• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Petraeus Taken Down by NSA?

NeverTrump

Exposing GOP since 2015
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
25,357
Reaction score
11,557
Location
Post-Trump America
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Wild speculation by some guy on Breitbart :lamo
 
Yeah, I know the source, but only the right wing sites are touching this one for now. The liberals still think Obama is willfully ignorant on this one as well. Even though, this is the only one Obama has actually commented on, and defended!

NSA Whistleblower: Obama Took Down General Petraeus with Surveillance Program

For a guy that claims to drive down the middle of the highway, I think the pedestrians on the right shoulder of the road you are driving are in real danger. It seems you are spending too much time on political porn sites of the right wing. That isn't good for your safety or those around you. Breitbart is not exactly real news.... they have been known to even create their own news when things are slow.

I really wish people would start threads with real news articles rather than asking people to comment on rubbish
 
For a guy that claims to drive down the middle of the highway, I think the pedestrians on the right shoulder of the road you are driving are in real danger. It seems you are spending too much time on political porn sites of the right wing. That isn't good for your safety or those around you. Breitbart is not exactly real news.... they have been known to even create their own news when things are slow.

I really wish people would start threads with real news articles rather than asking people to comment on rubbish
Maybe, but you have to admit that given the revelations of late, this is a believable story. That doesn't make it true, but the fact that such a thing can be reasonably believed indicates a serious erosion of trust in our government.
 
Next thing you know folks will start paying attention to that Drudge fella...
 
Next thing you know folks will start paying attention to that Drudge fella...
Nope. Can't trust Drudge. He wears a hat. Dead give away he's not trustworthy. I mean, what's he hiding under that hat, anyway? Prolly a stack of hundred dollar bills...
 
T: In light of the Petraeus/Allen scandal while the public is so focused on the details of their family drama, one may argue that the real scandal in this whole story is the power, the reach of the surveillance state. I mean if we take General Allen – thousands of his personal e-mails have been sifted through private correspondence. It’s not like any of those men was planning an attack on America. Does the scandal prove the notion that there is no such thing as privacy in a surveillance state?

William Binney: Yes, that’s what I’ve been basically saying for quite some time, is that the FBI has access to the data collected, which is basically the emails of virtually everybody in the country. And the FBI has access to it. All the congressional members are on the surveillance too, no one is excluded. They are all included. So, yes, this can happen to anyone. If they become a target for whatever reason – they are targeted by the government, the government can go in, or the FBI, or other agencies of the government, they can go into their database, pull all that data collected on them over the years, and we analyze it all. So, we have to actively analyze everything they’ve done for the last 10 years at least.

RT: You blew the whistle on the agency when George W. Bush was the president. With President Obama in office, in your opinion, has anything changed at the agency, in the surveillance program? In what direction is this administration moving?

WB: The change is it’s getting worse. They are doing more. He is supporting the building of the Bluffdale facility, which is over two billion dollars they are spending on storage room for data. That means that they are collecting a lot more now and need more storage for it.

RT: What are they going to do with all of that? Ok, they are storing something. Why should anybody be concerned?

WB: If you ever get on the enemies list, like Petraeus did or… for whatever reason, than you can be drained into that surveillance.

RT: Do you think they would… General Petraeus, who was idolized by the same administration? Or General Allen?

WB: There are certainly some questions, that have to be asked, like why would they target it to begin with? What law were they breaking?

RT: In case of General Petraeus one would argue that there could have been security breaches. Something like that. But with General Allen – I don’t quite understand, because when they were looking into his private emails to this woman.

WB: That’s the whole point. I am not sure what the internal politics is… That’s part of the program. This government doesn’t want things in the public. It’s not a transparent government. Whatever the reason or the motivation was, I don’t really know, but I certainly think that there was something going on in the background that made them target those fellows. Otherwise why would they be doing it? There is no crime there.


William Binney ~ ‘Everyone In US Under Virtual Surveillance’ – NSA Whistleblower | Shift Frequency


Big Brother and the Party justify their rule in the name of a supposed greater good.

Nineteen Eighty-Four - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sound Orwellian? Because it is...

Have you heard this argument lately from a certain POTUS?
 
I'm not willing to dismiss this simply because it's Breitbart. It's worth paying attention to and waiting for corroboration. If none is forthcoming, then we can call it "rubbish"...but not yet.
 
Talk about reaching to connect dots that aren't even closely related! :shock: :roll:

From CNN.com dated 11/14/2012:

Petraeus, 60, resigned Friday after acknowledging he had an affair with a woman later identified as his biographer, Paula Broadwell, 40, a fellow West Point graduate who spent months studying the general's leadership of U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

...

The affair came to light during an FBI investigation of "jealous" e-mails reportedly sent by Broadwell to a woman named Jill Kelley, a government source familiar with the investigation.

See also the timeline of events related to the General's association with Broadwell and the submission of the emails.

So, let's get this straight...

Jill Kelley receives emails from Paula Broadwell who herself was apparently jealous that Gen. Petraeus was cheating on her (re: "jealous emails") and somehow this is tied to a telephone/Internet surveillance program from the Obama Administration?

Unreal. :doh
 
Last edited:
The Benghazi Scandal Grows | The Weekly Standard

CIA director David Petraeus was surprised when he read the freshly rewritten talking points an aide had emailed him in the early afternoon of Saturday, September 15. One day earlier, analysts with the CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis had drafted a set of unclassified talking points policymakers could use to discuss the attacks in Benghazi, Libya. But this new version​—​produced with input from senior Obama administration policymakers​—​was a shadow of the original.

The original CIA talking points had been blunt: The assault on U.S. facilities in Benghazi was a terrorist attack conducted by a large group of Islamic extremists, including some with ties to al Qaeda.
I wonder how this fits in.
 
Back
Top Bottom