US Ambassador killed in Libya
Patreaus just resigned.....over an extra-marital affair supposedly.
He was to testify before Congress next week.
One down.....some more to go!
He was to testify before Congress next week.
One down.....some more to go!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Around the corner
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi guys,
just a theory. What if US is supplying Al-kaida with guns to help the insurgents.
The guns go through US embassy. Ambassador after a while has enough of this bull**** and he needs to be silenced. To withdraw help is the best way to assasinate. I know, that it sounds like a "conspiracy" and anything what sounds like a conspiracy is automatically not true in the eyes of most north american people, because that is the way they are programmed to think.
Just trying to think why they did not give the ambassador the help in time. I smell politics.
The only advantage of growing up in communist country is that you learned to read between the lines. But am I sure about what I am saying? No. Am I allowed to speculate? By all means. Something smells fishy.
just a theory. What if US is supplying Al-kaida with guns to help the insurgents.
The guns go through US embassy. Ambassador after a while has enough of this bull**** and he needs to be silenced. To withdraw help is the best way to assasinate. I know, that it sounds like a "conspiracy" and anything what sounds like a conspiracy is automatically not true in the eyes of most north american people, because that is the way they are programmed to think.
Just trying to think why they did not give the ambassador the help in time. I smell politics.
The only advantage of growing up in communist country is that you learned to read between the lines. But am I sure about what I am saying? No. Am I allowed to speculate? By all means. Something smells fishy.
As they say...."The Fish rots from the Head!"
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The Corner: Down from Olympus
.......We were beginning to sense that the crime of Benghazi (not listening to pre-attack requests for increased security; not sending help immediately from the annex to the besieged consulate; not rushing in additional military forces during the hours-long attack) and the cover-up (inventing the video narrative of a spontaneous demonstration gone wild to support a pre-election administration narrative of an impotent al-Qaeda, a successful Libya, a positive Arab Spring, and a cool, competent Commander in Chief, slayer of bin Laden, and architect of momentous Middle East change) were not the entire story of the 9/11/2012 attack: Why was there a consulate at all in Benghazi, given that most nations have shut down their main embassies in Tripoli? Why was there such a large CIA contingent nearby — what were they doing and why and for whom? Why did the ambassador think he needed more security when so many CIA operatives were stationed just minutes away? What was the exact security relationship between the annex and the consulate, and why the apparent quiet about it? Who exactly were the terrorist hit-teams, and did they have a particular agenda, and, if so, what and for whom? All these questions had not been answered and probably would have been raised during the scheduled Petraeus testimony — which is apparently now canceled, but why that is so, no one quite knows. And if Hillary Clinton departs, and perhaps Susan Rice and James Clapper as well, then the principals of the decision-making chain leave with more questions raised than answered. We are sort of back to a Watergate-like timeline of a scandal raised but not explored in a first term, only to blow up in the second......
.......We were beginning to sense that the crime of Benghazi (not listening to pre-attack requests for increased security; not sending help immediately from the annex to the besieged consulate; not rushing in additional military forces during the hours-long attack) and the cover-up (inventing the video narrative of a spontaneous demonstration gone wild to support a pre-election administration narrative of an impotent al-Qaeda, a successful Libya, a positive Arab Spring, and a cool, competent Commander in Chief, slayer of bin Laden, and architect of momentous Middle East change) were not the entire story of the 9/11/2012 attack: Why was there a consulate at all in Benghazi, given that most nations have shut down their main embassies in Tripoli? Why was there such a large CIA contingent nearby — what were they doing and why and for whom? Why did the ambassador think he needed more security when so many CIA operatives were stationed just minutes away? What was the exact security relationship between the annex and the consulate, and why the apparent quiet about it? Who exactly were the terrorist hit-teams, and did they have a particular agenda, and, if so, what and for whom? All these questions had not been answered and probably would have been raised during the scheduled Petraeus testimony — which is apparently now canceled, but why that is so, no one quite knows. And if Hillary Clinton departs, and perhaps Susan Rice and James Clapper as well, then the principals of the decision-making chain leave with more questions raised than answered. We are sort of back to a Watergate-like timeline of a scandal raised but not explored in a first term, only to blow up in the second......
No reason they still can not be called before Congress to explain their actions, decisions, and tell what they know. By the way....just where is Hillary Clinton....is she still at the Woman's Fair in Argentina?
Thread Starter
Patreaus just resigned.....over an extra-marital affair supposedly.
He was to testify before Congress next week.
One down.....some more to go!
He was to testify before Congress next week.
One down.....some more to go!
Don't you believe in mere conincidences !!!!!!
That was a rhetorical as I don't either at that level of Government.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Annapolis, MD
Age: 86
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the FBI, the affair was discovered earlier this year soon after the FBI began monitoring his email. This raises a very serious question. Who authorized the FBI to monitor the e-mail of the Director of the CIA? His communications would, by their very nature, be one of the nation's closest guarded secrets
That cannot have been a decision made by a junior staffer at DOJ. I doubt that even the Director of the FBI could authorize the surveillance of a critical member of America's national security team. Is this a decision Eric Holder can make? Or, does it come under the exclusive purview of the White House?
If the investigation began in the spring, why did the Bureau sit for so long on the revelations about the affair?
We can only hope that this resignation is the result of an attempted blackmail scheme to keep him quiet, and he, being a flawed man, but still a man of principle, resigned and made it public himself so he could speak freely in the future. If he does not speak of what he knows of Benghazi, we can assume they have more with which to force his silence.
Bob C
That cannot have been a decision made by a junior staffer at DOJ. I doubt that even the Director of the FBI could authorize the surveillance of a critical member of America's national security team. Is this a decision Eric Holder can make? Or, does it come under the exclusive purview of the White House?
If the investigation began in the spring, why did the Bureau sit for so long on the revelations about the affair?
We can only hope that this resignation is the result of an attempted blackmail scheme to keep him quiet, and he, being a flawed man, but still a man of principle, resigned and made it public himself so he could speak freely in the future. If he does not speak of what he knows of Benghazi, we can assume they have more with which to force his silence.
Bob C
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robert
That was mentioned by the US media as well.
How can the FBI investigate the head of the CIA
and the President not know about it ?
That was mentioned by the US media as well.
How can the FBI investigate the head of the CIA
and the President not know about it ?
Before the FBI would conduct such an investigation....the Director would for sure brief the President. That presupposes this President will even talk to the Director. Some Presidents give the Director a regular meeting, along with other important officials like the CIA Director and of late the DNI.
The FBI would have primary jurisdiction if the compromise was thought to be domestic only....and the CIA would have secondary authority.
Please to remember the CIA Counter Espionage folks and the FBI guys have a very tenuous relationship. Think back to Aldrich Ames closely followed by the FBI's Hanson case. Both were major disasters for each agency.
Throw in the NSA and some other half dozen outfits and the turf wars are monumental.
The FBI would have primary jurisdiction if the compromise was thought to be domestic only....and the CIA would have secondary authority.
Please to remember the CIA Counter Espionage folks and the FBI guys have a very tenuous relationship. Think back to Aldrich Ames closely followed by the FBI's Hanson case. Both were major disasters for each agency.
Throw in the NSA and some other half dozen outfits and the turf wars are monumental.
Last edited by SASless; 10th Nov 2012 at 21:53.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
one good thing about america, we can say anything we want ('cept fire in a crowded theatere).
but something is mighty funny, and our commander in chief might be COOL, but only like fonzie...not like cool calm and collected
but something is mighty funny, and our commander in chief might be COOL, but only like fonzie...not like cool calm and collected
The story gets worse if the rumours are remotely close. FBI sources report the E-mail scanning by the FBI started over a suspicion of possible fraud in Afghanistan that caused them to monitor the Emails. They say during that monitoring....the illicit affair was discovered. The decision to ask for the Resignation was made months ago and the FBI is upset the actual announcement of the Resignation took so long due to the election as it was feared there was a possibility of compromise of classified material as Petraeous was seen to be a target for compromise during that period.
Now a question.....did the White House sit on this knowledge and only use it post Benghazi to keep the CIA Director from talking about what happened before, during, and after the Attack?
We are talking Chicago Politics here folks....you always hold Aces in your pocket until you need them.
Also....Hillary has a scheduling conflict that keeps her from being able to testify as requested by Congress. Funny how that happened .....purely a coincidence is it not?
Now a question.....did the White House sit on this knowledge and only use it post Benghazi to keep the CIA Director from talking about what happened before, during, and after the Attack?
We are talking Chicago Politics here folks....you always hold Aces in your pocket until you need them.
Also....Hillary has a scheduling conflict that keeps her from being able to testify as requested by Congress. Funny how that happened .....purely a coincidence is it not?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: 59°45'36N 10°27'59E
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I can piece together from media......
Paula Broadwell harrassed some 3rd person for months via email. 3rd person gets the cops involved, FBI investigate, get access to Paula Broadwells email, where they find emails to/from David Petraeus with very personal content.
How is that going after David Petraeus?
Paula Broadwell harrassed some 3rd person for months via email. 3rd person gets the cops involved, FBI investigate, get access to Paula Broadwells email, where they find emails to/from David Petraeus with very personal content.
How is that going after David Petraeus?
A]n FBI source says the investigation began when American intelligence mistook an email Petraeus had sent to his girlfriend as a reference to corruption. Petraeus was commander of U.S. Forces in Afghanistan from July 4, 2010 until July 18, 2011.
The investigation began last spring, but the FBI then pored over his emails when he was stationed in Afghanistan. …
Given his top secret clearance and the fact that Petraeus is married, the FBI continued to investigate and intercept Petraeus’ email exchanges with the woman.
The investigation began last spring, but the FBI then pored over his emails when he was stationed in Afghanistan. …
Given his top secret clearance and the fact that Petraeus is married, the FBI continued to investigate and intercept Petraeus’ email exchanges with the woman.
Holly Patraeus, dissed. Way to go, General P, you just humiliated your one and only (thirty years, more?) who you took a vow to love and cherish until death do you part.
Come on, man.
Come on, man.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Torono
Age: 56
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has all the hallmarks of the put down of a coup to me, head of the CIA, and a dozen or so (Romney supporting) Top Brass summarily kicked out or embarrassed into resignation......
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A coup ? Might be going a bit far.
More likely just ignoring Obama's wishes or the military / CIA starting to do
own things without his consent and decided to clean out the lot while
he had the chance ?
More likely just ignoring Obama's wishes or the military / CIA starting to do
own things without his consent and decided to clean out the lot while
he had the chance ?
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I suggest that those responsible for planning this ill thought out attack were either incapable of thinking about the bigger picture, or were not interested in any ramifications and would not listen to reason?