Lewdog Posted November 10, 2012 Report Share Posted November 10, 2012 I can't really say there has been a time in my life that I have seen this many people in high security positions acting so immorally. First there was the Secret Service who let people into the white without any type of clearance that had their pictures taken with several high ranking individuals and even shook hands with the President and his wife. Then came the Secret Service in South America that was out all night getting drunk and buying hookers just hours before they had to guard the President. Then you had the Secret Service guy that shot and killed himself because he was caught cheating on his wife with a foreign citizen and was going to be fired. Next came the Navy Seal who wrote a book about killing Bin Laden. Oh, I forgot about the Navy Commander that just got relieved of duty as well, and the marines that are being tried for rape and murder in the Philippines. Followed by the Navy Seals who just got "career killing" letters as reprimands for giving classified info to a video game maker. Now, comes the biggest of all things, [quote]CIA Director David Petraeus resigned his post on Friday, confessing to having shown "extremely poor judgment by engaging in an extramarital affair."[/quote] <---FOUR star General Holy crap. Really? What is the problem going on here? Why are all these guys doing all this stuff? Can Hillary and Obama not keep their guys under toe? [url="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/cia-chief-petraeus-resigns-reportedly-over-affair-201305343--politics.html"]http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/cia-chief-petraeus-resigns-reportedly-over-affair-201305343--politics.html[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|kennethmw| Posted November 10, 2012 Report Share Posted November 10, 2012 Please Lew, just shut the fuck up. We already know that you're an idiot, you don't have to keep emphasizing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewdog Posted November 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2012 [quote name='kennethmw' timestamp='1352514463' post='1179101'] Please Lew, just shut the fuck up. We already know that you're an idiot, you don't have to keep emphasizing it. [/quote] What's so idiotic? This is the worst period of time I have seen military and secret service men getting into trouble since the Tailhook Scandal that took place in 1991 under Bush Sr. Care to share with my what's not important about the 4 Star General and head of the CIA having to resign isn't important, or any of the other stuff I listed for that matter? Do you realize how much these things put the safety of your favorite President at risk? Yeah read this article again, and tell me how Obama wasn't seriously at risk by looking at the picture of the party crasher shaking the Presidents hand. Put down this crap of blindly calling me an idiot and open your ears every now and again. [url="http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/white-house-crashers-michaele-tareq-salahi-past-secret-service/story?id=9202817#.UJ26bmebrKQ"]http://abcnews.go.co...17#.UJ26bmebrKQ[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 10, 2012 Report Share Posted November 10, 2012 People are human and make mistakes. You just cant make that mistake while working for the CIA. You'd also be naive to think this stuff happens only under Obama, or even at a greater rate under Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewdog Posted November 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1352549546' post='1179130'] People are human and make mistakes. You just cant make that mistake while working for the CIA. You'd also be naive to think this stuff happens only under Obama, or even at a greater rate under Obama. [/quote] Yeah read my new post about the new Yahoo article. I knew there was a lot more to this....and he was the HEAD of the CIA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 10, 2012 Report Share Posted November 10, 2012 [quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1352549663' post='1179131'] Yeah read my new post about the new Yahoo article. I knew there was a lot more to this....and he was the HEAD of the CIA. [/quote] Alot more to what? If what he said is true, and I have no reason to doubt him, you [b]CAN[/b] lose your job at the CIA for doing that. It makes you compromisable. I have no idea why if it werent true he would put himself or his wife through that kind of embarrassment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewdog Posted November 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1352549868' post='1179133'] Alot more to what? If what he said is true, and I have no reason to doubt him, you [b]CAN[/b] lose your job at the CIA for doing that. It makes you compromisable. I have no idea why if it werent true he would put himself or his wife through that kind of embarrassment. [/quote] Read the new post in the Libya thread. It's a lot easier to resign based on a moral issue, than resigning because you got four people killed, because you didn't answer your phone while shtooping your GF. Big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 10, 2012 Report Share Posted November 10, 2012 [quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1352550121' post='1179134'] Read the new post in the Libya thread. It's a lot easier to resign based on a moral issue, than resigning because you got four people killed, because you didn't answer your phone while shtooping your GF. Big difference. [/quote] I'm not calling it a moral issue, I'm calling it something that can compromise you, as the head of the agency you have to set the example of how agents should behave in the field, even if he is overt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewdog Posted November 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1352550350' post='1179135'] I'm not calling it a moral issue, I'm calling it something that can compromise you, as the head of the agency you have to set the example of how agents should behave in the field, even if he is overt. [/quote] Jamie, we aren't arguing about that. What I am saying is, it's one thing to cheat on your wife. Its another that if while cheating on your wife, you aren't answering your phone while 4 people are being killed in Libya, and the people that could save them are only a mile away and awaiting his approval. 30 minutes later he is finally giving his approval to help, while Hillary is calling him asking what the fuck is going on. One is a moral issue, the other is a lack of national security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-GoBengals- Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 [quote name='kennethmw' timestamp='1352514463' post='1179101'] Please Lew, just shut the fuck up. We already know that you're an idiot, you don't have to keep emphasizing it. [/quote] your points are valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewdog Posted November 11, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 [quote name='Dalton4HOF' timestamp='1352593167' post='1179274'] your points are valid. [/quote] What's not valid? Leadership starts at the top and trickles down. When a leader is reckless, people under him get loose and reckless, and so on. When your Secret Service agents, your top military special forces, and the head of your CIA are out there putting lives at risk, including the President, there's a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 [quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1352593448' post='1179276'] What's not valid? Leadership starts at the top and trickles down. When a leader is reckless, people under him get loose and reckless, and so on. When your Secret Service agents, your top military special forces, and the head of your CIA are out there putting lives at risk, including the President, there's a problem. [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewdog Posted November 11, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 Yeah yeah pile it on. How can people not see a problem when people who are not supposed to be or invited to the White House are able to walk right in and shake hands with the President? How is it not a problem when 4 Americans die because the head of the CIA is off screwing his mistress and not answering his phone to give the go ahead to CIA operatives who are only a mile away to respond to the consulate attack? Hillary Clinton is the Secretary of State and didn't even know that the CIA had created a 'haven' only a mile away from the consulate in Libya just in case something like what happened was to occur. Seriously, quit being stupid and just being negative about everything I say, and take the time to educate yourself, I know more than you think I know. The whole response in Libya was a clusterfuck. I told you guys that it made no sense, the government ALWAYS has an "oh shit" plan in place for all the scenarios that could happen. I was RIGHT, they did, but Petraeus didn't answer the fucking call to give the team the go ahead to respond until 30 minutes AFTER the distress call. If you look at the time line, some of the responders said, "Fuck it," and left to help because Petraeus wasn't answering and they knew people were dying. That alone should tell you something was wrong. Hillary had to call Petraeus to find out what the fuck was happening herself. Hillary is the third or fourth (I can't remember if it goes to Secretary of State first or Speaker of the House first) highest ranking person in the whole country and Petraeus' immediate supervisor, and she is left holding the bag in Washington. No wonder the dumb ass is resigning. I wouldn't be surprised if the whole affair thing isn't made up. Seriously, if some of you guys are not going to read and know what you are responding to, why respond? Lucid? Kenneth? Have you even read the articles? Do you know who won the election? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatorclaws Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 How am I supposed to believe this is new behavior? Due to all the new news and media sources I think it's simply more things being reported that were swept under the rug previously. [quote name='kennethmw' timestamp='1352514463' post='1179101'] Please Lew, just shut the fuck up. We already know that you're an idiot, you don't have to keep emphasizing it. [/quote] is it really that hard to just ignore his post instead of being a dick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewdog Posted November 11, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 [quote name='gatorclaws' timestamp='1352599970' post='1179311'] How am I supposed to believe this is new behavior? Due to all the new news and media sources I think it's simply more things being reported that were swept under the rug previously. is it really that hard to just ignore his post instead of being a dick? [/quote] I think a lot of stuff has been made public since the Tailhook scandal I mentioned earlier in the thread. Clinton and Lewinsky, the Bush daughters, and Iran-Contra, I think it's been a pretty fair playing ground. Wikileaks might be bringing some more stuff to the forefront, but you have to realize the intelligence officer that snuck a lot of that info to Asange got busted. Asange no longer has his intelligence mole. Homer and I have already discussed the Iranian scientist being assassinated. If you don't think the U.S. has knowledge of who is doing it, or is even helping to do it, your being naive to yourself. It's not conspiracy, its a dirty war where more goes on behind the scense than you may ever know. If NATO, Russia, or China knew for a fact that the U.S. was assassinating Iranian government officials what do you think would happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 [quote name='gatorclaws' timestamp='1352599970' post='1179311'] How am I supposed to believe this is new behavior? [/quote] Its not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewdog Posted November 11, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 [quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1352601479' post='1179318'] Its not. [/quote] Jamie, admit it, I'm not picking on Obama here. How many other Presidents have had these kind of security leaks in their tenure? I haven't even gotten into the number of sailors that were discharged for testing positive for 'Spice.' The rape charges on Marines in Okinawa and the Philippines. The Navy Admiral that was taken off his his vessel. The idiot that somehow got passed guards three times to kill women and children in their sleep and light them on fire. I think I went to school with his relative, Brian Bales at Franklin. He was younger than me though, and I had transferred to Springboro before he got to High School. The list goes on and on and on. Yes, some of this stuff has happened in the past, but not with this many high ranking officials. The last guy to go down like Petrious I can remember was Ollie North, and he was just doing what Regan told him to do. He took the bullet to save the President. Until anyone brings some facts to prove me wrong, I will continue to believe this country is being run loose and fast. Jamie you admitted that Obama wasn't a decision maker. I think that's the problem here. He has doled out too much responsibility on the shoulders of others, and there is no accountability. How can Hillary not know what is going on in the hottest action in the world? She should be getting a daily brief EVERY morning that is also given to the President. I know it happens, I've watched I don't know how many documentaries including interviews and pictures of the Presidents reading them. [quote]The [b]President's Daily Brief[/b][sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Daily_Brief#cite_note-0"][1][/url][/sup] ([b]PDB[/b]), sometimes referred to as the [b]President's Daily Briefing[/b] or the [b]President's Daily Bulletin[/b], is a [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States"]top-secret[/url] [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Document"]document[/url] produced each morning for the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States"]President[/url] of the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States"]United States[/url]. Responsibility for producing the PDB — which was traditionally held by the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director_of_Central_Intelligence"]director[/url] of the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency"]Central Intelligence Agency[/url] — was transferred to the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Director_of_National_Intelligence"]Director of National Intelligence[/url] on April 21, 2005, upon the confirmation of [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Negroponte"]John Negroponte[/url] by the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate"]Senate[/url].[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Daily_Brief#cite_note-1"][2][/url][/sup] The PDB is now delivered by the current (2010) Director of National Intelligence, [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_R._Clapper"]James Clapper[/url].[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Daily_Brief#cite_note-2"][3][/url][/sup][/quote] [quote]While the name of the PDB implies exclusivity, it has historically been briefed to other high officials. The distribution list has varied over time, but has always or almost always included the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_State"]Secretaries of State[/url] and [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_Defense"]Defense[/url] and the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Advisor_%28United_States%29"]National Security Advisor[/url]. Rarely, special editions of the PDB have actually been "for the President's eyes only," with further dissemination of the information contained left to the President's discretion.[/quote] [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Daily_Brief"]http://en.wikipedia....9;s_Daily_Brief[/url] Wake up my friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 If your not picking on Obama here Im not sure exactly what you [i]are[/i] doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 [quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1352599120' post='1179308'] How is it not a problem when 4 Americans die because the head of the CIA is off screwing his mistress and not answering his phone to give the go ahead to CIA operatives who are only a mile away to respond to the consulate attack? [/quote] I simply cannot believe that you believe this. The two things are not related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 [quote name='Bunghole' timestamp='1352641134' post='1179347'] I simply cannot believe that you believe this. The two things are not related. [/quote] I dont think he actually believes it either, he has an agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|kennethmw| Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 [quote name='gatorclaws' timestamp='1352599970' post='1179311'] How am I supposed to believe this is new behavior? Due to all the new news and media sources I think it's simply more things being reported that were swept under the rug previously. is it really that hard to just ignore his post instead of being a dick? [/quote] Is it really that hard to mind your own damn business? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.