[Paleopsych] Is Bush Wired?: The Voice in Bush's Ear

Steve Hovland 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.

-----Original Message-----
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, [2]viewers watching on CNN, Fox and MSNBC,
    including mediachannel.org's Danny Schechter, [3]were startled to hear
    another voice speaking Bush's words as if to prompt him. Some said
    this [4]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. [5]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.
    [6]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
    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?
    Email tips and information to [7]isbushwired at gmail.com

      * [8]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.
      * [9]A documentary maker explains why he thinks Bush is wired for
      * [10]Discussion of audio "shadowing" here. A news photograph from
        July 7 shows Bush with [11]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 [12]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.
    More images:

    posted by is bush wired? at [13]8:50 AM [14]30 comments

About Me

           Name:is bush wired?

    [15]View my complete profile

Previous Posts

      * [16]The Voice in Bush's Ear


      * [17]October 2004

    [18]Powered by Blogger


    1. http://www.isbushwired.com/atom.xml
    4. http://theleftist.blog-city.com/read/652304.htm
    5. http://nyc.indymedia.org/newswire/display/125456/index.php
    6. http://news.findlaw.com/wp/docs/election2004/debates2004mou.html
    7. mailto:isbushwired at gmail.com
    9. http://www.rense.com/general35/voices.htm
   10. http://www.filmbitch.com/
   11. http://www.lies.com/wp/2004/07/11/the-smallness-of-george-w-bush
   12. http://www.circa75.com/showArticle.php?article=89
   13. http://isbushwired.com/2004/10/voice-in-bushs-ear.html
   14. http://isbushwired.com/2004/10/voice-in-bushs-ear.html#comments
   15. http://www.blogger.com/profile/4837043
   16. http://isbushwired.com/2004/10/voice-in-bushs-ear.html
   17. http://isbushwired.com/2004_10_01_
   18. http://www.blogger.com/
paleopsych mailing list
paleopsych at paleopsych.org

More information about the paleopsych mailing list