Customer Discussions > Politics forum

Silencing General Petraeus


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-16 of 16 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Nov 16, 2012 1:18:08 AM PST
The evidence that Gen. David Petraeus, formerly the commander of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, the author of the current Army field manual, Princeton Ph.D. and, until last week, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, was forced to resign from the CIA to silence him is far stronger than is the version of events that the Obama administration has given us.

The government would have us believe that because the FBI confronted Petraeus with his emails showing a pattern of inappropriate personal private behavior, he voluntarily departed his job as the country's chief spy to avoid embarrassment. The government would also have us believe that the existence of the general's relationship with Paula Broadwell, an unknown military scholar who wrote a book about him last year, was recently and inadvertently discovered by the FBI while it was conducting an investigation into an alleged threat made by Broadwell to another woman. And the government would as well have us believe that the president learned of all this at 5 p.m. on Election Day.

We now know that the existence of a personal relationship between Broadwell and Petraeus had been suspected and whispered about by his senior-level colleagues and by his personal staff in the military, who worried that it might become publicly known, since before the time that he came to run the CIA.

We also know that when he was nominated to run the CIA, that nomination was preceded by a two-month FBI-conducted background check that likely would have revealed the existence of his relationship with Broadwell. The FBI agents conducting that background check surely would have seen his visitor logs while he commanded our troops and would have interviewed his military colleagues and regular visitors and those colleagues who knew him well and worked with him every day, and thus learned about his personal life. That's their job.

And that information would have been reported immediately to President Obama and to the Senate Intelligence Committee, prior to Petraeus' formal nomination and prior to his Senate confirmation hearing.

In the modern era, office-holders with forgiving spouses simply do not resign from powerful jobs because of a temporary, non-criminal, consensual adult sexual liaison, as the history of the FDR, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, and Clinton presidencies attest. So, why is Petraeus different? Someone wants to silence him.

Petraeus told the Senate and House Intelligence Committees on September 14, 2012, that the mob attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, three days earlier, was a spontaneous reaction of Libyans angered over a YouTube clip some believed insulted the prophet Muhammad. He even referred to that assault-which resulted in the murders of four Americans, now all thought to have been CIA agents-as a "flash mob." His scheduled secret testimony this week before the same congressional committees will produce a chastened, diminished Petraeus who will be confronted with a mountain of evidence contradicting his September testimony, perhaps exposing him to charges of perjury or lying to Congress and causing substantial embarrassment to the president.

It's obvious that someone was out to silence Petraeus. Who could believe the government version of all this? The same government that wants us to believe that FBI agents innocently and accidentally discovered the Petraeus/Broadwell affair a few months ago and confronted Petraeus with his emails a few weeks ago is a cauldron of petty jealousies. From the time of its creation in 1947, the CIA has been a bitter rival of the FBI. The two agencies are both equipped with lethal force, they both often operate outside the law, and they are each seriously potent entities. Their rivalry was tempered by federal laws that until 2001 kept the CIA from operating in the U.S. and the FBI from operating outside the U.S.

Isn't it odd that FBI agents would be reading the emails of the CIA director to his mistress and that the director of the FBI, who briefs the president weekly, did not make the president aware of this? The FBI could only lawfully spy on Petraeus by the use of a search warrant, and it could only get a search warrant if its agents persuaded a federal judge that Petraeus himself-not his mistress-was involved in criminal behavior under federal law.

The agents also could have bypassed the federal courts and written their own search warrant under the Patriot Act, but only if they could satisfy themselves (a curious and unconstitutional standard) that the general was involved in terror-related activity. Both preconditions for a search warrant are irrelevant and would be absurd in this case.

All this-the FBI spying on the CIA-constitutes the government attacking itself. Anyone who did this when neither federal criminal law nor national security has been implicated and kept the president in the dark has violated about four federal statutes and should be fired and indicted. The general may be a cad and a bad husband, but he has the same constitutional rights as the rest of us.

No keen observer could believe the government's Pollyanna version of these events. When did the CIA become a paragon of honesty? When did the FBI become a paragon of transparency? When did the government become a paragon of telling the truth?

http://reason.com/archives/2012/11/15/silencing-general-petraeus

Posted on Nov 16, 2012 2:00:06 AM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Nov 16, 2012 2:19:23 AM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 16, 2012 2:23:20 AM PST
MisterTee says:
And ?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 16, 2012 2:38:15 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Nov 16, 2012 1:24:41 PM PST]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 16, 2012 2:39:04 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 16, 2012 2:41:41 AM PST
MisterTee says:
Have you seen my most awesome video ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYZZ2tE0FEM&feature=plcp

If you ain't on drugs, this is the next best thing.

Posted on Nov 16, 2012 2:39:08 AM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 16, 2012 3:23:58 AM PST
The man cheated on his wife. Resigned because of it. Move on!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 16, 2012 4:05:20 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 16, 2012 4:05:42 AM PST
The break-in at the Watergate Hotel was just a "third-rate burglary attempt." Move on!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 16, 2012 4:34:45 AM PST
TOPICWAQ says:
It's a tad more than just an affair..I thought you were "never wrong" when it came to politics....
The truth will come out eventually. Obama said he would take responsibility. He should just do so....and testify under oath in front of the committee....
Why is he wasting time, and letting everyone else take a fall?
The focus should be on the details of the attack...not the affair....

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 16, 2012 4:39:54 AM PST
Cliff Sedge says:
'In the modern era, office-holders with forgiving spouses simply do not resign from powerful jobs because of a temporary, non-criminal, consensual adult sexual liaison, as the history of the FDR, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, and Clinton presidencies attest. So, why is Petraeus different? Someone wants to silence him.'

Or maybe he just holds himself to a higher ethical standard.

Seems this Broadwell, uh, broad had information she was communicating about his movements on a non-secured PC.

Not good for somebody in charge of the nation's security to be theoretically traceable.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 16, 2012 4:41:51 AM PST
Intrepid says:
It is actually opposite.
Gen. Petraeus as CIA Director could have things go hide.
But as private citizen in a closed Senate Inquest he would be more free not less free to testify. He would no longer need to protect his job.

Posted on Nov 16, 2012 7:52:50 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 16, 2012 7:53:55 AM PST
W.T. says:
I think Petraeus' going public and resigning was his response to an attempt by the administration to blackmail him with the affair. They tried to keep him quiet, but it didn't work. And his "declaration of independence" from the Administration is already bearing fruit for those who care about the truth.

Now we know that he's claiming he knew right away it was a terrorist attack, but "someone" edited references to al Qaeda out of a memo he created.

This is getting REALLY interesting now...

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 16, 2012 10:31:45 AM PST
Intrepid says:
He's too much a good soldier and team player to do what you proposed. The investigation of a breech started to occur possibly even before the Benghazi attack.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 26, 2012 6:49:25 PM PST
Lientje says:
Topicwaq: The answers to Last Week's The Week Contest.

The question: A marble wall at the CIA's headquarters in Langley is engraved with a quote from the Gospels: "ye shall know the
truth and the truth shall make you free." Given recent revelations concerning now-former CIA Chief David Petraeus, we asked for
a new motto for the spy agency.

Here is one guys answer (Allan Gross, Carmel, Indiana). Let not the privates determine the fate of the generals.

Don't you love it?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 26, 2012 6:53:21 PM PST
Yeah -- Obama and co KNEW Benghazi was going to happen, so they set up a trap because they knew Petraeus was the only person with the honor to stand up to them.

Don't you see how it all fits together? Proof will arrive . . . well, at some point.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Politics forum
Participants:  10
Total posts:  16
Initial post:  Nov 16, 2012
Latest post:  Nov 26, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions