CIA Director David Petraeus resigns

[Bill Mattocks]

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...traeus-resigns-cites-extramarital-affair?lite

OK, so this is interesting.

Let's go back to Benghazi. President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, General Petraeus, General Ham.

Ham retires:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/7/head-of-africa-command-not-forced-out/

Secretary Clinton is going to step down:

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/336502

Now Petraeus resigns.

And last week, before the election, Iran apparently took a few pot shots at a US drone in international air space. Not reported until AFTER the election.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/09/us-usa-iran-drone-idUSBRE8A71C520121109

One of the theories about Benghazi was that it was a CIA mission, not a diplomatic mission. That much was later confirmed, the CIA says they were in there buying up weapons that had been stolen from Libyan armories after the fall of Libya. However, there is at least one 'conspiracy theory' out there that says that the weapons the CIA was buying were being sent back to Syria to be given to the rebels to be used to overthrow the government there. Some of those rebels are Al-Qaida.

Wow. A lot going on here. And none of it what it appears to be.

 

[WC_lun]

Why does it have to be anything other than exactly what it apears to be?

Also, there is no indication if Secretary Clinton will step down or not. She has even hinted in a recent interview that she may stay.

Like many stories, particularly one that are going to be used as political fodder, we need to resist the urge to jump to conclusions.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Why does it have to be anything other than exactly what it apears to be?

It doesn't. But even for me - and you know I do not buy into 'conspiracy theories' - it's awfully damned interesting that this is all happening at the same time.

 

[WC_lun]

It is the beginning of another presidential term. This type of stuff happens often when a president's second term is about to start, especially with the more strssful jobs. I do not think it is odd at all.

As a side note, who do you think would be good as a replacement? I think that if Clinton does retire, Powell might be a good replacement for her, though I do not about replacing Patreus. Though it seems his second in command, Morrel, might have the inside track.

 

[Tez3]

I'd imagine that if you were wanting to retire/leave, that the end of the old term and before the new one would be a good time to go as new incumbants can start with the President on his new term. It's probably best not to read too much into people leaving at this time, it's probably just more convenient. It's happened here many times with various posts.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

It is the beginning of another presidential term. This type of stuff happens often when a president's second term is about to start, especially with the more strssful jobs. I do not think it is odd at all.

Really? I know cabinet staff often resign or retire at the end of the first term. However, did you see why Patraeus is resigning? And General Ham's retirement, taken by itself, would seem perfectly normal, except that it was immediately after the Benghazi story started getting traction, in which he was a player with regard to the response. Even then, could be pure coincidence. Then you get this, and it starts to seem like not so much a coincidence. Mostly, there are no conspiracies. Mostly, things that appear coincidental are. Sometimes they are not.

 

[Tez3]

The drone thing was reported here before the election. A lot of jokes about the bad shooting.

 

[WC_lun]

Yeahm I saw why Patreus was retiring. It makes sense, because infedility could be used as a security risk, especially for a man in his position. Men make mistakes, but his would have caused all sorts of issues if he had not stepped down voluntarily and before other used his infidelity politically. I think Patreus was smart enough to know this and did the right thing for the CIA and the country.

 

[Tez3]

Yeahm I saw why Patreus was retiring. It makes sense, because infedility could be used as a security risk, especially for a man in his position. Men make mistakes, but his would have caused all sorts of issues if he had not stepped down voluntarily and before other used his infidelity politically. I think Patreus was smart enough to know this and did the right thing for the CIA and the country.

Well I don't know so much about a security risk but you certainly couldn't trust someone to do a good job in the CIA if he can't keep an affair secret!

Actually he always looked a dry sort of fish, I'm surprised he had it in him.......

 

[Bill Mattocks]

The drone thing was reported here before the election. A lot of jokes about the bad shooting.

Interesting. Do you have a link? I can't seem to find it in the search. I see references to the drone for the first time in the news on Nov 6, the day of the election. The drone shootdown attempt apparently happened on Nov 1, which was before the election. I will look some more, but I do not see any news references to it before the 6th. If you have a link, I will stand corrected.

EDIT: In fact, that doesn't look right at all.
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/08/first-on-cnn-iranian-jets-fire-on-u-s-drone/?hpt=hp_t3

Two Iranian Su-25 fighter jets fired on an unarmed U.S. Air Force Predator drone in the Persian Gulf on November 1, the Pentagon disclosed on Thursday.

I believe the disclosure was made yesterday. The supposed attack happened on Nov 1, before the election. Might you be thinking of different drones?

 

[Tez3]

Interesting. Do you have a link? I can't seem to find it in the search. I see references to the drone for the first time in the news on Nov 6, the day of the election. The drone shootdown attempt apparently happened on Nov 1, which was before the election. I will look some more, but I do not see any news references to it before the 6th. If you have a link, I will stand corrected.

EDIT: In fact, that doesn't look right at all.
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/08/first-on-cnn-iranian-jets-fire-on-u-s-drone/?hpt=hp_t3



I believe the disclosure was made yesterday. The supposed attack happened on Nov 1, before the election. Might you be thinking of different drones?

I wasn't contradicting you, just that often we gets news reported you don't or because of time differences we get it first, or last sometimes! Will look again anyway. I do know I was in Cornwall when I saw it and didn't come back until 3rd Nov, it was probably on Al Jazeera. We have quite a lot of different news channels here including Russian (in English)

 

[billc]

Bhengazi...what's that? Of course the American press would hold back news of Iran shooting at our drone before the election. With Bhengazi out there, and the Vice President laughing at the idea that Iran is any kind of threat during the Vice Presidential debate, seeing an act like that would be...awkward. In reality, it wouldn't have mattered if we had known about the drone shooting, I mean, come on...four Americans were killed in Bhengazi, on the anniversary of 9/11...and no one cared.

 

[Empty Hands]

Wouldn't surprise me. Very little would, after the last 60-70 years or so. Beyond our public hypocrisies, our actions in private have been illegal, immoral, and unjust, from Bay of Pigs to Iran Contra to Extraordinary Rendition. It wouldn't surprise me if our torture and rendition programs have not really been shut down.

The ridiculous fantasizing about Obama has allowed the purveyors of that fantasy (bowing! apologies! weakness to enemies!) to be blinded to the fact that Obama is a cold blooded son of a ***** when it comes to war, security and diplomacy, from a long, bipartisan tradition of the same. I would say most Americans would be against all of that, but the response when some of this horror comes to light, like the torture regime in Iraq, demonstrates that most Americans are perfectly fine with evil and immorality. As long as their team is the one doing it, that is.

 

[Tez3]

Wouldn't surprise me. Very little would, after the last 60-70 years or so. Beyond our public hypocrisies, our actions in private have been illegal, immoral, and unjust, from Bay of Pigs to Iran Contra to Extraordinary Rendition. It wouldn't surprise me if our torture and rendition programs have not really been shut down.

The ridiculous fantasizing about Obama has allowed the purveyors of that fantasy (bowing! apologies! weakness to enemies!) to be blinded to the fact that Obama is a cold blooded son of a ***** when it comes to war, security and diplomacy, from a long, bipartisan tradition of the same. I would say most Americans would be against all of that, but the response when some of this horror comes to light, like the torture regime in Iraq, demonstrates that most Americans are perfectly fine with evil and immorality. As long as their team is the one doing it, that is.

Bowing? Most of us as martial arts bow and we aren't weak, bowing is considered polite in many places of the world, it used to be common in the USA and the UK until the early 20th century. Even today people will still do a modified bow to each other, as a nod, across a street, room etc anywhere they can't shake hands but want to acknowledge each other. No, I can't see that blaming him for bowing is fair!

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Bowing? Most of us as martial arts bow and we aren't weak, bowing is considered polite in many places of the world, it used to be common in the USA and the UK until the early 20th century. Even today people will still do a modified bow to each other, as a nod, across a street, room etc anywhere they can't shake hands but want to acknowledge each other. No, I can't see that blaming him for bowing is fair!

It was, to be honest, weird.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread893103/pg1

I don't buy into all the conspiracy theories about the bowing and what it meant, but bow he did, more than a couple times, and it was just strange.

 

[Tez3]

It was, to be honest, weird.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread893103/pg1

I don't buy into all the conspiracy theories about the bowing and what it meant, but bow he did, more than a couple times, and it was just strange.

On our way back from Cornwall we stay overnight in a hotel, there were a coachloads of Japanese tourists staying there, my husband had gone outside to smoke his pipe and was coming back in at the same time as one of the Japanese chaps so my other half let him through the foor first, the Japanese chap bowed thanks, my other half bowed to say your welcome, the Japanese chap bowed back again...and you've guessed it the pair of them were bowing at each other a few times until someone else wanted to come through the door.

On side note Japanese reactions to a full English breakfast are interesting especially to the black pudding

 

[Bill Mattocks]

On our way back from Cornwall we stay overnight in a hotel, there were a coachloads of Japanese tourists staying there, my husband had gone outside to smoke his pipe and was coming back in at the same time as one of the Japanese chaps so my other half let him through the foor first, the Japanese chap bowed thanks, my other half bowed to say your welcome, the Japanese chap bowed back again...and you've guessed it the pair of them were bowing at each other a few times until someone else wanted to come through the door.

On side note Japanese reactions to a full English breakfast are interesting especially to the black pudding

Bowing is entirely appropriate in context, isn't it? But I know you know that.

President Obama is not Japanese, nor is the President of Mexico, whom he bowed to, nor the head of various Arab nations he bowed to. And his bow to the Japanese Emperor and his wife was actually incorrect if you want to discuss it as a Japanese tradition; he bowed and reached out to shake hands, and the bow was very deep, that of a submissive to a superior. I'm no expert on bowing, but I learned a bit about it when I was stationed in Japan. I know that they don't do it much in China or Korea.

The point was that for the first few months of his administration, President Obama appeared to be having a problem stopping himself from bowing at everyone he met. It was not appropriate for the elected leader of the free world. I place no ulterior motive on it, it was just weird and even a little creepy.

Pleasant little stories about how Japanese people bow doesn't really change that. Context, please.

 

[Tez3]

Bowing is entirely appropriate in context, isn't it? But I know you know that.

President Obama is not Japanese, nor is the President of Mexico, whom he bowed to, nor the head of various Arab nations he bowed to. And his bow to the Japanese Emperor and his wife was actually incorrect if you want to discuss it as a Japanese tradition; he bowed and reached out to shake hands, and the bow was very deep, that of a submissive to a superior. I'm no expert on bowing, but I learned a bit about it when I was stationed in Japan. I know that they don't do it much in China or Korea.

The point was that for the first few months of his administration, President Obama appeared to be having a problem stopping himself from bowing at everyone he met. It was not appropriate for the elected leader of the free world. I place no ulterior motive on it, it was just weird and even a little creepy.

Pleasant little stories about how Japanese people bow doesn't really change that. Context, please.

Oh dear we are grumpy! Lets face it, it doesn't matter what Obama does he's always going to be in the wrong. He's not a deity, he's a politician, a human one at that not one deified when he is declared the President.
As a lot of the countries you mentioned don't bow they won't have thought any the less of him and he kept his clothes on, it's only Americans that get precious about things like this, focus on the important things like trade with these countries, sales and jobs for your companies and don't worry about the little things. Other countries don't report him bowing, they report the important things.

It may come as a surprise to you as well, only America thinks the President is the leader of the free world..... the rest of us think he's America's President.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

It may come as a surprise to you as well, only America thinks the President is the leader of the free world..... the rest of us think he's America's President.

If I must be blunt, it doesn't matter what others think. We are the sole remaining superpower and everybody bloody well knows it. China's coming right up, and the US is declining, but we still do not bend knee, nor do we bow. And don't tell me you don't care about protocol, I recall the issue when one of our presidents copped a feel of your queen not too long ago, eh? You'd have thought he was trying to get a leg over.

 

[Tez3]

If I must be blunt, it doesn't matter what others think. We are the sole remaining superpower and everybody bloody well knows it. China's coming right up, and the US is declining, but we still do not bend knee, nor do we bow. And don't tell me you don't care about protocol, I recall the issue when one of our presidents copped a feel of your queen not too long ago, eh? You'd have thought he was trying to get a leg over.

Super power eh and with you owing China so much money they won't need to invade. Bend a knee or bow? false pride comes before a fall. If you are as sure of your power as you think you are your President could do anything he wanted with impunity. Insecurity shows, if he's powerful he can bow to everyone and he will still be regarded as powerful.

Protocol and sexual assault are two different things don't you think? You would be happy if someone felt up a woman of your family expecially an elderly woman, a grandmother at that?