They say he cheated in the debates?

[quasi-modo]

Someone was trying to convince me that the president wore a wire in the debates because of some images that caught a 'bump' in the back of his suit. An article they dragged me too said if you photoshop it it proves it cant be from clothing.... My enitial reaction is if you photoshop an image you can make it say anything you want. Discuss.

[hismajesty]

It was fishy, but it doesn't matter either way imho, since he lost that debate.

[MyndFyre]

Someone was trying to convince me that the president wore a wire in the debates because of some images that caught a 'bump' in the back of his suit. An article they dragged me too said if you photoshop it it proves it cant be from clothing.... My enitial reaction is if you photoshop an image you can make it say anything you want. Discuss.

LoL, but it's okay that Kerry brought some stuff (and they had a video of him removing it from his jacket) into the debates and put it on his platform?  Bah.

[Hazard]

At the rallies, his jacket seemed a little bulky. Why? Bulletproof vest. If you look in the audience during the debates you'll see burly men with bulging pockets. Who are they? The Secret Service, I'm sure you can figure out the bulges. Maybe... security? Did you ever see an ear piece either? Did you ever see him leaning to the side holding his ear? No. Its just stupid conspiracy crap.

[quasi-modo]

Someone was trying to convince me that the president wore a wire in the debates because of some images that caught a 'bump' in the back of his suit. An article they dragged me too said if you photoshop it it proves it cant be from clothing.... My enitial reaction is if you photoshop an image you can make it say anything you want. Discuss.

LoL, but it's okay that Kerry brought some stuff (and they had a video of him removing it from his jacket) into the debates and put it on his platform?  Bah.

I mentioned that too, I recall reading that on teh drudge.

[quasi-modo]

At the rallies, his jacket seemed a little bulky. Why? Bulletproof vest. If you look in the audience during the debates you'll see burly men with bulging pockets. Who are they? The Secret Service, I'm sure you can figure out the bulges. Maybe... security? Did you ever see an ear piece either? Did you ever see him leaning to the side holding his ear? No. Its just stupid conspiracy crap.

I knew this much, if bush had a guy wispering to him he would have not been as repetative and quicker on his feet. But people actually think that he was getting a feed from someone else.

[Hazard]

People also think that L.B.J. was behind the Kennedy assassination and that the United States never put a man on the moon.

[Arta]

I remember talk about that. Seemed a bit unlikely to me.

[hismajesty]

The lump, I admit, was suspicious. I'd beleive it had Bush done well in the debate, but he performed poorly so it doesn't add up.

[Stealth]

He must have been wearing a wire. He's a braindead, cheating Republican.

If he was wired, why the hell did he do so horribly in the first debate?

There's nothing suspicious about it. It's probably a bulletproof vest -- that would make quite a bit of sense, but we'll never know about it for sure, because the Secret Service is not permitted to tell us.

[UserLoser.]

Not saying he was, or wasn't wearing a bulletproof vest, but:

I don't see why he would need to wear a bulletproof vest at a debate.  He's standing still, not moving around, so it's probably not a hard target for anyone who would be willing to assassinate the president.  Why would you wear a bulletproof vest when someone can just shoot you in the head (like I said, not moving around, can't be that hard of a target)?  That's an even more guaranteed kill if one were to shoot you in the upper torso...

[Arta]

One of the papers here had an interview with the tailor who made his jacket. He said it was just a fold in the fabric - just the way the suit wears.

[MyndFyre]

That's an even more guaranteed kill if one were to shoot you in the upper torso...

So perhaps a bulletproof vest would prevent the more guaranteed kill from a shot to the upper torso?

Or did you mean that it's a more guaranteed kill than if one were to shoot you in the upper torso?

[Kp]

Heads are smaller than torsos, which makes them a harder target and thus you need more time to aim.  Also, a headshot isn't a guaranteed kill by any means.  People do just fine without ears, for instance.  The shot would need to disrupt the brain, either directly or by causing bone fragments to enter the brain.  So, to get a probable kill the assassin would need to hit at or next to the brain, while firing from a distance with little time to aim - see next paragraph.

Though theoretically possible, it'd be very difficult to aim well without the gun being visible to anyone who looked at you.  Since we can assume that the Secret Service is doing a thorough job canvassing the crowd, it therefore seems that they would spot any visible weapons.  So, either you take an unaimed shot (keeping the weapon concealed - and thus denying you use of its sights to aim) or you pull it out and take a barely aimed shot (you won't have time to aim carefully since you'll be spotted almost immediately).  In either case, the torso is a much easier target due to its greater size.  I would be greatly surprised if an assassin got off more than a couple of shots before the president was buried under Secret Service people.  Also, consider that the assassin will be tackled as well, and might get off an unaimed shot as he goes down.  Again, the relative size of the head versus the upper torso dictates that an unaimed shot is more likely to hit a torso (if it hits anything at all).

Besides, why take unnecessary risks with the president's life?  Having the vest on him will greatly increase his chance of survival if the bullet strikes the vest and won't adversely affect his chances if the vest doesn't take the hit.  Also, I doubt whether Secret Service would even consent to his appearing in public without some protection.

[UserLoser.]

That's an even more guaranteed kill if one were to shoot you in the upper torso...

So perhaps a bulletproof vest would prevent the more guaranteed kill from a shot to the upper torso?

Or did you mean that it's a more guaranteed kill than if one were to shoot you in the upper torso?

Neither :p, I meant shot to the head would be probably a 99+% guaranteed kill.  Perhaps I worded it wrong, shrug

Edit: After actually reading Kp's post, bleh, I've never seen or heard of anyone surviving from a headshot :p