[Paleopsych] Is Bush Wired?: The Voice in Bush's Ear
shovland at mindspring.com
Wed Oct 6 17:14:43 UTC 2004
I watched Bush's speech this morning.
It may be that it drove home that the point
that someone else speaks through him.
From: Premise Checker [SMTP:checker at panix.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 9:47 AM
To: paleopsych at paleopsych.org
Subject: [Paleopsych] Is Bush Wired?: The Voice in Bush's Ear
The Voice in Bush's Ear
Is he prompted through an earpiece?
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
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
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
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
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?
Email tips and information to isbushwired at gmail.com
* Meet the Press executive producer Betsy Fischer does not
explain how she can be certain that Bush wore no earpiece on his
February 2004 interview with Tim Russert.
* A documentary maker explains why he thinks Bush is wired for
* Discussion of audio "shadowing" here. A news photograph from
July 7 shows Bush with another odd bulge at the back of his
The suspicions of Veritas were aroused by a moment in Bush's December
2003 news conference. Here is an excerpt from his post :
Q I know you said there will be a time for politics. But you've also
said you wanted to change the tone in Washington. Howard Dean recently
seemed to muse aloud whether you had advance knowledge of 9/11. Do you
agree or disagree with the RNC that this kind of rhetoric borders on
political hate speech?
THE PRESIDENT: There's time for politics. There's time for politics,
and I -- it's an absurd insinuation.
- White House Press Conference, Dec. 15
A funny thing happened at the December 15th presidential press
conference. Asked to comment on an earlier statement by Howard Dean
regarding his alleged foreknowledge of 9/11, Bush stumbles about the
stage, clearly caught off guard by the question, then delivers the
line: "It's an absurd asinuation."
...it could not be more clear that Bush was provided the words with
which to answer. At first, Bush stumbles about, repeating his previous
line that "there's a time for politics." During this time, he's
avoiding eye contact, shrugging, and delaying. Then, the answer is
given to him, presumably through a wireless ear piece. Bush then
suddenly delivers his line that "it's an absurd asinuation." The
suddenness of his reply, after having been speechless, the smile in
his eyes when he's given the correct answer, and his incorrect
pronunciation of the word "insinuation" all lead to [the] conclusion
that he was prompted to provide this answer.
posted by is bush wired? at 8:50 AM 30 comments
Name:is bush wired?
View my complete profile
* The Voice in Bush's Ear
* October 2004
Powered by Blogger
7. mailto:isbushwired at gmail.com
paleopsych mailing list
paleopsych at paleopsych.org
More information about the paleopsych