Azat]

http://www.isbushwired.com

[DominO123]

What's your opinion Azat now that you have watched the debate?

[Anileve]

Calling on the AFP

A simple way for major news media, you with all your millions in resources, to check out the "prompter vs. repeater" theory:

 

Chirac is said by people who saw it on TV to react visibly to the second voice speaking Bush's lines -- whether it was a repeater for generating closed-captions or a prompter -- in the June press briefing at the Elysee Palace. This is from a posting on Portland Indymedia:

 

"His buddy, Chirac somehow had a mic on Bush AND whoever it is that speaks to him. You could hear "rove"? say a sentence then Bush repeat it exactly the same way...word for word. He just continued on thru it, but when it was over, he acted very paranoid looking all around. Like he was wondering what was to come next. Cherac

had a VERY HUGE smile, winked and nodded as they left. It was a beautiful sight!"

 

Many reporters and officials in the audience that day should be able to tell us: Did the voice that was heard precede Bush's in real time? If so, he was using a prompter. If it followed Bush's voice (again in real time, at the event) then it was likely that of a live-human-being hired to repeat speech into a text-generating engine for closed captioning.

 

It is odd, as readers have pointed out, that this unsynced audio phenomenon doesn't seem to happen with other officials and live news events, only with some of Bush's speeches. In addition to the Chirac-Bush event, television viewers in some places heard a voice speaking Bush's lines before he did during his 9/11 address. The new Salon story says there are also reports of a prompter-like voice heard at Bush's remarks at the Sea Island G-8 summit meeting in June as well. But it doesn't say if that voice was heard in real-time by the audience, or on a broadcast.

 

A posting from a reader who says he spoke recently with an audio engineer for a major media outlet:"He said he was on site setting up for one of the debates. At these on sites they are required to scan the area for RF interference. He said his specrum analyzer picked up several RF bands that were not in the Secret Service saftey frequencies. He said, upon him asking questions of his supervisors about these frequencies, he was approached by 'officials' telling him to 'go blind immedeately' and to forget what he saw and to keep his eyes and ears out of those bands.

All of those RFs are encoded, including the ones used by the networks. He indicated that there may be people, engineers, thatr may hve 'accidentally' left their SAs on and maybe recorded some of the stuff. Now this is *highly* illegal (thank you FCC) but there may be proof out there.."

 

http://www.isbushwired.com

 

This is just painful. Bush seemed to be maneuvering much better. He was not anxiously searching for words stuttering for a long period of time to finally emerge with a weak statement. He came off much stronger and much more in control. Of course he was still pounding the podium with his hand and salivating throughout the speech. His demeanor and confidence is improving, he was generating numerical figures and using political rhetoric, more so now than previously. What was interesting is that every time he would appear at a loss for words which has been a usual occurrence, instead of taking a very long time searching, he would lower his eyes and emerge with an appropriate term. He would stutter a bit look down and all of a sudden correct himself even though the original word sounded different. I don't know, maybe it's my paranoia or maybe it's my intuitive nature when it comes to body language.

 

The damn debate was a freaking draw, and Kerry is what my girlfriends call a "LD" (hint: L stands for limp), he never really makes the slash that's needed. And then he makes the bogus claim about Bush not meeting with Black Leaders. When it comes to religion he doesn't come off strong enough. He looks in the camera and says that he proposes a healthcare plan provided by the government and then looks straight in the camera and says what I am proposing is not a government plan. Can their wives take the stand for Pete's sake and stop this nonsense? Even Dubya Idiot admitted (he doesn't really have much choice) that Laura the Valley Girl speaks better English.

[DominO123]

I absolutly agree with you dear, it isn't paranoia... the grimace Bush was doing many times were the one that one will make when trying to hear something comming from his ear and focusing on it while talking... and I made the SAME observation about his little moment of silences, they were not moment of silences because he forgot something or searching his words, he will shut up and make a grimace like hearing something, and then he will come up with the exact words to use. I am pretty sure he had earpieces, much so that if I havn't heard about this theory of earpieces I swear I would have concluded this after having watched this debate. It appeared so obvious to me. And his facial movements and gestures, forcing himself to follow what was said or something, mechanical etc... And the numbers he came with, as well the fact that he unlike Kerry does not take notes and then remember in this pressure the exact points he had to answer.

 

No one will make me buy that he did not have earpieces, I know that we should not accuse without evidences, but sometimes common sense tell us that there is something wrong, when intuition support your common sense.

Edited October 14, 2004 by Fadix

[Anileve]

Get this

 

El Mundo, Spain: Osama Bin Laden Is In China

 

11 October 2004 | 21:03 | FOCUS News Agency

 

Madrid. In the final stage of the presidential elections in the USA, President George Bush might use Osama Bin Laden as a trump, writes Irish journalist Gordon Thomas in the liberal Spanish daily El Mundo. According to Thomas, Washington is negotiating secretly with Peking for taking Osama Bin Laden out of his refuge in the north-western parts of the country, which are populated mostly with Muslims. Last summer, Bin Laden concluded an agreement with the regime of Peking, which promised to shelter the terrorist in exchange for putting an end to the partisan war of the Chinese Muslims against the People’s Republic of China, the journalist claims. Thousand of Muslims in the region are involved in human and drug trafficking to the West. After the arrival of Osama Bin Laden, the region is relatively calm, the journalist points out.

 

http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?catid=1...atte=2004-10-11

 

Now that's what I call dirty but somehow not arousing. <_<

[Armen]

Eve, that's one sexy piece of news. I love El Mundo.

 

Hey, anyone watched the last debate. Bush wasen't that bad, eh?

[Anileve]

Debate Number Three: There It Was Again (Maybe Kerry Should Buy One)

 

by Dave Lindorff

15 Oct 2004

 

The question of whether Bush was wired at the debates is important both because it raises questions about his honesty, and because it exposes the timidity of the media—especially the television news—which has the answer in its archives. Meanwhile, Kerry should find out where the White House buys these gizmos.

While everyone's wondering about that bulge under George Bush's ill-tailored suits during the three recent debates, and about whether he was channeling answers from Karl Rove or one of his assistants, it's worth nothing that his opponent, John Kerry, could have used some help from the ether himself.

 

Time and again, Kerry muffed opportunities to slam his verbally and factually challenged opponent, and instead stuck to a bunch of lame, carefully scripted responses to questions. When Bush, for example, spoke glowingly of Iyad Allawi, the puppet leader of Iraq's puppet government, instead of letting it pass, Kerry could have pointed out that Allawi’s speech to Congress was in fact penned by the White House for him. (Maybe that was the point to ask Bush if Allawi was wearing an earpiece when he delivered it, which would have brought down the house.)

 

 

When Bush condemned Kerry for dissing the so-called "coalition of the willing," Kerry should have pointed out that one member, Costa Rica, was an unwilling member that had to threaten to sue to have its name taken off the list.

 

 

Not once, when Bush attacked Kerry for allegedly not supporting the troops, did Kerry mention how the president has hidden the returning bodies, or how he has avoided visits to the thousands of returned wounded like the plague.

 

 

Clearly Kerry could have used a bug in his ear like the one Bush seems to have been using.

 

 

As for the president, the best evidence that George Bush was wired for help during the three presidential debates is the White House's response to the charge.

 

 

The first response, of course, was no response at all. As the first reporter to query the White House about the clearly evident bulge on his back during the first debate in Miami, I was simply ignored. Repeated calls from me--in my Salon-correspondent role--to both the White House press office and to the Bush campaign PR office went unreturned.

 

 

Actually, what would happen is I would call the PR office, say I was from Salon, and be told with whom I needed to speak. Then, when asked what I was calling about, I would be told, following a short delay, that the press officer in question at each place was "out on an errand." These errands in some cases lasted half a day. At the end of those interminable errands, no one ever called me back.

 

 

The N.Y. Times, when it followed up Salon's first story with its own call to the Bush campaign, was initially told that the photo circulating widely on the Web was "doctored."

 

 

Only later, when it was pointed out that the bulge was visible on the original video feeds, did the Bush campaign fall back on a second explanation: the bulge was a wrinkle, or actually a "pucker."

 

 

That this excuse is clearly ludicrous, Salon made clear in its second article, which showed an unmistakable bulge in the same area of the president's jacket during the second debate in St. Louis, and in a photo of Bush on his ranch, in which he had a bulge under his T-shirt that was remarkably like the one under his jacket during the first--and third--debates.

 

 

When the Bush campaign finally did respond, in the person of Reed Dickens, it was to flatly deny that Bush was wearing anything, including a wire--again a patently absurd and untrue claim that only begs the question: why can't the president admit that there is something on his back?

 

 

It will probably not be known for certain what the bulge was until months (maybe years) after the debates are history, when somebody as always happens spills the beans in a memoire or a leak, but the important thing is not so much what it was as what the Bush campaign's response was, and what the mainstream media’s response has thus far been.

 

 

Clearly if the president was getting secret help with his answers during the debates--whether with facts, wording, or simply with cues to help him select from a list of pre-memorized answers to questions that were being asked of him (which I suspect is the most likely scenario, given the set-piece nature of many of his repetitive answers)--it was a form of cheating. In this case, it would be the viewing and voting public that was being cheated on, since the object of the debates was for people to watch and compare how the two candidates measured up against each other standing on their own two feet under pressure.

[-=VAHE=-]

Wheres Election 2004?

[MosJan]

Vahe jan ushatsar menq arden 2008 enq xosum

[-=VAHE=-]

che bayts eli, inch exav ena teman, karevor baner kar aseloo!!

[MosJan]

che bayts eli, inch exav ena teman, karevor baner kar aseloo!!

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

 

Vahe jan hamperi - mi qich maqrelu gorts ka mej@