For the past week, while at home, using his own computers, and off the clock at Caltech and NASA, Nelson has been analyzing images of the president's back during the debates. A professional physicist and photo analyst for more than 30 years, he speaks earnestly and thoughtfully about his subject. "I am willing to stake my scientific reputation to the statement that Bush was wearing something under his jacket during the debate," he says. "This is not about a bad suit. And there's no way the bulge can be described as a wrinkled shirt."
[...]
Bruce Hapke, professor emeritus of planetary science in the department of geology and planetary science at the University of Pittsburgh, reviewed the Bush images employed by Nelson, whom he calls "a very highly respected scientist in his field." Hapke says Nelson's process of analyzing the images are the "exact same methods we use to analyze images taken by spacecraft of planetary surfaces. It does not introduce any artifacts into the picture in any way."
If the original image is in fact correct, there´s little doubt there was something under his jacket.
Does it matter?
Well, only if you want a president who can still speak coherently when his batteries have given up...
LHMark From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 7255 posts, RR: 51 Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1717 times:
Damn communist Al-Qaida NASA scientists who hate America...
"Sympathy is something that shouldn't be bestowed on the Yankees. Apparently it angers them." - Bob Feller
B757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 25 Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1697 times:
Salon.com is still pushing this story even though it has been refuted and rejected even by the New York Slimes and SEE-BS? I guess since the only thing keeping them online is the hundreds of millions poured into it by rich liberals, they put out liberal whack job stories. Also, the "expert" is a well know Democrat donor.
Clinton also had the same bulge under his suit. Probably from the same thing, a bullet proof vest.
Finally, two other things that sink this story. If Bush was wearing a device that let him get his talking points from someone, given today's technology it would not have to be large or mounted on the person. It could be in the ear and not noticed. Also, if Bush had been wired, he would have done better in the first debate.
L.1011 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2209 posts, RR: 10 Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1653 times:
The very same Robert M Nelson that gave $2,000 to Howard Dean...
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 53 Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1643 times:
You probably believe the story about the "face" on Mars too....
JoseMEX From Mexico, joined Oct 1999, 1539 posts, RR: 29 Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1575 times:
If he had really been wired, don't you think the Democratic Party or the Kerry campaign would be all over it, or raised some kind of (official) complaint?
Dragon-wings From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3920 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1558 times:
If he had really been wired, don't you think the Democratic Party or the Kerry campaign would be all over it, or raised some kind of (official) complaint?
And if he was wired don't you think the guy feeding him the answers could of come up with better ones than he did!
Captoveur From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1553 times:
Congrats Klaus, you earned one of these:
Professional help is availible for disorders like this. The man was probably wearing a bullet proof vest, he is the President of the United States, he probably wears one just about any time he goes out in public, I know I probably would. There is a decent chance Kerry was wearing one too.
If you are cheating there is no excuse to not win. Plus, you all think he is stupid and borderline retarded so I will ask you this: Ever try to speak with someone else talking in your ear? It is damn near impossible and it takes TV personalities a pretty long time to learn to do it seamlessly.
Also, the wire required for an earpiece would not need to be NEARLY that large, If they showed me a battery pack or something under his clothes I might start to believe this line of bull.
Thecoz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1525 times:
The kevlar vest explanation is probably the most plausible, indeed.
This may be a stupid question, but why doesn't the media speculate that it was a vest? That's the first time I saw this explanation for it. It sounds completely valid, yet not even mentioned except for on here.
Why would anyone in a dangerous situation not wear a vest? Sounds like preparedness to me; not cowardice.
Boeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1519 times:
This may be a stupid question, but why doesn't the media speculate that it was a vest?
Because the media is stupid. Period.
Could be suspenders as well, however, his jacket "stood up" in front. Same as it does when is out in a crowd where he'd clearly be wearing a kevlar vest. Most likely, it's a chest vest. Someone sneaking into the audience would be more of a concern that from backstage where the secret service was at.
Dragon-wings From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3920 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1507 times:
If that indeed is a kevlar vest is Bush the first president to wear a kevlar vest at a debate?
NoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7796 posts, RR: 13 Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1481 times:
I have no idea what you read or watch on TV. But our left-left media did indeed discuss a vest. A spokesman, however, said Mr. Bush did not wear a vest. He said it was nothing but a wrinkled jacked.
N6376m From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1459 times:
Poor Klaus. Paranoia will destroya.
What are you going to do after Tuesday when W wins re-election, by what all indications point will be a fairly large number? The obsession that you and Alpha1 have is really very entertaining but it borders on a mental problem.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29350 posts, RR: 62 Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1455 times:
So has this scientist been on Art Bell before or what?
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20853 posts, RR: 55 Reply 19, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1448 times:
N6376m: Poor Klaus. Paranoia will destroya.
That´s quite amusing coming from somebody who still believes Saddam Hussein was a "mortal threat" to the USA!
Your paranoia already has left a bloody trail of destruction through both the middle east and through more than thousand homes in the US and in "coalition" countries.
I´d say I can live with mine rather better than that.
N6376m From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1384 times:
Klaus - pray tell where I've ever written that Saddam was a mortal threat to the US? Come on put up or shut up. You can't just make up quotes or statements to support any ridiculous claim you dream up in your head.
Show us - where have I said this?
You're delusions are really getting out of control.
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20853 posts, RR: 55 Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1366 times:
N6376m: Klaus - pray tell where I've ever written that Saddam was a mortal threat to the US?
What else is your reason du jour for the invasion? They´re changing so often it´s hard to keep track. And none of them is even halfway consistent with verifiable reality.
Almost half of all americans apparently still believe that Saddam was behind 9-11 - which is false, but it was a useful falsehood to coax them into the war.
N6376m: You're delusions are really getting out of control.
I´m sorry for your well-deserved embarrassment, but I haven´t had to change my argumentation from before the war. Your side is still flip-flopping all over the place, depending on which of the inventive excuses have just been shot down again.
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20853 posts, RR: 55 Reply 24, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1349 times:
N771AN: Putting words in bold is a sure sign of delusion. I suggest you get medical help.
Your response is weak and devoid of substance!
GKirk: Klaus, come on, your turning into a typical Eurowhining cheese eating surrender monkey. Beahve yourself
Coming from whom??? You´re a real joker!
25 JetService: You guys got it all wrong. The President was packing heat in case the Senator started getting a little jiggy. In all seriousness, I put my money on th
26 Qb001: Captoveur, With your "ideas" and your promotion of refusing to debate an issue with serious arguments, here's what will happen of your country:
27 Aa61hvy: QB- maybe if you pulled your head out of where the sun don't shine you'd realize that picture can be easily faked. Even the author to the thread agree
28 Jaysit: A bullet proof vest? Please. What did the idiot think? That his answers would be so profound that someone would want to shoot him? The only argument r
29 Klaus: JetService: You guys got it all wrong. The President was packing heat in case the Senator started getting a little jiggy. Can you lead the USA from ja
30 GDB: So he cannot, even with this alleged 'aid' still barely string a coherent sentence together without constantly reverting to buzz words and cliches? I
31 Captoveur: "What did the idiot think? That his answers would be so profound that someone would want to shoot him?" Jaysit, please tell me you aren't actually tha
32 Itsjustme: Strangest outline of a kevlar vest I've ever seen.
33 PPGMD: You guys got it all wrong. The President was packing heat in case the Senator started getting a little jiggy. Actually Klaus, though unlikely it still
34 Jetjeanes: I wear a level II vest under my suit, which is very uncomfortable and does make you look a little heavier but there is very little protection on a ves
35 Aa61hvy: Don't you think the president would have some real high tech stuff, and would hide it in a better place than his back?
37 Dc10guy: It just goes to show you the lengths the republicans will go to prop up their idiot... You have to question their blind dedication sometimes.
38 Ltbewr: This has been discussed before here. My response then and still stands, is to believe it is a bullet resistant vest. If if was a 'communications devic
39 Dc10guy: True Ltbewr, that could be what it is.... But I'll bet it was a bad attempt to cheat at the debate.
40 JeffM: "(2004-10-11) -- A forensic scientist studying photographic evidence has identified an object which caused a bump on the back of a suit jacket worn by
41 Dc10guy: WOW Dubya's spin sure is crooked !!! must a a old war wound a ??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, not!
42 JeffM: Well Dc10Kid, Kerry got shot in the ass..... what was he trying to do? Run away? Or advance the retreat?
43 Prebennorholm: Am I the only one who finds it quite natural that a governing president of a superpower carries something more sophisticated than a Nokia cell phone?
44 LHSebi: perhaps it may be part of a presidential emergency device, for use in case of an assination attempt, or national emergency. HAHAHAHAHAHA! Yes, if ther
Sponsor Message: 
From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20853 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 7255 posts, 
From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Oct 1999, 1539 posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24621 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
