It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Breaking: CIA Director Petraeus Resigning

page: 17
86
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 03:49 AM
link   
so yeah this happening the DAY after Obama gets re-elected is just a coincidence right?.... RIGHT??

i'm betting he figured Obama was going to lose and when he won it was time to step down, using the affair as a good a reason as any.

it seems as if all the good men are giving up and getting out of the way.
edit on 10-11-2012 by rayuki because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 04:20 AM
link   
He doesn't want any part in the up coming Israeli / US strike on Iran so he is getting out early. I wouldn't be surprised if Mossad threatened him with pictures and videos of his affair, just to get him out of the picture.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 04:32 AM
link   
General rule of thumb of the alphabet agencies...

Don't do stuff that could get you blackmailed later.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Well, this is the U.S. If this was Europe no one would really care or you'd get the reply "He only has one mistress?!". We've got hangups with sex.

And for those of you saying it could lead to blackmail-you are right. It's only because American's are so damn silly about sex.
edit on 9-11-2012 by antonia because: added a thought


I see you are trying to change all this with your avatar.


This is not about an affair, that's for damn sure. This is machiavellian s**t, where
nothing is ever just as it appears.

Was Petraes viewed as a good-guy or a bad-guy?
That is the question.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutonaLimb
Was Petraes viewed as a good-guy or a bad-guy?
That is the question.


Define "good-guy or...bad-guy" and by whom; ie, via ATS he would be a "good-guy" if he resigned to shed light on a massive cover-up. He would be a "bad-guy" via the administration if he wasn't towing the administration's line....

Unfortunately this is very relative to what is amounting to a very grey-area story. As sad as that might be...



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by JacKatMtn
 


Wow that's got set-up writen all over it. But the irony is he's the director of al-CIA-du, so he should be able to easily spot a set up from a mile away shouldn't he??? One would think? Unless that is you got moronic monkeys running the CIA.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 05:07 AM
link   
I wonder why it is that all or most of the lead stories on these recent government scandals seem to emanate from FoxNews intelligence analysts and reporters, who also broke all of the important and relevant facts regarding Fast and Furious and Benghazi-Ghate! ........Some of these include Col. Peters, Jennifer Griffin and Catherine Herridge, who are three of the best intelligence analysts in all of broadcast news so its no real surprise that the breaking stories regarding Petreaus-Gate have come from their respective pens. There is much more to come so stay tuned.

Lt. Col. Ralph Peters On Petraeus: "Timing Is Just Too Perfect"


LT. COL. RALPH PETERS: The timing is just too perfect for the Obama administration. Just as the administration claimed it was purely coincidence that our Benghazi consulate was attacked on the anniversary of September 11th. Now it’s purely coincidence that this affair -- extra-marital affair -- surfaces right after the election, not before, but right after, but before the intelligence chiefs go to Capitol Hill to get grilled. As an old intelligence analyst, Neil, the way I read this -- I could be totally wrong, this is my interpretation -- is that the administration was unhappy with Petraeus not playing ball 100% on their party-line story. I think it's getting cold feet about testifying under oath on their party-line story. And I suspect that these tough Chicago guys knew about this affair for a while, held it in their back pocket until they needed to play the card.

I don't like conspiracy theories, I may be totally wrong, but the timing of this, again, right after the election and right before Petraeus is supposed to get grilled on Capitol Hill, it's really smells.


And just for good measure - here's an example of good editorializing as well from the Fox stable:
Krauthammer: Now That A Sex Scandal Is Attached To Benghazi, It Will Be Pursued

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: .. .. .. partial quote:

The other thing I would add is what Bolton said, I think he’s absolutely right. There is no way that this is going to get in the way of the Benghazi story coming out, and in an odd way, and sort of a discouraging way, now that the story is attached to a sex scandal, it will become a story that will be pursued by the media as were not pursued before.

They were holding off I think to protect Obama before and also perhaps out of a lack of interest. But just given the nature of our journalism, it will now become the hottest story around and you can be sure that even the mainstream papers which did not show any interest whatsoever in this story up to and into the election are going to get on it now and it will become -- it will unravel.


edit on 10-11-2012 by gmonundercover because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 06:22 AM
link   
A little late to the game, but there is really something here! You could not write this stuff. Hollywood screenwriters eat your heart out!
Chalk this up as another sham, and the good old-fashioned Chicago two-step. Any time controversy succumbs a lofty politician from the Windy City? They taut complete and utter ignorance to the whole thing, and during the course of the investigation colleagues start dropping like flies. Indictments, sex scandals, corruption, and mysterious deaths. Chicago Tribune columnist, John Kass, coined a name for these people? He called them "buffers."

Metra boss Phil Pagano's suicide a repeating pageant for Illinois


Each of the four politicos had connections and influence, but they weren't big players. They were prominent suits out front.

But true power is reserved only for a few. Such people never become anxious when the calliope music starts cranking. They've got other people to run around the empty chairs. These folks are called buffers.


The political bosses are surrounded by these people, and they go down first to protect the boss. It has been going on in Chicago for years. It sounds like the good General has become a "buffer," for the President and his colleagues as this Benghazi Scandal gathers steam. Some have said that now former CIA Director, David Petraeus, was going to testify in the near future about what happened in Libya. Kind of hard to testify when he is no longer in an official position at the CIA? I wonder what empty suit will get the nod? I wonder how many more pawns will fall to protect the king?

This is just another political maneuver full of intrigue and deceit. People deserve answers as to what happened in Benghazi, and why some of our own may have allegedly been abandoned by those they were serving. This whole thing stinks to high heaven! The President has got another four years, and more than ample time to start fessing up! People voted you in, and they deserve answers! Stop with the political theater! If I where the General? It would probably be a good idea to get in touch with some of his Army buddies, and go over his personal security protocols? Have to avoid those blasted accidents that seem to befall people in Washington when scandal approaches. Maybe Petraeus woke-up to a horse head in his bed?
edit on 10-11-2012 by Jakes51 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 06:27 AM
link   
I became suspect on the integrity of Paula Broadwell's book as soon as I saw Vernon Loeb's name as co-author. Besides that - any time there's a co-author that usually means that the co-author is the actual author - standard practice in the corrupt publishing houses of today! The very same people who run the publishing houses run the press in America.

Take note of the implied and not so subtle (nor so accidental) sexual connotation to the books title
All [The Way] In

So, I think a major link in the chain of events regarding this recent sex-scandal is Paula Broadwell's co-author Vernon Loeb - Zionist and notorious scandal monger and liar par excellence.


For openers go here

Washington Post journalist Vernon Loeb, known for the FAKEed Jessica Lynch story rejoins paper


In Debunking, Jessica Lynch, Media myths, Newspapers, Washington Post on January 6, 2011 at 8:50 am

Vernon Loeb, one of the Washington Post reporters who in 2003 wrote the botched story about Jessica Lynch’s purported battlefield heroics in Iraq, is returning to the newspaper as its local editor.

Washington Post, April 3, 2003


The electrifying but erroneous story about Lynch, then a 19-year-old Army private, turned her into the single most recognizable soldier of the Iraq War.

In a front-page report published April 3, 2003, the Post anonymously cited “U.S. officials” in saying that Lynch “fought fiercely” in the ambush of her unit in southern Iraq, that she had “shot several enemy soldiers,” and that she had fired her weapon “until she ran out of ammunition.”

But the hero-warrior narrative–published beneath the bylines of Loeb and Susan Schmidt–was untrue.
Lynch did not fire her weapon in the ambush. Nor was she shot and stabbed, as the Post reported.

So when all is said and done - GOOGLE Paula Broadwell's co-author Vernon Loeb



edit on 10-11-2012 by gmonundercover because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 06:29 AM
link   
I said this a few days after the Benghazi attack. He needed to resign, he was weak. It seems he was more of a tool than I noticed. He couldn't even control himself. He had no business being in the position he was in.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 06:32 AM
link   
It's so classic how everyone is so quick to defend Pataeus as such an honorable, stand-up guy. As if a four star general isn't also human.


And for those so quick to scream conspiracy or cover-up....

THERE IS, but it's not as nefarious as a set up or black-mail.

Someone leaked to the F.B.I. - likely someone within the C.I.A. who discovered the mistress accessed the General's email, ya know...that's kind of a big deal in those circles LOL!. The F.B.I. investigated, found evidence of an obsession with 1000s of emails and brought the issue to the White House - who wanted to punt until after the election.

So it was opted that the one man with the highest security clearance besides the President was allowed to remain in his position, despite being severely compromised.

How far back does this go?

Who knew about it and did nothing?

Did the the affair or subsequent cover up cause the intelligence failures in Benghazi? Or any other breeches of security?

Those are the issues - NOT whether Obama set him up. Petraeus did this to himself and the White House got dragged down to while trying to minimize the scandal until after the election.

The timing of this is EXACTLY why people should take this at face value. The timing just post-election and pre-Benghazi hearings would necessarily beg MORE questions and controversy. No one in the White House wants that but it's what happened.
edit on 11/10/2012 by kosmicjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Dear Lord, How much more can our intelligence be insulted. If our country wasn't in such dire distress, this whole cover up would be laughable. We have four Americans brutally murdered by terrorists and they continue to do a circular dance spinning lies (with the assistance of our trusting media) that are beyond bizarre. Newsmax: “The decision was made to delay the resignation apparently to avoid potential embarrassment to the president before the election,” an FBI source says. “To leave him in such a sensitive position where he was vulnerable to potential blackmail for months compromised our security and is inexcusable.” OMG! Avoid potential embarrassment due to Petraeus' affair? Who the eff cares about his affair? If the FBI wants to use the old affair excuse, please let's just open up the flood gates and begin discussing everyone's sexual escapades including Bath House Barry's penchant for backdoor enjoyment. I suggest that they hurry up and prepare that subpoena because Petraeus has a target on his back just like the Navy Seals. Anyone and everyone who knows the truth about Benghazi will be eliminated and it won't be a one way trip to Albania, it will be six feet under.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by hadriana
Can he maybe claim the 5th and NOT answer questions if he is a private citizen?
Could that be why the resignation?
I mean, they could call him - but if he is a civilian, does he HAVE to say anything.

I plead the 5th.
I plead.
I plead.
I pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeead

Could that be it?



Fox News said earlier that he was 'looking forward to testifying'. Then he shocked the administration by resigning. It would be interesting if he shocks them again and suddenly decides to testify at the last minute.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 07:13 AM
link   
In keeping with my post (above) we would do well to ask the next logical question "Did Israel draw David Petraeus into a standard Mossad "honey trap" ala Eliot Spitzer and others? We do know that Petraeus leaked emails about Israel and its become recent news fare that former AIPAC newsletter editor Wolf Blitzer and neocon (Bush) advocate Fran Townsend both endorse Jane Harman as the next CIA Director as a replacement for Petraeus, which causes me to wonder if General Petraeus was honey trapped by the Israelis and/or AIPAC to get him replaced by an Israel first-er like Jane Harmon after he conveyed (in his own peculiar way) that US support for Israel was a threat to US troops.


edit on 10-11-2012 by gmonundercover because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 07:20 AM
link   
The part about him not testifying now is what I don't understand. I'd appreciate it if someone could explain this to me.

I don't see what his resignation has to do with him not testifying now. Can't he be treated as a hostile witness?
After all, he's not dead and can still speak in a court of law. Last I was aware, resigning your position doesn't mean that you get your mind wiped clean.

Is this also why we're seeing so many banksters resigning? If you resign, you're granted immunity from testifying at trials?



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 07:30 AM
link   



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Afterthought
 

I have the same question about him appearing before the committee.

The announcement that I was aware of came from Nancy Pelosi. As far as I know, she isn't running the show.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

Here's an NBC link.

It appears he had an affair.

~Heff
Ummm.....So did slick willie...but he never quit......leads me to believe he just wanted away from Barry's Benghazigate mindset.

YouSir



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


Thanks for your comment. I feel better knowing that I'm not the only one who can't grasp the reasoning for this.
I keep seeing Petraeus in balloon pants shouting "Hammer time! Can't touch this!"



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by kosmicjack
 

Thanks for the link - now let's see what we can do with it as per conspiratorial theorizing -
???

In other words according to John Miller the unprecedented step had been taken by the FBI to investigate and to spy on a sitting director of the CIA !!! Big news here actually. And it is in conformity with all I have said heretofore about a Zionist inspired Petraeus set-up.



edit on 10-11-2012 by gmonundercover because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
86
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join