Is Bush wired for sound??

diamond geezer

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 26, 2004
156
0
Check out the website to see the photo which may show Bush wired up for sound.

link

The Voice in Bush's Ear


This site is a clearinghouse for discussion of whether President Bush uses an earpiece through which he's fed lines and cues by offstage advisers. His speech rhythms suggest this, as do some of his word choices and interjections, and his constantly shifting eye movements while speaking. And there's another form of evidence: Television viewers have sometimes heard another voice speaking Bush's words before he says them. When Bush spoke at D-Day ceremonies in France last June, for example, viewers watching on CNN, Fox and MSNBC, including mediachannel.org's Danny Schechter, were startled to hear another voice speaking Bush's words as if to prompt him. Some said this continued into a q & a. And on the night of 9/11, when Bush appeared on television to address the nation, viewers of one television station in Quincy, Massachusetts heard another voice speaking, slowly and carefully, a few words at a time -- words which were then recited by the president. The voice was nondescript, male, definitely not the president's voice, says Quincy resident Robyn Miller. This went on for at least four sentences, she says, and then the "extra" feed was cut off.

Reporters should have looked into this long ago. But for the past four years through Bush's first debate last week with John Kerry -- and even in the days after the debate -- the press has ignored the evidence of its eyes and ears, and failed to ask whether the president secretly relies on unseen handlers for some public events, including press conferences. If Bush wore a hidden earpiece to cheat in this way during his first debate with John Kerry (however unsuccessfully), it is urgent that the fraud be exposed before the election.

The agreement set by the debate commission barred shots of the candidates from the rear of the stage. The networks refused to comply with the camera angle rules, broadcasting occasional shots of the candidates from behind.

Many viewers thus saw a squarish bulge the size of a large battery pack under the back of Bush's suit jacket, with an S-shaped cord appearing to snake up the right side of his back. Several blogs have carried speculation that it was an audio receiver.

A poster to NYCIndymedia says, "Think 'passive transducer' earpiece." He writes, "The bulges under his jacket are likely receiver/repeaters that pick up the transmitter (and encrypted?) signals from his handlers and transmit them, at very low power, to the earpiece."

"Sure, Bush uses an earpiece sometimes," a top Washington editor for Reuters said to me last spring. "State of the Union -- he had an earpiece for that. Everybody knows it," he said, or assumes it. But everybody doesn't know it, I said. Why hadn't Reuters investigated? The editor shrugged and said it wasn't so different from using a teleprompter.

Except that a teleprompter isn't a secret. And Americans have the right to know if the president can't or won't speak in public without covert assistance.

Television hosts and news anchors wear earpieces, called IFBs (for internal foldback, or feedback) which fit in the ear canal and are almost invisibly small, to receive cues from their producers. (Language scientists say that "shadowing," repeating the words someone else is speaking, is not at all difficult, but it is difficult not to move your eyes when listening.) Television journalists would be likely to spot the use of an IFB or at least to suspect it. So, why haven't they raised the question? I suspect it's untouchable in part because asking the question now points up all the years they let go by without asking it.

But these are the questions that must be asked now, by the Commission on Presidential Debates, and journalists: Does the president use an earpiece in his meetings with the public and with journalists? Did he wear one in last week's debate? How can members of the public who suspect he wore an earpiece be assured that he will not do so in the next debate? What was the object underneath his jacket?
 

SiliconAddict

macrumors 603
Jun 19, 2003
5,889
0
Chicago, IL
Dude I HIGHLY doubt it. Do you know how fast someone would have pounced on that. Someone would have noticed. If nothing else Kerry would have noticed and spun it into his debate somehow. It would have been a political nightmare for him.
 

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,366
119
Los Angeles
Maybe I missed something, but I thought posting stuff like this was frowned upon. The supporting "evidence" is so far-fetched it's not even funny and the "source" of the piece seems to be from a posting at another fourm.

1. The bulge is probably caused by his bullet proof vest.
2. The part of an IFB that goes into your ear is obvious, and keeping the wire that's coming out from under your shirt collar from yelling "hey, look at me" is all but impossible (unless you have long hair and wear it down covering your ears and neck).
3. The wire going between the receiver/battery pack and the in-ear speaker is the same size as a typical headphone wire. It wouldn't cause the huge "bump" that appears across Bush's right shoulder blade. A similar bump also appears across Bush's other shoulder blade. It’s almost as if he has some sort of thick, heavy vest on underneath his suite... Also, the receiver/battery pack is about the size of a deck of cards (if not smaller). Aside from the white headphones in their ears how obvious would it be if someone was listening to an iPod tucked away inside their business suit?
4. Even if Bush was "wired-for-sound" (which means you wire to transmit, not receive) why would they use something as clunky and obvious as an IFB? Why not some super-nifty gadget that is completely self-contained and fits inside your ear? I'm more inclined to believe that some gadget at home in the sci-fi world was used than what this guy is peddling. The simple fact that this guy tries to pass off an IFB as some covert tool that requires a massive battery pack and fat cable to feed an "almost invisibly small" in-ear piece is enough, by itself, to warrant using the "roll eyes" smilie.

So Bush's pedestrian public speaking ability, first attributed to stupidity, now, apparently, showcases all the "telltale" signs of someone being fed dialogue covertly? C'mon...


Lethal
 

pseudobrit

macrumors 68040
Jul 23, 2002
3,418
4
Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
LethalWolfe said:
So Bush's pedestrian public speaking ability, first attributed to stupidity, now, apparently, showcases all the "telltale" signs of someone being fed dialogue covertly? C'mon...
I think the site is junk.

So thankfully, we can still safely attribute his ineptitude to stupidity. ;)
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Jul 18, 2002
4,388
7
toronto
i'm fairly skeptical of this earpiece thing, especially based on the evidence, but for those who watched the first debate (i was not able), i do have this to ask...

i'd read on a lefty site (can't remember where) about someone wondering about an earpiece. his reasoning went like this: in the middle of a bush response, with no prompting from mr lehrer or anyone else audible, and apparently with no prodding from the light timers, bush stopped in the middle of a sentence, uttered "let me finish", and kept going.

1. did anyone notice it?
2. what did you make of it?
3. does it at all lend any support to the claims that he had an earpiece?
 

jackieonasses

macrumors 6502a
Mar 3, 2004
929
0
the great OKLAHOMA....
zimv20 said:
i'm fairly skeptical of this earpiece thing, especially based on the evidence, but for those who watched the first debate (i was not able), i do have this to ask...

i'd read on a lefty site (can't remember where) about someone wondering about an earpiece. his reasoning went like this: in the middle of a bush response, with no prompting from mr lehrer or anyone else audible, and apparently with no prodding from the light timers, bush stopped in the middle of a sentence, uttered "let me finish", and kept going.

1. did anyone notice it?
2. what did you make of it?
3. does it at all lend any support to the claims that he had an earpiece?
what if he was conversing with his second personality?

wait, that just doesn't make sense. off to bed I GO!
 

pseudobrit

macrumors 68040
Jul 23, 2002
3,418
4
Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
zimv20 said:
in the middle of a bush response, with no prompting from mr lehrer or anyone else audible, and apparently with no prodding from the light timers, bush stopped in the middle of a sentence, uttered "let me finish", and kept going.
I had assumed Jim was making a gesture indicating a desire to interrupt.
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Jul 18, 2002
4,388
7
toronto
pseudobrit said:
I had assumed Jim was making a gesture indicating a desire to interrupt.
that sounds reasonable. if we had access to all angles of video, we could probably suss out if that was it.
 

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,366
119
Los Angeles
pseudobrit said:
I had assumed Jim was making a gesture indicating a desire to interrupt.

Me too. There were a couple of times when Bush "jumped the gun" in regards to Jim's moderation of the debate.


Lethal
 

solvs

macrumors 603
Jun 25, 2002
5,693
1
LaLaLand, CA
To borrow a line from SiliconAddict: Never suspect conspiracy if incompetence could achieve the same result. I read this on a conspiracy web site. I wondered at first, but if I remember correctly, Bush was really defensive at this point. All Jim had to do was swivel slighty toward Kerry or raise his hand a bit to get Bush to go off. I was thinking about this before the debate, what if he used an earpiece? That would really be an embarassment.

The sites are probably just trying to make him look stupid though. Not that it's really that hard to do so. :p
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
Well apparently there was a rumor started by a right-wing type that Kerry was cheating by bringing notes to the debate, and I think this was a left-wing response to those unsubstantiated rumors with unsubstantiated rumors of their own. Not exactly classy, but both sides are rolling out the dirty tricks at this stage in the game.
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Jul 18, 2002
4,388
7
toronto
what's wrong w/ bringing notes, anyway? this should be a debate on ideas supported by readily-available stats and facts, not a test to see who can memorize the most.

my high school physics teacher had what i thought was an interesting technique. we could bring notes to a test, but they had to be written on a 1" x 1" piece of paper. what was funny was, by the time i figured out which formulas i wanted to write down, and actually did fit them all on the paper, i had memorized them anyway. :)
 

icone

macrumors newbie
Oct 9, 2004
0
0
Is Bush wired for Sound??

George Bush wearing a wire during the debated is an absolute outrage, totally against all the set rules, and if true, adds to the widespread speculation of some very underhanded political moves by the Republican party (remember Florida?). It also doesn't help Bush's credibility.

First, I don't necessarily think wearing an earpiece is so bad in most instances... but to wear one during a debate and be coached with answers is a really offensive idea to most people.

The President is obviously not the best public speaker, and allegedly suffers from a light dyslexia and doesn't do well with a teleprompter... so what if he wears an earpiece! He supposedly wore one during the last State of the Union. He wore one when speaking in France last June, in fact, you can actually hear the coaching over the microphone, the video can be found on the White House web site!!! http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/06/20040605-6.html

Time will tell... AUDIOGATE... if true, I hope Bush goes down in flames!
 

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Jul 4, 2004
21,652
123
Well, it's now being conjectured on the BBC (Radio FiveLive Sun 9:30am ) as being probable, if not fact.

With additional comments about media organisations apparently being forbidden to shoot footage/stills from behind the candidates.

There then followed a jokey discussion about tailoring...
 

pseudobrit

macrumors 68040
Jul 23, 2002
3,418
4
Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
Blue Velvet said:
Well, it's now being conjectured on the BBC (Radio FiveLive Sun 9:30am ) as being probable, if not fact.

With additional comments about media organisations apparently being forbidden to shoot footage/stills from behind the candidates.

There then followed a jokey discussion about tailoring...
I am disheartened, because unless this turns out to be true, it's just another unfounded and baseless smear campaign that uglies up the political scene.

On the other hand, the partisan part of me thinks it's fantastic if the "liberal media" finally find enough of their ****ing the balls to give a little of the "vast rightwing conspiracy" type stuff (i.e. lies, Goddamned lies, total fabrications, false rumour mill crap being reported in the mainstream press) to the other party.
 

Sabbath

macrumors 6502a
Sep 18, 2003
534
0
London
I was just wondering if this had been reported in the US at all. I've know of the idea which has been going around for a while, but I thought people would expect someone who isn't a good public speaker to use a wire in certain cases. Similarly I could imagine he may use it to gain advice if there is some "breaking news" to avoid criticism similar to that where he sat in the school during the 9/11 attacks. Obviously using a wire during a debate is a significant issue, is it not? I would presume it would be to the majority of the American population. I don't put much faith in these kinds of stories, I'm just interested in peoples opinions. This story was reported in the Guardian (newspaper) yesterday and now on the bbc website today (and according to Blue Velvet on the radio too). So has this been reported in the US mainstream media at all?
 

blackfox

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2003
1,208
4,026
PDX
I do not know enough to comment on the validity of the charge.

I do know, that with or without said wire, Bush got his ass handed to him by Kerry.
 

Dont Hurt Me

macrumors 603
Dec 21, 2002
6,056
6
Yahooville S.C.
I can imagine the evil Dick Cheney talking to George telling him what to say in the debate, Haliburton is good,we did the right thing,WMDs and Haliburton is good............
 

skunk

macrumors G4
Jun 29, 2002
11,745
3,992
Republic of Ukistan
I think it was God's voice telling him what to say. As to why God would need a transmitter, rather than just whispering in his ear like he usually does, I couldn't say.
 

Don't panic

macrumors 603
Jan 30, 2004
5,551
695
having a drink at Milliways
the story has been picked up by most media sources, although they mostly refer to the WH official dismissal of the story as "ridiculous".
It looks something was there, but I find hard to believe he was feeded lines: too risky if it came out. some suggest it's some sort of medical/security device. if it is so, the WH should come out clean on that before it balloons out of proportions.

what if someone hacks into the receiver and feeds him the wrong lines? that would make for an interesting debate...
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,915
1,466
Palookaville
From the photos, it sure does look like something's there. But why, I ask, if Bush was wired, would he wear the thing between his shoulder blades? Makes no sense.
 

XnavxeMiyyep

macrumors 65816
Mar 27, 2003
1,132
3
Washington
I actually recall hearing this right after 9/11 happened. It was some speech on WB, and you could hear everything that Bush was going to say right before he actually said it.
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
Looks suspicious

We may not know for sure, for a long long time, but it does look like something is there. It wouldn't surprise me, Karl Rove has a reputation for using underhanded methods. Pure speculation for now though.
 

3rdpath

macrumors 68000
somethings there but i don't think its a receiver. i don't think even rove/bush would try to swing that. honestly, it's probably a girdle to help the pres stand taller next to kerry...bush is a sloucher( in every sense).

btw, i couldn't hear any prompting on the video of bush w/ chirac but it was so obvious he was being fed his lines. i've always felt bush sounded like he had no idea what he was saying...that he was merely reciting a script. it all became perfectly clear with the video...the whole 4 or 5 word "packet" manner of speech. bush acts like he's reading notes and just parrots the audio feed.

what a sad sad figurehead for our country.