Monday, October 18, 2004

THE BULGE GROWS - a brief note from BUSH WIRED

We enter another week of the BULGE. New stories about the bulge are again popping up in the press from around the globe. What started as simple speculation on the "internets" has become a phenomenon of sorts. The Bulge exists, we can all see it!

THE OFFICIAL BUSH WIRED PHOTO GALLERY - SEE THE LINKS BELOW THIS POST FOR FURTHER INFO, NEWS & VIDEO.

Meanwhile, the Bush/Cheney campaign and many in the mainstream media continue to deny the existence of the BULGE. If you watched MEET THE PRESS with Tim Russet yesterday, you know what I mean. A "vast left-wing conspiracy"? HA! I'm just one guy with a broken laptop that noticed the bulge and started asking questions a couple weeks ago. At first I thought this was funny, then odd, now its snowballed into a very important topic. I can't believe the Bush/Cheney campaign still outright denies the existence of the bulge. I can't say what it is... but I know its there! To be honest, I had hoped it wasn't a coaching device... but if it was, the world deserves the truth. A medical device? Thats an important issue too. Some straight answers would have put this topic to bed long ago. Without those answers speculation and free-speech are all we are left with.

Further, this "phenomenon" may be an important milestone in the history of the internet. If the media won't ask questions then somebody has to... Where would the world be now if the internet and blogs existed during the Iran/Contra scandal? I suspect a very different place. The fact that the STORY IS NOW THE STORY is also an important point. I never knew a digital soapbox would allow me to speak so loudly.

-Chris
c.shaw@mac.com

18 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi Chris, Nice job reorganizing this site. Keep up the great work. You are making an important contribution to our democracy. Such that it is. thank you.

3:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i didnt believe any of this until i visited this site. thanks for doing this i dont know what i believe but i have questions now. this is serious i thought it was a joke. why isnt the media on this story. im a bush supporter thanks for making this a forum for information and not antibush hate

if he cheated i wont vote for him

4:36 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I found this nonsense from it being posted on another site. Your own montage of photos CLEARLY illustrates that the imfamous bulge is a typical class III body armor vest with a trauma plate. You must expect people to believe that the President of the United States only has access to 50 year-old technology requiring giant units. Modern wireless transmitters are about the size of a quarter. I have one. This is on par with blaming Bush for the Hurricane season. You all should really find a more productive way to spend your time rather than fooling yourselves into believing your are "making a contribution to our democracy".
Take care.

10:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

For another plausible explanation of the bulge, go here

11:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I noticed the bulge myself without anybody telling me
and as soon as I saw it I was positive G.W. was wired.
Something similar but a lot smaller existed in Kerry's
jacket too and I thought maybe it's regular for guys with secret service scort to be equipped with such a
thing. I will not accept a NO for answer here since I saw it by my own eyes, I'm %110 on Bush and 20-30% on
Kerry carrying the device. The fact that they denied
it makes me think its not something legal or security
related. What's wrong with the president carrying
a walkie talkie all the time as long as it helps him
to make to the second decisions for all american. It would be a problem though if those are only from or for
a particular party.

12:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

--->>> NEW!!! • DAVE LINDORFF

12:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why has no one in the press got themselves within range with a scanner and record the transmissions?!

I mean, it's one thing if they guy's dyslexic and can't read a teleprompter during a prewritten speech, but to use one during debates? that's hubris.

Why has no one confirmed this with a frequency scanner?

arg!

12:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, look at this!

Look how he pauses and listens. Its a statement he made during the Calif. blackouts.

http://www.cbsnews.com/media/2003/08/14/video568402.rm

Save it before it disappears

12:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Could this become a double watershed moment?

For the media, exposed protecting a President
For the president, being exposed for what he is

12:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is clearly in the terrorists’ favor that George W. Bush wins the election on November 2nd. Just as much as George W. needs Osama Bin Laden and Al Quaida to breed fear so that he can manipulate the American people in his favor, the terrorists need president Bush, who is the archetype of the Judeo-Christian enemy, so that they can recruit more soldiers to help fight their holly war. The Dshihad is a classical battle between good and evil, between Islam and Christianity. Beyond dispute, George W. Bush is the model enemy in this fight, unlike John F. Kerry. So, if you're voting for Bush because you think that he is more likely to put an end to this perceived 'terrorist threat'; think again! Having him for president makes America only more vulnerable!

2:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Chirac video actually demonstrates that it is clearly an audio glitch. I am not a fan of this president in any way. And I am 100% certain there was something under his jacket during at least 2 of the debates (the first and last). However, even if it is a transmitter, the Chirac video does not show precedent. Listen carefully and you can tell that it is, indeed, Bush's voice that is "prompting," complete with identical inflections. Even the phrases over which the president stumbles can be heard exactly from the "prompter." Moreover, the device the president appears to adjust in his ear is most probably a transmitter - for translation. This was a bilingual press conference (French and English), and I believe it's customary for both parties to be provided with simultaneous translation. That's probably what's in Bush's ear. I would very much like to know what is under the president's coat in the debate videos and stills. But the Chirac video is completely irrelevant as it is clearly a bizarre audio glitch (perhaps due to a tape delay in the video broadcast that wasn't synched?). I'm sure some A/V wiz can explain it properly.

3:34 PM  
Blogger icone said...

In regards to the Chirac video: This video is still the subject of much speculation. I direct you to a recent story by DAVE LINDORFF.

While the video may be some sort of audio sync problem, if you listen carefully the voice is, in fact, NOT Bush's, and uses different wording at times. To be fair, this could have been an inadvertant feed of the translation audio. But the fact that the translation audio arrives BEFORE Bush speaks is odd.

I have had contact with several journalists about this video, and the feed was carried by all networks from a pool video source. I hoped to have found a separate source of this video from outside the press pool, but no luck yet.

Also, please read the last Salon.com article as it also covers this issue, and has an eyewitness account of this happening in other situations LIVE. The link to the article is on the All The Bulges in one Place post, as well as a 17 mb video link. A visitor also posted the full text of the article in the comments section.

As always, YOU BE THE JUDGE!

Thank You
BUSH WIRED

4:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If it was only the flat rectangular plate there would be room for doubt. The clincher is the obvious wire leading from the plate up towards the neck. In about a half hour I educated myself on wireless earphone technology. There are several manufactures of these devices. They all feature a hidden earpiece lodged in the ear canal and require a induction loop, which is basically a loop of wire that goes around the neck and plugs into the reciever. The radio reciever itself is conventional. The thinline back mounted scheme makes sense. Any other mounting place carries more risk of accidental exposure.

REFERENCES:

http://www.earinc.com/p1-electronic-wireless.php

http://www.professionalsound.com/catalog/induct.htm

http://www.phonakcom.ch/english/induktions.htm

6:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This year's fast-dollar halloween costume:

dark suit
shiny blue tie
little lapel flag
duct tape
empty cheerios box

7:53 PM  
Blogger jon said...

Looking for wireless home security info and perimiter cams I found our site. I agree totally!

9:28 AM  
Blogger kalisekj said...

Cool Blog, I never really thought about it that way.

I have a Hurricane Katrina blog. It pretty much covers hurricane related stuff.

Thank you - and keep up the thoughts!

4:38 PM  
Blogger kalisekj said...

Hey, I have enjoyed...your blog is informative - even entertaining.

I have a halloween sites. They pretty much covers costumes and masks related stuff.

Thanks again and I'll be sure to bookmark you.

10:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yes i agree w anonymous,s why do you people sit and worry about this bull. ive and my pappy always said lawyers reporters are too plentiful while 1 is trying to make news in a court room the reporter,s have already MADE the news and i do mean made it yall are idgets. but yall should have chosen bigger professions if u want to call it 1 to working at the greyhound bus station,s picking ticks off the buses or work in a big hospital shaking farts out of bed sheets. and since when was it enacted in law that no one could wear a ear-phone piece and the president and even i found a web site where you can buy all you want of nearly invisable such devices and not 1 as big as you show oh and im a computer analyst tou can plainly see some of the photos have been doctored you can see the smudge marks on some. but hey if ya,ll ain,t heard any good gossip by noon tomorrow u bunch of old women start some. tx ricky

11:42 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home