Proof Bush Fixed the Facts...

tommrr wrote:

Not2Know,
1 big problem (among the many problems) with your theory. The abscense of the earpiece. I deal with them on a daily basis, and there are NONE available that are not somewhat visible. And, I won't even go into the whole that is not the size or the shape of a receiver under the jacket.

when this came up after the debates, i wound up concluding that maybe it was, maybe it wasn't.

it's a smidge smaller (or is that just perception?) than the garden variety letronics, but i did come across a really slim shure that i'd never seen before.
not so much in this picture, but in another similar one, there did look to be the possibility of the corkscrew on the ifb earpiece right behind the ear. ?? the guy hunches over so much, it wouldn't be all that noticable to joe public...

but one thing that makes me think that, at least the technology is present that could make a much smaller transceiver and fully wireless earpiece is the huge amount of geek toys that are available to government that isn't in the public domain. of course i can't proove that they exist, but considering what we use everyday, it would be silly to think that they don't.

And to step away from the tech end of it. If he were being fed answers, why weren't he being fed BETTER answers? If you are going to go to that much trouble, at least make it worthwhile.

I am aware of the small, slim easy to conceal models, as in the past I have had the duties/pleasure of putting them in some interesting places.

And to step away from the tech end of it. If he were being fed answers, why weren't he being fed BETTER answers? If you are going to go to that much trouble, at least make it worthwhile.

tommrr wrote:

I am aware of the small, slim easy to conceal models, as in the past I have had the duties/pleasure of putting them in some interesting places.

hah! working for the usual suspects, are we?

i'm more of a post kinda guy. but i did do cam and sound packages for a couple of years. some of the aquisition toys are pretty neat.

tommrr wrote:

And to step away from the tech end of it. If he were being fed answers, why weren't he being fed BETTER answers? If you are going to go to that much trouble, at least make it worthwhile.

give the people what they want. first rule of show biz.

always leave 'em wanting more. the second rule.

it's not about giving good answers, it's about giving them answers they want to hear. without actually giving any real information or saying anything that you can be held accountable for.

that way, the same people come back tot the next speech for the rest of the answer. which, of course, never seems to materialize.

but, "god bless you and god bless the united states of america" ? get's 'em everytime.
:wink:

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

tommrr wrote:

And to step away from the tech end of it. If he were being fed answers, why weren't he being fed BETTER answers? If you are going to go to that much trouble, at least make it worthwhile.

give the people what they want. first rule of show biz.

always leave 'em wanting more. the second rule.

it's not about giving good answers, it's about giving them answers they want to hear. without actually giving any real information or saying anything that you can be held accountable for.

that way, the same people come back tot the next speech for the rest of the answer. which, of course, never seems to materialize.

but, "god bless you and god bless the united states of america" ? get's 'em everytime.
:wink:

First rule: Get paid before the show, then go on to the other 2 rules.

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

tommrr wrote:

I am aware of the small, slim easy to conceal models, as in the past I have had the duties/pleasure of putting them in some interesting places.

hah! working for the usual suspects, are we?

i'm more of a post kinda guy. but i did do cam and sound packages for a couple of years. some of the aquisition toys are pretty neat.

Actually a lighting guy by trade, but have eagerly volunteered for mic placement duties for obvious reasons.

oh. yeah... my "move to hollywood, eat top ramen, become rock star" past always obscured that part. pay to play anyone ? grrrr...

Covert security cams are quite interesting these days, my old company did those quite often . . . amazing how easily one can set up a very sophisticated camera with a dig-image chip, and not arouse the least suspicion . . .

If they knew how commonly they are within the look down zone of PIR's which activate cameras, how often they are on a monitor in a security control center somewhere, they would fill their pants as the stroke occurred.

One of our customers (we did industrial security) was a hospital which operated more than 300 cameras.

Here's the latest from the Sunday Times....apparently, some Democrats from the US are coming over to ask Blair some questions.

Hope they're more effective than good ol' Norm Coleman.

I would suggest that they bring those special gloves.....you know, the one's they use for picking up eels.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1622378,00.html

This article also raises the subject of the quality of your Media reporting, over in the USA..........Here is a snippet:-

Congressman John Conyers......"I deplore the fact that our media have been so reticent on the question of whether there was a secret planning of a war for which neither the Congress nor the American people had given permission," Conyers said.

"We have The Sunday Times to thank for this very important activity. It reminds me of Watergate, which started off as a tiny little incident reported in The Washington Post. I think that the interest of many citizens is picking up."