Was Bush wired for the debate?

[a_unique_person]

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/11/1097406493527.html



US President George Bush's campaign team have played down reports that the president was fitted with a transmitter to allow him to receive help during a televised debate.

During the public discussion with presidential opponent Senator John Kerry, an apparent bulge could be seen in the middle of Mr Bush's back under his suit jacket.

A number of internet sites have claimed that the president was wearing a device that allowed an adviser to feed him answers to questions during the debate last week.

It was also alleged that on several occasions Bush stopped speaking for a period and stared ahead as if listening to a voice.

Other reports suggested the president could have been wearing a bullet-proof vest.

Dave Lindorff, a reporter with the news and current affairs website Salon.com, was one of the first to suggest the apparent bulge could be a device.



I don't know how seriously to take this claim. Any more information pro or con?

[DaChew]

Why would there have to be a buldge? There've been wireless receivers that fit right inside the ear for years. I believe Randi even caught a faith healer type using one once.

[zakur]

http://www.isbushwired.com/

http://www.mediachannel.org/views/dissector/affalert273.shtml

[corplinx]

We all know the bulge is really Dick Cheney's neuro-control transmitter which guides the president to war.

This is why the Bush team is so much better than Kerry: technology. Kerry resorted to crib notes during the first debate while Bush used state of the art audio and mind control equipment thats larger than a cellphone from the 1980s attached directly to his back.

[Cleon]

I've seen this rumor a while, and for the life of me the only question that comes to mind is, "WHO $%^&ING CARES???"

[CFLarsen]

Why wear it there? Why not in his belt?

Bad tailoring. But it's always interesting to see just how many will believe the worst.

[HarryKeogh]

no candidate would risk being caught with a wire, you would instantly lose any chance of winning the presidency and tarnish your party for years.

silly rumor.

[Luke T.]

This is the stupidest conspiracy theory ever.

Did anyone actually listen to Bush's responses in the debates? Hey, I'm a Bush supporter, and even I think his answers sucked. If he was being fed through a wire, whoever it was feeding him answers, THEY NEED TO FIRE THAT GUY!

:D

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I don't know how seriously to take this claim.

Thanks for the laugh.

[Furious]

In other news, people for the other guy are equally retarded. (http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm)

[zakur]

Originally posted by Luke T.
This is the stupidest conspiracy theory ever.

Did anyone actually listen to Bush's responses in the debates? Hey, I'm a Bush supporter, and even I think his answers sucked. If he was being fed through a wire, whoever it was feeding him answers, THEY NEED TO FIRE THAT GUY!

:D In all seriousness, there was that very odd point in the middle of one of Bush's responses where he says" Wait, let me finish" although neither Kerry nor Lehrer said anything.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by zakur
In all seriousness, there was that very odd point in the middle of one of Bush's responses where he says" Wait, let me finish" although neither Kerry nor Lehrer said anything.

That's not particularly indicative of anything...It might've looked like one of them was about to interrupt. Happens to me all the time.

[Dorian Gray]

True, Cleon. At one point, Bush even said that Kerry "was looking at me like my clock was up."

[mbp]

I don't understand why so many here seem to dismiss the very idea that Bush might be wired without much consideration at all.
He may or may not be - I'm not sure myself - but at least there are some odd things here worth considering.

Look at this picture (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/041009/480/pd13510090242) from the second debate. He clearly does have something on his back. I don't see how this one could be a wardrobe malfunction.

And Salon had an article (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/08/bulge/index.html) about it a couple of days ago in which a "spyware expert" said of the mysterious bulge that
There's certainly something on his back, and it appears to be electronic," he said. McKenna said that, given its shape, the bulge could be the inductor portion of a two-way push-to-talk system. McKenna noted that such a system makes use of a tiny microchip-based earplug radio that is pushed way down into the ear canal, where it is virtually invisible. He also said a weak signal could be scrambled and be undetected by another broadcaster.


Also, there is this odd clip (http://www.canofun.com/blog/videos/BushAndTheOddSync.wmv) from an earlier Bush appearence in which a second voice seems to say Bushs words before he does himself.

None of this is proves anything. But it's at least suspicious.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by mbp
Also, there is this odd clip (http://www.canofun.com/blog/videos/BushAndTheOddSync.wmv) from an earlier Bush appearence in which a second voice seems to say Bushs words before he does himself.

Nice.

Even better than AUP, man.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by mbp
Look at this picture (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/041009/480/pd13510090242) from the second debate. He clearly does have something on his back. I don't see how this one could be a wardrobe malfunction.

Why not? The question is: Where did it go (or how did it appear, depending on which pic was taken first) from picture 1 to picture 2?

ehhhh.........the two pictures are from the same debate, right?

Originally posted by mbp
Also, there is this odd clip (http://www.canofun.com/blog/videos/BushAndTheOddSync.wmv) from an earlier Bush appearence in which a second voice seems to say Bushs words before he does himself.

I am not sure of this clip. Does it show (or "sound") on the soundtrack of the network broadcast debate?

At any rate, I would still want to know: Why on his back? Why not clipped to his belt?

[ManfredVonRichthoffen]

Originally posted by mbp
Look at this picture (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/041009/480/pd13510090242) from the second debate. He clearly does have something on his back. I don't see how this one could be a wardrobe malfunction.

And Salon had an article (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/08/bulge/index.html) about it a couple of days ago in which a "spyware expert" said of the mysterious bulge that
First one looks like his colar bones jutting out. Second one looks like a fold in the jacket.

1) Doesn't look like anything but what I mentioned
2) the location is the most retarded place to put an electornic device, especially with the belt loop 8 inches away in an area where it wouldn't have been seen.
3) He didn't perform well enough to justify saying he was being fed lines.


I suppose he could have gone to great lengths to have Corky put his colar bone shaped listening device on, then feed him lines, but I doubt it.

[mbp]

Originally posted by CFLarsen

ehhhh.........the two pictures are from the same debate, right?

No, they are not. This one is from the second debate.



I am not sure of this clip. Does it show (or "sound") on the soundtrack of the network broadcast debate?

I don't understand your question.
The clip is from Bush speaking sometime during the 60-year d-day celebrations earlier this year. The sound is as it was broadcast on CNN. (Or so it is claimed. I obviously didn't see or record this on CNN.)


At any rate, I would still want to know: Why on his back? Why not clipped to his belt?
No idea. Maybe the receiver needs to be very close to the transmitter?

[gnome]

Ok... for another ridiculous twist in the conspiracy theory...

What if the evil puppet masters PUT the big square box on his back on purpose, just so that interest in the idea of Bush being wired would focus on that, and be easily brushed aside?

Kind of like that time in Chicago when a cop allegedly dressed in a bunny suit to beat up a suspect, so that nobody would believe the story.

[mbp]

1) Doesn't look like anything but what I mentioned

He's got some oddly shaped collarbones connected by some rectangular thing then, but ok.
It could also be something entirely different such as a heart rate monitor I suppose.


2) the location is the most retarded place to put an electornic device, especially with the belt loop 8 inches away in an area where it wouldn't have been seen.

It does indeed seem odd that they couldn't come up with something that was harder to detect. That's also my biggest problem with this "conspiracy theory".


3) He didn't perform well enough to justify saying he was being fed lines.

Speaking and listening at the same time isn't an easy thing to do, I would imagine. Bush does, in my opinion, seem to pause very often and at odd moments when he speaks. This might be the reason why.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by mbp
No, they are not. This one is from the second debate.

Ehhh....evidence? :) Which is from what debate?

Originally posted by mbp
I don't understand your question.
The clip is from Bush speaking sometime during the 60-year d-day celebrations earlier this year. The sound is as it was broadcast on CNN. (Or so it is claimed. I obviously didn't see or record this on CNN.)

Exactly. I want to know if the clip is from the original CNN tape.

Originally posted by mbp
No idea. Maybe the receiver needs to be very close to the transmitter?

Nah, man. We have wireless networks in our homes. Don't tell me that the Secret Service can't do better.

[Rob Lister]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Why wear it there? Why not in his belt?

Bad tailoring. But it's always interesting to see just how many will believe the worst.

Actually it's fairly good tailoring, if you ask me. Judging from the photo already linked

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/041009/480/pd13510090242

The bulge appears to me to be a bullet-proof vest. It's about the right shape and bulkiness. We know he wears one (all since Reagan have AFAIK).

Covering that nicely under an off-the-rack suit ain't gonna happen.

I'm guessing it's something a bit like this...

http://www.americansecurity.net/image.php?imageID=22fb4a753a56a7e1853ca36cad38cc67

But more expensive...or course.

[mbp]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Ehhh....evidence? :) Which is from what debate?

Huh? Are you being serious?
The picture I've posted a link to is from the second debate. And as it's the only picture I've linked to (in this thread), I don't understand the "which" question.
As evidence I offer the caption

President Bush gestures toward his Democratic challenger John Kerry during the presidential debate in St. Louis, Friday, Oct. 8, 2004. (AP Photo/Ron Edmonds)

Which appears beneath the picture on the news.yahoo.com page I linked to.


Exactly. I want to know if the clip is from the original CNN tape.

Hard to know either way without access to CNN's archives. The episode is briefly mentioned in the Salon story as a fact and not something under dispute. Which still proves nothing, I agree.
And being wired while giving a speech or making a prepared statement isn't really any "worse" than using a telepromter.


Nah, man. We have wireless networks in our homes. Don't tell me that the Secret Service can't do better.
That does seem odd, I agree. Unless the distance to the ear is crucial I can't think of a good reason to place it on his back.
Although a very very small receiver placed in the ear or on a tooth (a different theory :) ) would probably not have quite the range of your average wireless lan adapter.
And maybe they just weren't expecting the media to break the rule about not having cameras placed behind the candidates.

[mbp]

Originally posted by Rob Lister
The bulge appears to me to be a bullet-proof vest. It's about the right shape and bulkiness. We know he wears one (all since Reagan have AFAIK).

According to this (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/09/politics/campaign/09bulge.html?oref=login&oref=login) article in the New York Times, "campaign and White House officials" deny that Bush was wearing a bullet-proof vest.
Although I suppose he could have been anyway.

[Rob Lister]

Originally posted by mbp
According to this (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/09/politics/campaign/09bulge.html?oref=login&oref=login) article in the New York Times, "campaign and White House officials" deny that Bush was wearing a bullet-proof vest.
Although I suppose he could have been anyway.

Well, I suppose if they deny it, he wasn't...except I'm pretty sure he was. That he/they would deny it makes sense.

I guess one way to know (somewhat more for) sure is by researching the many photos of Bush appearing before other live audiencies -- specifically the photos taken from behind.

It isn't often he is dressed in simi-formal attire so it should be pretty easy to flush this out.

I'll google a few later if I get time.

Mind you, I'm doing this for the challenge factor mostly. I'm pretty much convinced that if he were to wear a radio at a debate, he wouldn't wear one so obvious.

He could put it in his pants with his other presidential bulge! :)



^above was for Dorine, 'cause I know there's a real love interest there.

[billydkid]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/11/1097406493527.html

I don't know how seriously to take this claim. Any more information pro or con?

He does frequently seem to be listening to other voices. I thought it was God.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
Nice.

Even better than AUP, man.

Nice, I ask for some input because the idea seems pretty implausible, and you trash me. Teach me to ask for some skeptical input again, won't it?

[csense]

What you really should be concerned about is the .45 caliber which is entirely obvious under his right arm and above the pocket, with the muzzle pointing at between 7 and 8



http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20041009/capt.pd13510090242.debate_pd135.jpg

[LostAngeles]

While Bush being wired and fed answers wouldn't surprise me, I'm tending towards "not so" for two points.

One of the arguements for the wire is that Bush said "Let me finish." Why is his feeder saying that? Who would be interrupting the feeder?

...OK, it's one point. I just think that one's kind of dumb.

Unless I'm cutting myself with the Razor, the bulletproof vest seems a simpler and more plausible explanation. The White House probably denied it because Kerry wasn't wearing one. Obvious response from the left hand of Nitwit is "Ehh, how come Kerry didn't get to wear one?" (hint: because you didn't think to put one on him. If the WH said, "We're putting a vest on Bush. Why don't you do the same with Kerry?" which would have gotten "OMG, debate not safe! WH knowZ d00dZ.")

As far as Kerry goes, well, Drudge is the right hand of Nitwit and as such, I tend to ignore his repor... Oh, I'm sorry, muckraking is the term I want to use there, yes.

(No, I'm not sick of the left and the right wings. Not at all.)

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Nice, I ask for some input because the idea seems pretty implausible, and you trash me. Teach me to ask for some skeptical input again, won't it?

I've thought it over, and I still think that a reasonable person wouldn't need any help deciding how seriously to take this claim.

I find it humorous that you ask the question, rather than coming to your own conclusion.

I managed to come to my own conclusion that Kerry didn't sneak any notes onto his podium at the same debate.

The idea of either trying to cheat is ridiculous.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
I've thought it over, and I still think that a reasonable person wouldn't need any help deciding how seriously to take this claim.

I find it humorous that you ask the question, rather than coming to your own conclusion.



Humorous? The link is from a reputable news source. Now, that certainly doesn't make it true, but it does mean that someone who should be trained in the art of using evidence to make a story thinks it could be true. I didn't say if I thought it was mostly unbelievable, or mostly believable. Even if it is totally unbelievable, it is interesting that reputable people are seriously putting this forward as a possibility, just for the sake of curiousity.

One thing I have learned, commonsense is fallible.



I managed to come to my own conclusion that Kerry didn't sneak any notes onto his podium at the same debate.

The idea of either trying to cheat is ridiculous.

I'm afraid politicians have plenty of form, including this one. Ref: reasons for going to war.

[csense]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Even if it is totally unbelievable, it is interesting that reputable people are seriously putting this forward as a possibility, just for the sake of curiousity.



I think there are better motives at play here, the least of which being wishful thinking.

Bush wasn't wearing anything and that includes a vest or a wire. You're seeing a combination of tensional forces, or vectors, and shading. That's it. Anything else you see is entirely from your own imagination.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by csense
I think there are better motives at play here, the least of which being wishful thinking.

Bush wasn't wearing anything and that includes a vest or a wire. You're seeing a combination of tensional forces, or vectors, and shading. That's it. Anything else you see is entirely from your own imagination.

Not my imagination, the reporters imagination. I have no idea what listening devices are capable of these days. I did think it sounded pretty ridiculous myself, but put it up here for a discussion anyway. Suddenly, it's wishful thinking on my part. I think it's more like wishful thinking on your part.

[csense]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Not my imagination, the reporters imagination. I have no idea what listening devices are capable of these days. I did think it sounded pretty ridiculous myself, but put it up here for a discussion anyway. Suddenly, it's wishful thinking on my part. I think it's more like wishful thinking on your part.

Not your motives, but the motives of the reputable people you made reference to...and in the second part I'm using the pronoun you generally not specifically.

[damn_wookie]

Der Spiegel Pic (http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzkultur/0,1518,grossbild-397809-322451,00.html)

I inadventantly duplicated this thread elsewhere.

Anyways...

We all want as much information as possible. This very forum is on a site dedicated to the work of Mr. Randi.

Many years ago he caught a prominent televangelist pulling this very trick. There was a hilarious send up of this in "Fletch Lives".

I would think his experiences would be EXTREMELY relevant to this issue.

Is it really so preposterous that Bush would try such a thing? Or more likely, get talked into it?

[csense]

Originally posted by damn_wookie
Der Spiegel Pic (http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzkultur/0,1518,grossbild-397809-322451,00.html)

Is it really so preposterous that Bush would try such a thing?


OMG....Kerry also has a strange anomaly in what looks like the middle of his back also. I don't think these are wires people...I think it's something much more sinister. It's apparent to me now that the wire story is a cover, and both Bush and Kerry are aliens who are secretly trying to take over our planet, and what we are witnessing in the picture below is Bush (or whatever his alien name is) checking to see that Kerry's (or whatever his alien name is) pronounced reptilian spinal cord is properly concealed from view.


Der Spiegel pic
http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,397809,00.jpg

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by csense
OMG....Kerry also has a strange anomaly in what looks like the middle of his back also. I don't think these are wires people...I think it's something much more sinister. It's apparent to me now that the wire story is a cover, and both Bush and Kerry are aliens who are secretly trying to take over our planet, and what we are witnessing in the picture below is Bush (or whatever his alien name is) checking to see that Kerry's (or whatever his alien name is) pronounced reptilian spinal cord is properly concealed from view.


Der Spiegel pic
http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,397809,00.jpg

I'm just worried at the way they can't keep their hands off each other. And that little aside they make to each other, that wouldn't be scripted would it, it would be just a witty little comment that ocurred to them on the spur of the moment.

[csense]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I'm just worried at the way they can't keep their hands off each other. And that little aside they make to each other, that wouldn't be scripted would it, it would be just a witty little comment that ocurred to them on the spur of the moment.


Considering that the aliens (we know as Bush and Kerry) can't speak their native language in front of us for obvious reasons, they are using our language as code unbeknowest to us, so I think the meaning of any of these intimate comments are fairly irrelevant from our perspective...given of course what we now know.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by mbp
Huh? Are you being serious?
The picture I've posted a link to is from the second debate. And as it's the only picture I've linked to (in this thread), I don't understand the "which" question.
As evidence I offer the caption

Which appears beneath the picture on the news.yahoo.com page I linked to.

There's a photo in the (corrected!) link on the other thread about this subject. Sorry for the confusion.

Originally posted by mbp
And being wired while giving a speech or making a prepared statement isn't really any "worse" than using a telepromter.

Except this is neither a speech, nor a prepared statement, nor are both politicians using a teleprompter. This is a debate, and one shouldn't use outside help (at least not hidden) during one such.

Originally posted by mbp
And maybe they just weren't expecting the media to break the rule about not having cameras placed behind the candidates.

Actually, that makes pretty dramatic pictures... ;)

Anyway, a storm in a tea cup.

[gnome]

Originally posted by LostAngeles
One of the arguements for the wire is that Bush said "Let me finish." Why is his feeder saying that? Who would be interrupting the feeder?

The way I envisioned this scenario, Bush was unconsciously talking to the feeder, feeling interrupted by new cues before he was finished speaking the last thought.

I bet it's hard, if someone's talking in your ear, and able to respond to things that you say, to keep from saying something back to them at times.

[csense]

Originally posted by gnome
The way I envisioned this scenario, Bush was unconsciously talking to the feeder, feeling interrupted by new cues before he was finished speaking the last thought.

I bet it's hard, if someone's talking in your ear, and able to respond to things that you say, to keep from saying something back to them at times.


I hope you realize that this feeder would need to be at a location intimate to the event as it is transpiring in real time since all broadcasts, even so called live, have a time delay...which means that a remote location with a live broadcast feed is out of the question.

So where do you think this feeder was. In the audience, back stage.

Where?

[gnome]

Originally posted by csense
I hope you realize that this feeder would need to be at a location intimate to the event as it is transpiring in real time since all broadcasts, even so called live, have a time delay...which means that a remote location with a live broadcast feed is out of the question.

So where do you think this feeder was. In the audience, back stage.

Where?

Hey, take it easy. I'm not convinced there was a feeder. I'm just exploring the possibilities. You raise a very good question here.

Where do the candidate's assistants and such stay during the debate? In the audience, backstage, or elsewhere...? I can't really speculate without knowing how that part of it is organized.

In addition, would it be as easy to wire a microphone to him as a receiver?

[LostAngeles]

Originally posted by gnome
The way I envisioned this scenario, Bush was unconsciously talking to the feeder, feeling interrupted by new cues before he was finished speaking the last thought.

I bet it's hard, if someone's talking in your ear, and able to respond to things that you say, to keep from saying something back to them at times.

Ah, ok. That makes sense now.

Uttering things aloud without realizing it something I do a lot when I'm trying to work a non-math problem through.

[CFLarsen]

I don't think at all that it would be impossible to wire Bush in such a way that it was virtually impossible (save for a full body search, and I don't expect anyone to be that perverse...) to detect it.

That's why I find the placement of a possible transmitter so ridiculous. Just put it in his belt, on his back!

I'm not buying this at all.

[gnome]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
I don't think at all that it would be impossible to wire Bush in such a way that it was virtually impossible (save for a full body search, and I don't expect anyone to be that perverse...) to detect it.

That's why I find the placement of a possible transmitter so ridiculous. Just put it in his belt, on his back!

I'm not buying this at all.

That's close to where I'm at... at this point his behavior is more convincing than that suspicious lump. But it's not proof.

[csense]

Originally posted by gnome
...that suspicious lump. .

Here's the picture with the so called lump:


http://images.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/08/bulge/story.jpg



The anomaly has two distinct properties. A short horizontal line from one shoulder to the next. And and a long slender line from the same point at about the top middle of his back, all the way down to the tail of the suit. These two lines are perpendicular to each, or rather at right angles to each other.

If you look at the vertical line as compared to his shoulders, you can clearly make the judgement that it is approximately center with his back, along the same axis as the backbone, or vertebrae.

These lines form a "T" shape rather than a square that some people are inferring.

The small horizonatal wrinkle corresponds from point to point with the bottom part of the shoulder blades where there is somewhat of a blunt rounded point on the bone itself. Reach around your back to your own shoulder blade and you can feel it.

Now look at the posture of the President and you can clearly see that his shoulders are exerting force outwards, pulling on the fabric of the suit and in effect pulling it tight and smooth directly above that point and forming the outline of the bone of the shoulder blade.


Below all this, there is nothing exerting equal lateral force like there is above, so it won't have the same tension here and thus the fabric in this area won't be smooth. Now if we look at the President's posture again we clearly see that he is somewhat hunched forward and his head is not in line with his vertebrae, and this force that is pushing forward and perpendicular to the lateral force of the shoulder blades, has the effect of pulling up on the suit, causing the fabric in the area below the shoulder blades that is free of lateral tension to form the wrinkle that you are seeing.

The vectors of the wrinkles correspond to the tensional forces that are being applied ...it is that simple.

A well tailored suit, probably enhances the effect since there is less material to absorb the tensional forces generated by someone who is very animated like the President...and especially with his physique of large shoulders.

[csense]

Here's another controversial picture:


http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20041009/capt.pd13510090242.debate_pd135.jpg



If you look between the shoulder blades you'll see two small horizontal lines and a much larger one on top which seems to be curved. Wrinkles don't naturally curve like that between two points of tension and because of this it's suggested that it shows the outline of a vest.

The problem is, it isn't a curved line. It just seems that way because of the properties of a wrinkle and the angle of light.

A wrinkle is like a wave with a rounded crest. Just look at the drapes on any window and it will become apparent what I'm talking about.

The large wrinkle on the top is actually going straight across but because light is illuminating more of the crest of the wrinkle on the left side rather than the right, the shadow drops as it goes to the left, and you're interpreting this drop in the shadow as the wrinkle droping to the left and hence curved.