• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Bush Pulls Top Bodyguard From Scuffle

Bush

The Chilean security. What a cluster. I don't blame Bush. I wouldn't want to go walking around without my security either. I'm sure Bush recognized the total cluster also, and was trying to get some protection.
 
Well, who else are we supposed to mock until 2008?
Click to expand...
Let me check the rule book . . . yep, page 335 - the campaign is over. You are required to mock the president until next campaign season. If for any reason, the president has not done anything mockable, mock the VP or the speaker of the house.
 
It was really kinda a "non-event". I would think that if Bush farted in a group of world leaders and denied it, or better yet, blamed Martin (Canada), now that would be a newsworthty story.

Charlie (pull my finger) Monoxide
 
Richard G said:
The Brits did something similar a few years ago. Because there had been several shootings in London, the the Brits asked the secret service not to carry guns.

I don't understand that logic, and neither did the Pres. The Brits finally caved.
Click to expand...

Just to correct this bit of revisionism.... Of course it's illegal for most people to carry handguns on the streets of Britain, and there was some speculation in the press about whether or not Bush's bodyguards would be armed.

As it turned out, there was a prearranged agreement that said that they could carry their weapons. So there was no "caving" required from the "Brits". Quite the reverse, in fact, since the agents would not have had the protection of diplomatic immunity if they had actually shot at someone.

Original story
 
Tricky said:
Well, you could always go back to Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy.
Click to expand...
Hillary: Her time will yet come.
Ted: Some things are just beyond satire.
 
BPSCG said:
Hillary: Her time will yet come.
Ted: Some things are just beyond satire.
Click to expand...

Hey! I just noticed you got that growth remove from your lower lip. Did it hurt?
 
TillEulenspiegel said:
Well you know they say the France was the birthplace of modern diplomacy.
What that means is that no one means what they say and no one says what they mean. AKA lying by misuse of language.

I suspect Monsieur Chirac would offer the traditional French response , that being one raises one's nose and sniffs for effect.
Click to expand...

I'm no great fan of my dear President but I was impressed by his reaction to being told that someone had just shot at him in the Bastille Day parade a couple of years ago.

"Ah? Bon?"
 
Rob Lister said:
Hey! I just noticed you got that growth remove from your lower lip. Did it hurt?
Click to expand...
Virtual local anesthesia is a wonderful thing. Don't you love living in these days of modern times?
 
Vulcan death grip

Remind me to never tick off any Secret Service agents.

From the NY Times:
security.184.2.650.jpg



That Chilean security guy looks like he's about to wet his pants. Notice the Vulcan Death Grip used by the agent.

To add insult to injury, the agent appears to be the twin brother of Peter North.
 
What I find alarming is how easily the Prez coulda got whacked in a situation like this.

He goes in, the guards close ranks, and its over before his SS men know what happened.
 
From some of the coverage in the UK, it sounds like it was pretty diplomatically ugly anyway.

A state visit by President George W Bush to Chile, intended to counter Latin American talk of Washington's "arrogance", ended in a diplomatic shambles last night when the Chilean president cancelled a banquet because US Secret Service guards demanded to check guests for weapons.

The Americans insisted that the nearly 300 guests, including the president of the Chilean senate, the head of the Chilean supreme court, the top commanders of each branch of the Chilean military and their wives, should pass through metal detector arches before they be permitted to dine near Mr Bush at the presidential palace in Santiago.

President Ricardo Lagos scrapped the state banquet in favour of a "working dinner" with Mr Bush in his private dining room.

...

A senior Chilean diplomat told a local newspaper, El Mercurio: "President Lagos considered it unacceptable that the principal leaders of the nation, and distinguished business leaders should be forced to submit to an inspection that approached humiliation."

Both sides accused the other of over-zealousness, with Chilean officials mocking US agents for peering and reaching inside two antique cannon in the palace to make sure they could not be fired at Mr Bush.
Click to expand...
 
Demigorgon said:
What I find alarming is how easily the Prez coulda got whacked in a situation like this.

He goes in, the guards close ranks, and its over before his SS men know what happened.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing. I wonder if the SS(ha..ha..) will change their tactics in the future so that situations like this can't happen again.

Both sides accused the other of over-zealousness, with Chilean officials mocking US agents for peering and reaching inside two antique cannon in the palace to make sure they could not be fired at Mr Bush.
Click to expand...
I think this sentence illustrates the difference between the US and Chilean security standards that caused this fiasco pretty well. If there were an assassination attempt planned, which is why those SS guys are there in the first place, why wouldn't the assassins use something like an antique cannon to conceal their materials? If it's ridiculous for SS agents to do a security sweep around an area for possible assassination materials, isn't it therefore ridiculous to have those SS agents around the president at all?

Another thing I don't understand is that supposedly this dinner was cancelled because it was insulting that these high ranking members of Chilean government be subjected to security searches(which I think illustrates other social issues that I won't go in to), such as going through a metal detector. How would this security step be anything but pragmatic? Why wouldn't the Chilean officials have done it themselves in the first place, and had a much better position to therefore deny SS agents the right to do the sweep, if that's what they were going for? Not that the prez's security team wouldn't still have a problem with not being able to handle security themselves, but Chile would be in a more easily defensible position than, "No security at all. These are upstanding people!" and expecting the leaders of foreign nations to take that at face value as if no "upstanding person" has ever been loony enough to take out a head of state.

It appears to me as if Chile set out to "teach the arrogant US a lesson" and ended up with egg on their own faces. I really don't see how this could've been a mistake. Perhaps it didn't go up to the highest levels(eg; disgruntled security officials decided to take this step instead of presidential-level officials), but it certainly came across that way.

I reserve the right to be completely wrong, of course. So if you have a solid basis for why I am, lay it on me. Though political bias should gratefully be left at the door, if you please.
 
Pescado said:
I reserve the right to be completely wrong, of course. So if you have a solid basis for why I am, lay it on me. Though political bias should gratefully be left at the door, if you please.
Click to expand...

I think you're right in the major elements of your analysis (i.e. these are all things you'd expect security to do), however, I think the incidents indicate a definite lack of communication, diplomacy, and mutual co-operation between the US and the Chilean forces - the same lack of communication that occurred in the UK (referred to earlier) and led to various unsavoury news stories.

Anyway, aren't these guys supposed to be discreet?
 
Pescado said:
I was thinking the same thing. I wonder if the SS(ha..ha..) will change their tactics in the future so that situations like this can't happen again.
Click to expand...
I was wondering about that too. Got me to thinking - why was the President allowed to walk into a crowded venue ahead of his bodyguard? Did someone miss an assignment?
 
BPSCG said:
I was wondering about that too. Got me to thinking - why was the President allowed to walk into a crowded venue ahead of his bodyguard? Did someone miss an assignment?
Click to expand...

Can't....resist.....

Because the bodyguard had to keep Bush's key wound up.

Sorry.

I'm a little concerned about how easy it was to get near the Prez. I can't imagine a scuffle like this occuring that close to P. Diddy, and while I don't like Bush, particularly, I do think he's at least as important as P. Diddy.

Perhaps they could enclose him a bulletproof hamster ball?
 
Both sides accused the other of over-zealousness, with Chilean officials mocking US agents for peering and reaching inside two antique cannon in the palace to make sure they could not be fired at Mr Bush.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the Chilean officials are entirely correct in their speculation as to why the agents were checking the insides of the antique cannons.

On a mostly unrelated note: Would anyone like to discuss what a huge and awesome pipe bomb you could build out of an antique cannon?
 
BPSCG said:
Hillary: Her time will yet come.


Oh! That was ugly, I flashed to the old song "Our Day Will Come" and broke into a cold sweat!



Ted: Some things are just beyond satire.
Click to expand...

Bob Rivers - "Teddy the Red Nosed Senator". from www.twistedtunes.com

Spot on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom