Does This Video Clearly Show Bush Lying About 9/11?

*Edited headline for accuracy*




Please first watch this video before further commenting. I came across it purely by chance while surfing Youtube and it really got to me.


This is news footage of George W. Bush addressing reporters during a normal run of the mill press conference.... when all a sudden out of nowhere the reporter confronts Bush about the comments that were made alleging he had prior knowledge of 9/11.

YouTube Link

Bush appears shocked and proceeds to bumble and become flustered and confused....behaving as someone who has just had the truth revealed and his covers pulled. The reaction would be tragic if not for the fact that it is so hilarious, it is obvious the man is overwhelmed with fear. Heavy breathing, becoming flustered, pure panic in his eyes.


Erratic to say the least. To some it would even announce an element of guilt.

Now here is my point....wouldn't this by most measures be an obvious tell that the man is lying? FBI and agency interrogators the world around know of the certain and distinct tells that a person can exhibit unwittingly when they are attempting to be decietful.

Can anyone out there possibly deny the fact that Bush, being the terrible liar that he is, basically by his response admit that he was trying to lie? Fact is people who are telling the truth do not behave in such a way.

I would like to hear from any possible body language experts or anyone else who would contend that his reaction was natural or normal. Some in the field claim that a well trained pantamime expert can be nearly 100% accurate when sizing up liars, much more so than a polygraph.

So I ask you one and all...based on your own previous experience and gut feeling.....is this man lying?

Did this man get away with mass murder?

[edit on 1/9/09 by BlackOps719]

[edit on 1/9/09 by BlackOps719]

It's pretty difficult to prove that you didn't do something. His reaction appears, to me, consistent with that scenario. It is like asking the question, "When did you stop beating your wife?"

What does he mumble right before the reporter starts into another question? "absurd situation"?

It would be so great to see some of these guys take polygraph tests. Because you know that saying they love so much....oh "If your not doing anything wrong you have nothing to hide."
Is there any way we can make polygraphs a requirement for all these leaders with so much power, i think it would help clear up a lot of things, don't you?

Good find , IMHO the man is lying through his teeth.
I watched an interesting film which documented the fight for a
re-examination of evidence by three 911 widows (forget the name).
In this film claims came to light that Bush ranch was fitted with several STA missiles 2 days before 911 - don't know how factual it is though.

I think leaders are often the last to know and I think we would have more problems than we could handle if we did that. Truth wouldn’t be subject to the odd leader here and there it would roll down the line.

I think it is something to the effect of "that is an absurd insinuation"...but the look on his face, the heaviness in his breathing, couple that with the broken speech and it doesnt look good.


It reminds me of when you ask a child a question and they try and lie, their dimeanor and body language tell on them every time. How would a jury react to a witness who behaved in such a way?


[edit on 1/9/09 by BlackOps719]

reply to post by BlackOps719

---

I agree he does look flustered, but there are dozens if not hundreds of clips of him looking absolutely stupid and unprepared...

If it proves anything, It's his lack of ability to do the job he was employed/voted in to do.
Will watch with interest though.

It's hard to judge. He's either hamming it up, or is genuinely troubled. I suspect a bit or both.

Polygraphs don't reveal anything, they are junk science. As for his reaction, I think he clearly was surprised by the question and offended. If you have financial and military connections to these events then bring them out and present them to the public, if not then forget about it, how can somebody do something if you offer no evidence and no motion to sue that any courtroom would beg to run a trial on, it would be the most famous trial in history, but i think there might be connections but they are so muddy that it would be like trying to regulate the financial markets, a hopeless task in a world so complex, why do they need regulation anyways and why does it matter if he did take part in 911, he doesn't remain president forever and that would also lead to exposure as well, why would he take a risk that can clearly backfire?

Now we can argue that maybe he neglected defense in order to create a cause to increase the spending budget to keep the fake economic bubble floating. Also I would ask what will be Obama's bubble, will it be government job bubble? Probably. So what maybe the world really made of....I guess one could say bubbles!

That reaction was the same one that Bush showed when questioned as to why he and Cheney were being interviewed about the incidences of 911 together as opposed to being seperated, which they each refused to do. I believe the terms were no press, no cameras, no recording of transcripts or something to that effect.

Anyonce can see that he was being untruthful in each of the interviews. I will try and find a copy of the clip to post as an example.

His response didnt really denote anger or outrage at the question being posed, it appeared to be much more along the lines of "oh crap...they know...quick think up a lie to cover my butt".


I wont pretend to know what goes on in the mind of George W. but I will say that his reaction smacks of guilt.

Typical George Bush.

A very lousy public speaker.

Good reason why he didnt testify infront of the
9/11 commission.

Perhaps he was taken back by the fact that he was really being asked:

"Did you let 3,000 Americans die to push your administration's hidden agendas?"

That's a pretty tough question...don't know what questions were before that, but he sure looks taken by surprise and horrified at the question's implications.

[edit on 10/1/2009 by ExamineAllViews]